taking assessment as teaching and learning strategy for improving students’ e-learning...
DESCRIPTION
Introduction(1/3) Combine 2 major instructional characteristics dynamic assessment a.Web-based dynamic assessment system (GPAM-WATA) b.Normal web-based test (N-WBT ) Based on assessment as teaching and learning strategy Adopt the graduated prompt approach (GPA)TRANSCRIPT
Taking assessment as teaching and learningstrategy for improving students’ e-Learning
effectiveness
Computers & Education, 54 (2010) 1157–1166
Tzu-Hua Wang
Reporter : Yu Chih Lin
Outline
Introduction
Method
Conclusion
Suggestion
Introduction(1/3)Combine 2 major instructional characteristics dynamic assessment
a. Web-based dynamic assessment system (GPAM-WATA)
b. Normal web-based test (N-WBT)
Based on assessment as teaching and learning strategy
Adopt the graduated prompt approach (GPA)
Introduction(2/3)
Design of GPAM-WATA
Two formats of dynamic assessment
a) Sandwich format - Between the pre-test and the post-test
b) Cake format - Administered in an individualized way
Introduction(3/3)Argued that the domain-specific prior knowledge
a) Impacted learner achievement
b) Interacted with different phases of information processing
c) Trouble in learning new information
Different designs and strategies to facilitate learning
Method(1/10)3 elementary school teachers and the sixth grade students
Computer course - Nature and Life Technology
Randomly assigned to learn in two groups
a) GPAM-WATA group
b) N-WBT group
Method(2/10)
Gender Group
N-WBT GPAM-WATA Sum
Female 30 29 59
Male 28 29 57
Sum 58 58 116
Participant distribution in the GPAM-WATA group and the N-WBT group
Method(3/10)E-Learning materials are about Plant Photosynthesis
• A: Learning guide’ section• B: Learning contents’ section• C: Adobe Flash animation.
Method(4/10) Graduated prompting assessment module system
IP
Instructional Prompts
Item
START
END
Item
A B
C
D
F
E
Method(5/10)
Method(6/10)Data collection
a) Pre-test scores of the summative assessment
b) Post-test scores of the summative assessment
c) Scores of prior knowledge assessment
Method(7/10)According to the scores of prior knowledge assessment
a) Low-level prior knowledge groups
b) Middle-level prior knowledge groups
c) High-level prior knowledge groups
Method(8/10)
Source SS df MS Fvalue PostHoc^a
Pre-test scores of the summative assessment
4131.814 1 4131.814 38.347**
Different types of Web-based assessment (A)
25425.803 1 25425.803 235.974** GPAM-WATA > N-WBT**
Different levels of prior knowledge (B)
1728.284 2 864.142 8.020** Middle-level prior knowledge > low-level prior knowledge **
High-level prior knowledge > low-level prior knowledge **
AXB 901.779 2 450.890 4.185*
Error 11744.576 109 107.748
Corrected total 50306.364 115
Two-way ANCOVA
Method(9/10) Different levels of prior knowledge
Group Variable Level Mean^a (std.error) F value PostHoc^b
GPAM-WATA(n = 58)
Pre-test scores of the summativeassessment
4.863*
Different levels of prior knowledge
Low-level priorKnowledgeMiddle-level priorKnowledgeHigh-level priorknowledge
75.644(2.636)
81.032 (1.947)
83.359 (2.285)
2.046
N-WBT (n = 58) Pre-test scores of the summativeassessment
29.508**
Different levels of prior knowledge
Low-level priorKnowledgeMiddle-level priorKnowledgeHigh-level priorknowledge
42.892(2.404)
52.281 (2.995)
59.456 (2.907)
9.164** M > L*
H > L**
Method(10/10)Prior knowledge groups
Group Variable Level Mean^a (std. error)
F value PostHoc^b
Low-level prior knowledge (n = 41)
Pre-test scores of the summative assessmentDifferent types of Web-based assessment
GPAM-WATAN-WBT
75.431(3.005)37.558(2.371)
12.074**92.267**
GPAM-WATA > N-WBT**
Middle-level prior knowledge (n = 36)
Pre-test scores of the summative assessmentDifferent types of Web-based assessment
GPAM-WATAN-WBT
81.666(2.125)50.312(2.523)
10.646**88.589**
GPAM-WATA > N-WBT**
High-level prior knowledge (n = 39)
Pre-test scores of the summative assessmentDifferent types of Web-based assessment
GPAM-WATAN-WBT
87.636(2.206)62.966(2.390)
15.978**55.507**
GPAM-WATA > N-WBT**
ConclusionConstruction of an assessment-centred e-learning environment
Graduated prompt approach is effective in facilitating learning
May not be generalizable to other subjects
SuggestionRecommend teachers develop dynamic assessment items and
IPs focusing on the learning contents
Investigate how the types and dimensions of prior knowledge affect learning effectiveness