1 / 12

BACKGROUND

This study examines the relationship between Active Participation in Test Development (APTD) and student performance and attitudes. The research objectives include determining the impact of APTD on student exam performance and assessing student opinions on the approach. The study found no significant correlation between the quantity or complexity of questions submitted through APTD and student exam performance. However, students generally showed high interest in practical subject matter categories but had relatively lower support for the idea that APTD helped in exam preparation. The discussion explores potential reasons for the lack of correlation and suggests future directions for further research.

robinsonm
Download Presentation

BACKGROUND

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. An Examination of the Relationship Between Active Participation in Test Development (APTD), Student Performance and Student Attitudes Robert B. Sweeney, Jr.†Kelly Mosteller, Masters Graduate StudentRoy J. Daigle‡University of South AlabamaSchool of Computer and Information SciencesMobile, Alabama 36688(334) 460-6390sweeney@cis.usouthal.edudaigle@cis.usouthal.edu

  2. BACKGROUND • Goal: incorporate higher levels of skills/knowledge into computing curriculum

  3. Background: Tests • Useful for • Assessment • Instruction • Retest • Collaboration • Feedback

  4. Background: Test Issues • Poor preparation • Uncertainty • Project Generalization

  5. Background: APTD • Active Participation in Test Development (Daigle & Doran, 1998) • Designed for Project Generalization objectives • Students & instructor develop test in collaboration • Four phases: 1. Call for test item submission 2. Cooperation for integration & review to prepare test3. Instructor review of prepared test 4. Instructor preparation of the examination. • Encourages early student exam preparation, reduces student uncertainty, and provides feedback to instructor

  6. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES • Determine if there is a relationship between the use of APTD and student performance on examinations • Predictor Variables: Quantity and Complexity of questions submitted • Depth of Knowledge scale based on Bloom Taxonomy used to assess Complexity • Assess student opinion relative to course subject matter and use of APTD

  7. HYPOTHESES Relationship between APTD and Student Exam Performance • H1: The quantity of student questions submitted as part of APTD will not affect the student’s test performance. • H2: The complexity of student questions submitted as part of APTD will not affect the student’s test performance. • H3: The interaction of quantity and complexity of the student questions submitted as part of APTD will not affect the student’s test performance. Student Opinion • A student survey was conducted to determine their preferences for particular class subject material and for their opinion of APTD

  8. METHODOLOGY • Subjects: students in accelerated database-programming course preparing for Computer Science or Information Systems masters • Prerequisites: accelerated courses in Java, data/file structures, architecture/operating systems, and networks/communications

  9. RESULTS – H1, H2, and H3 Correlation analysis performed comparing midterm and final exam scores with: • H1: Quantity of questions submitted • No significant correlation coefficients • H2: Complexity of questions submitted • No significant correlation coefficients • H3: Quantity and Complexity of questions submitted • No significant correlation coefficients Consequently we cannot reject H1, H2, or H3

  10. RESULTS – SURVEY • Students reported generally high interest in all subject matter categories • Practical, project-oriented categories (MS Access and Visual Basic, and relational DBMS) rated higher than theoretical (normalization) • Students reported generally strong agreement with the effectiveness of APTD • Relatively lower support for idea that APTD helped in student exam preparation or exam performance

  11. DISCUSSION • Lack of correlation between exam performance and APTD might be due to: • Rewording of submitted exam questions to a higher complexity level • Lack of specific instruction on levels of knowledge complexity • Frequency of question submissions • Student perceptions were that the APTD approach was effective.

  12. FUTURE DIRECTIONS • Revise methodology and redo experiment • More depth of knowledge instruction • Adjust number of requested submissions • Larger/more diverse subject group

More Related