The author and other teaching faculty take pride in their ability to write creative and challenging examination questions. Their self-assessment is based on experience and their knowledge of their subject and discipline. Although their judgment may be correct, it is done usually in the absence of deep knowledge of what is known about the construction of high-quality questions and tests that assess student understanding. A recent study suggests that many faculty instructors may be deceiving themselves. Momsen et al. (2010) analyzed nearly 10,000 quiz and examination questions submitted by 50 faculty instructors of various undergraduate biology subjects including molecular biology. They classified each test item according to its cognitive level in the six categories of Bloom's taxonomy. Their data show consistently that faculty expectations, as articulated in course syllabi, were higher than the level of performance they expected on examinations. In this article, the author shares his comments on the analysis of examination questions which exposes low faculty expectations.