Student engagement with computerized practising: Ability, task value, and difficulty perceptions.
A prerequisite for low‐stakes activities to improve learning is to keep students engaged when confronted with challenging material. Comparing a personalized and non‐personalized version of computerized practising, this study experimentally evaluates the relationships between student effort and abili...
| Publicado en: | Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Vol. 34; no. 6; pp. 828 - 843 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , |
| Formato: | equations & formulas research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Dec2018
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=132914548&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 132914548 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 02664909 6M1 jtl: Journal of Computer Assisted Learning issn: 02664909 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Dec2018 vid: 34 iid: 6 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell place: Malden, Massachusetts artinfo: ui: 132914548 132914548 132914548 10.1111/jcal.12292 132914548 ppf: 828 ppct: 15 formats: tig: atl: Student engagement with computerized practising: Ability, task value, and difficulty perceptions. aug: au: Cornelisz, Ilja Klaveren, Chris affil: Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences ‐ Department of Education Science ‐ Amsterdam Center for Learning Analytics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands sug: subj: Student Attitudes Learning Methods Academic Performance Computer-Assisted Instruction Education, Non-Traditional Human Random Assignment Outcomes of Education Task Performance and Analysis Educational Status Perception Students, High School Student Role ab: A prerequisite for low‐stakes activities to improve learning is to keep students engaged when confronted with challenging material. Comparing a personalized and non‐personalized version of computerized practising, this study experimentally evaluates the relationships between student effort and ability across different dimensions of task perceptions. Students practise longer when the task is perceived to be not too difficult. Students assigned to a personalized version of the tool have a lower success rate while practising, but this does not translate to differences in practice intensity, task perceptions, or summative test scores. In a personalized practising environment, perceived interest and usefulness both have the potential to promote engagement, albeit in different ways. Students with a lower level of subject‐specific ability find the tool more interesting and, particularly, consider the non‐personalized tool difficult but useful. Instead, in the personalized condition, it is the group of students with higher prescores who value the tool as relatively useful. These results indicate that more students will remain engaged with adaptive practising if software takes into account such differences. Multiple approaches and algorithms may thus be necessary to optimally adapt practising to individual learners. Lay Description: What is already known about this topic: A prerequisite for low‐stakes activities to improve learning is to keep students engaged when confronted with challenging material.Educators are generally optimistic that adaptive software in education has the potential to boost student learning outcomes.Obvious challenges remain in keeping school‐aged adolescents engaged throughout the learning process with digital learning tools used in low‐stakes settings. What this paper adds: Task perceptions regarding low‐stakes practising relate empirically to differential patterns of student engagement and performance for students of different ability.The impact of personalization on task perceptions evolves over time as students acquire more experience with the learning tool.Perceived interest and usefulness of working with digital learning tools both have the potential to promote engagement, albeit in different ways and only for students working in a personalized environment.High‐ability students assign higher usefulness to adaptive practising, which, relative to nonadaptive practising, is relatively difficult and lowers the success rate. Implications for practice and/or policy: When adaptive practising is implemented as a relatively low‐stakes activity, perceived usefulness is important in safeguarding student effort.More students will remain engaged with practising if adaptive software takes into account student differences (e.g., ability) and preferences (e.g., test preparation).Effective computerized personalized practising asks for a more comprehensive approach as to promote engagement of all students. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: equations & formulas research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|