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