@seanconnor, I see in a blog response that Saylor are putting ungraded versions of the old exams back online for legacy courses (I must have missed it while I was away if this was mentioned elsewhere). While it is good to know that the old exams will be available again–which makes it more likely that there will be some effort from users to maintain the legacy courses–their usefulness will almost certainly wane over time as courses and materials change. Some of the exams were always rather too focused on the minutiae of particular resources rather than on the published learning objectives and these will be especially vulnerable to change.
One might argue that the question banks be opened up to user contributions but this would be something of a minefield as the credibility of assessments lies largely in the expertise of the designer. As we have seen only too often, even accomplished professional educators can create less than perfect assessments (it is rare that I have taken an exam here without hitting at least one questionable answer if not outright error).
At best, one might hope that some courses could be picked up for use, possibly in a modified form, by teachers who would be interested in maintaining or improving the assessment materials in a controlled manner. What this implies is that contributors to the question banks would be ‘accredited’ in some way as having relevant expertise in the subject area. As, in reality, the likelihood of these circumstances arising seem quite slim, Saylor could probably deal with requests to modify the exams on an ad hoc basis. It might be worthwhile, however, putting a note to the effect that interested educators are invited to make such contributions.
The above should not be taken to suggest that input from students cannot have value. Clearly there are still plenty of quality issues with the existing questions–for example, where there are typographical errors–which can usefully be addressed without stepping into areas of academic credibility.