Students' perceived usefulness of computerized percentage‐only vs. descriptive score Reports: Associations with motivation and grades.
In computer‐based testing (CBT) environments instructors can provide students with feedback immediately. Commonly, instructors give students their percentage correct without additional descriptive feedback. Our objectives were (a) to compare students' perceived usefulness of a percentage‐only score...
| Publicado en: | Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Vol. 36; no. 2; pp. 199 - 209 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , |
| Formato: | research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Apr2020
|
| 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=142100946&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 142100946 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 02664909 6M1 jtl: Journal of Computer Assisted Learning issn: 02664909 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Apr2020 vid: 36 iid: 2 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell place: Malden, Massachusetts artinfo: ui: 142100946 142100946 145819699 142100946 10.1111/jcal.12398 142100946 ppf: 199 ppct: 10 formats: tig: atl: Students' perceived usefulness of computerized percentage‐only vs. descriptive score Reports: Associations with motivation and grades. aug: au: Daniels, Lia M. Bulut, Okan affil: Department of Educational Psychology, University of Alberta, Alberta, , Canada sug: subj: Student Attitudes Student Performance Appraisal Motivation Computers and Computerization Human Male Female Adolescence Adult Middle Age Students, Undergraduate Teaching Methods Learning Methods Questionnaires Pretest-Posttest Design Descriptive Statistics T-Tests Goal Attainment Feedback Summated Rating Scaling Confidence Intervals Computerized Adaptive Testing Funding Source Adolescent: 13-18 years Adult: 19-44 years Middle Aged: 45-64 years Male Female ab: In computer‐based testing (CBT) environments instructors can provide students with feedback immediately. Commonly, instructors give students their percentage correct without additional descriptive feedback. Our objectives were (a) to compare students' perceived usefulness of a percentage‐only score report vs. a descriptive feedback report in a CBT environment and (b) to test relationships amongst perceived usefulness, motivation, and exam performance. Using a semester‐long repeated measures design embedded into three real examinations, we found that students perceived the descriptive feedback report as more useful than the percentage‐only report. However, there were no relationships amongst the usefulness of the score report and students' motivation or exam scores. Instead, previous performance was the strongest positive predictor of future performance. We discuss the effortful work required to create descriptive feedback reports with their utility and suggest ways instructors may better support students in using descriptive feedback reports when they are implemented. Lay Description: What is already known about this topic: Providing students with feedback immediately following a computer‐based test can be considered a "best practice" from an assessment perspective.Most commonly instructors show students their percentage correct immediately following a computer‐based test.There are many other types of feedback that may be more useful for students. What this paper adds: After three real‐time exams, we examined students' perceived usefulness of percentage‐only versus descriptive score reports.Students perceived descriptive score reports as more useful than percentage‐only.Student motivation and scores were unrelated to perceived usefulness of the report. Implications for practice and/or policy: If it is not labor‐intensive, instructors may want to build descriptive score reports because students perceive them as useful.However, because the score reports did not influence subsequent performance, instructors also need to help students build a plan of action. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|