Approaches to learning and assessment preferences in a portfolio-based learning environment

1. Approaches to learning and assessment preferencesin a portfolio-based learning environment Marlies Baeten Filip Dochy Katrien Struyven K.U.Leuven, Belgium

2. Introduction • Society today demands life-long learners and professional experts  Deep approach to learning • Intention: to understand, to distil meaning • Strategy: to relate ideas, to look for patterns • How? • Constructivist teaching methods • Innovative assessment

3. Introduction • Constructivist teaching methods • Constructive • Cumulative • Self-regulated • Goal-oriented • Situated • Collaborative • Individually different

4. Introduction • Innovative assessment • Increasing responsibility of the student • Numerous measures • Higher order-skills • Multiple dimensions of intelligence • Authentic and contextualised • Integration of assessment in the learning process e.g. portfolio assessment (this study)

5. Introduction • Empirical findings • Stimulating deep approaches  Mixed results  One plausible explanation: Combination of constructivist design principles and lectures?? • The current research • Combination of constructivist design principles and lectures in a portfolio-based learning environment • Taking into account students’ assessment preferences

6. Research questions • Do students’ approaches to learning change in a portfolio-based learning environment? • Do students’ assessment preferences change in a portfolio-based learning environment? • What relationships are found between approaches to learning and assessment preferences?

7. Method • Participants • First-year professional Bachelor’s degree students studying Office Management • During the course ‘Intercultural communication and training’ • Pre- (N=169) and post- (N=150) test

8. Method • Research instruments • Approaches to learning • Revised Two Factor Study Process Questionnaire (Biggs, Kember & Leung, 2001) • Assessment preferences • Assessment Preferences Inventory (Birenbaum, 1994)

9. Method

10. Method • Procedure • Pre- and post-test design • Instruction • Incorporation of constructivist design principles • Lectures • Portfolio assessment • Formative function • Summative function

11. Results • Do students’ approaches to learning change in a portfolio-based learning environment? • Paired samples t-test

12. Results • Do students’ assessment preferences change in a portfolio-based learning environment? • Paired samples t-test

13. Results

14. Results • What relationships are found between approaches to learning and assessment preferences? • Correlational analyses

15. Results • Deep approach to learning • permanent evaluation rpre-test = 0.259 and rpost-test = 0.315 • tasks that require higher order thinking rpre-test = 0.297 and rpost-test = 0.259 • student participation in exams rpre-test = 0.185 • new modes of assessment rpost-test = 0.247

16. Conclusion • Portfolio-based learning environment • Increasing surface approaches to learning • Decreasing assessment preferences • Student participation • Permanent evaluation • Portfolio assessment • Deep approach to learning ~ preference for tasks that require higher order thinking, permanent evaluation and new modes of assessment

17. Suggestions further research • Clarifying students’ (negative) experiences • Various forms of portfolio assessment • Duration • Control group

18. Contact • Marlies.Baeten@ped.kuleuven.be