د/ايمان زغلول قاسم

استاذ تكنولوجيا التعليم المشارك بكلية التربية بالزلفي

book B21

The software used for the administration of the assessment and questionnaire was
Question Mark Perception [QMP] (Question Mark Perception, Version 4.0). A screenshot of
part of the assessment for learning is presented in Appendix 2A, and a screenshot of the
summative assessment can be found in Appendix 2B. Both assessments in the experiment
consisted of 30 multiple-choice items with four response options each, which is the regular
type of assessment for the course in which the assessment was administered. Moreover,
multiple-choice items are easy to score in a CBA and also present practical advantages when
analysing the test results. All items and the feedback in the assessment for learning were
constructed by teachers of the course from the higher-education institute.2
The assessments and questionnaire were administered in the Dutch language because
the educational programme of the students was in Dutch. In the subsequent sections, the
instruments used in the experiment are elaborated upon.
Assessment for learning. The assessment for learning was intended to support student
learning. For this experiment, three different feedback conditions were constructed within the
computer-based assessment for learning (see Table 2.1). The contents of the items were
identical; however, the type, level, and timing of feedback differed.
The first experimental group was offered a computer-based assessment for learning in
which immediate KCR + EF was provided after answering each item. The EF in this
experiment gave a concise explanation on how to obtain to the correct answer. Depending on
the content of the item, the feedback was aimed at the task or process level according to the
classification by Hattie and Timperley (2007). The reason for choosing concise feedback was
that Mory‘s (2004) extensive study showed that simple but sufficient feedback may lead to
higher effectiveness with regard to learning than would elaborate feedback. This is because it
might contain a considerably smaller amount of distracting information, which makes it
relatively easier for students to process the feedback.
The second experimental group was offered the same feedback in the assessment for
learning. However, the timing of the feedback differed—they received the feedback after they
had completed all the items in the assessment for learning. The other conditions were identical
to those of the first experimental group.
The third experimental group served as a control group; students in this group only
received feedback on the correctness or incorrectness of the provided answers (KR) after
completing the entire assessment for learning. The conditions within the three experimental
groups are summarised in Table 2.1.
2

الوقت من ذهب

اذكر الله


المصحف الالكتروني