More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

research-article

Online Quizzes: The Use of Multiple Attempts and Feedback System

Authors:

Mark Joseph Laig Mendoza,

Minie Rose Caramoan LapinidAuthors Info & Claims

IC4E '22: Proceedings of the 2022 13th International Conference on E-Education, E-Business, E-Management, and E-Learning

Pages 124 - 131

https://doi.org/10.1145/3514262.3514271

Published: 19 April 2022 Publication History

Abstract

Timely, specific, and ongoing feedback to correct students’ errors and mistakes in an assessment can be overwhelming for teachers, not to mention that in the Philippines, the normal class size is around 40-60 students. In such setup, the feedback system feature in Schoology's online quiz provides instant, and automated feedback to students while answering the assessments. Likewise, the use of this automated feedback system with the multiple attempts feature improved the students’ thought process and understanding of Mathematics concepts. This study followed the descriptive mixed methods research design in order to determine the effectiveness of an online quiz with multiple attempts and feedback on students’ understanding of sequences and series using the Schoology LMS. A heterogeneous class of forty Grade 10 students participated in this study. These students were exposed to blended learning instruction prior to the administration of the online quizzes. The quantitative phase analyzed the ANOVA Repeated measures results of the online quizzes. The qualitative phase focused on the analysis of the students’ solutions in all attempts, and post- assessment reflective journal entries. The study revealed a significant increase across students’ online quiz scores which is attributed to the three attempts and automated feedback system. This result was supported by students’ reflective journal entries indicating positive attitudes on the use of feedback system such as helping them understand Mathematics concepts, managing time wisely among activities, and becoming independent learners.

References

[1]

Angus, S. D., & Watson, J. (2009). Does regular online testing enhance student learning in the numerical sciences? Robust evidence from a large data set. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2), 255-272.

[2]

Baleni, Z. G. (2015). Online formative assessment in higher education: Its pros and cons. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 13(4), 228-236.

[3]

Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (expanded). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

[4]

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.

[5]

Brookhart, S.M. (2012). Preventing feedback frizzle. Educational Leadership, 70(1), 24-29.

[6]

Brothen, T. & Wamback, C. (2004). The value of time limits on internet quizzes. Teaching of Psychology, 27, 58-60.

[7]

Cohen, D., & Sasson, I. (2016). Online quizzes in a virtual learning environment as a tool for formative assessment. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 6(3), 188-208. Retrieved from http://www.jotse.org/index.php/jotse/rt/captureCite/217/225 on March 27, 2020.

[8]

Cook, B., & Babon, A. (2017). Active learning through online quizzes: Better learning and less (busy) work. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 41(1), 24-38.

[9]

Dobson, J.L. (2008). The use of formative online quizzes to enhance class preparation and scores on summative exams. Advances in Physiology Education, 32, 297-302.

[10]

Dunn, K.E., & Mulvenon, S.W. (2009). A critical review of research on formative assessments: The limited scientific evidence of the impact of formative assessments in education. Practical Assessment Research & Evaluation, 14(7), 1-11.

[11]

Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2012) Making TIME for feedback. Educational Leadership, 70(1), 42-47.

[12]

Gierl, M.J., Bulut, O., Guo, Q., & Zhang, X. (2017). Developing, analyzing, and using distractors for multiple-choice tests in education: A comprehensive review. Review of Educational Research, 87(6), 1082-1116.

[13]

Haladyna, T.M. (2004). Developing and validating multiple-choice test items. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

[14]

Hashey, A. I., & Stahl, S. (2014). Making online learning accessible for students with disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 46(5), 70 - 78.

[15]

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.

[16]

Hatziapostolou, T., & Paraskakis, I. (2010). Enhancing the impact of formative feedback on student learning through an online feedback system. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 8(2), 111-122.

[17]

Hillman, J. (2012). The impact of online quizzes on student engagement and learning. Retrieved from https://berks.psu.edu/sites/berks/files/campus/Hillman_TLI_report.pdf on March 27, 2020.

[18]

Hyland, P. (2000). Learning from feedback in assessment. In P. Hyland & A. Booth (Eds.). The practice of university history teaching (pp. 233-247). Manchester: Manchester University Press.

[19]

Ibrahim, A. (2015). A study on technology based learning and strategies for innovative teaching methods. International Journal of Scientific Research, 4(11), 74-75.

[20]

Johnson, B.C., & Keviniemi, M.T. (2009). The effect of online chapter quizzes on exam performance in an undergraduate social psychology course. Teaching of Psychology, 36, 33-37.

[21]

Komenda, M., Pekárková, L., & Schwarz, D. (2011). EMEE – Well-founded feedback in learning management systems. Journal of Interdisciplinary Research, 1(2), 142-145.

[22]

Liu, L. & Cavanaugh, C. (2011). Success in online high school Biology factors influencing student academic performance. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 12(1), 37 - 54.

[23]

Lonchner, B., Conrad, R. & Graham, E. (2015). Secondary teachers' concerns in adopting management systems. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice To Improve Learning, 62-70.

[24]

Majumdar, S. (2009). The pedagogical framework for online learning. R. Maclean, Rupert, D. Wilson (eds.), International Handbook of Education for the Changing World of Work, 1847-1861.

[25]

Moreno, R. (2004). Decreasing cognitive load for novice students: effects of explanatory versus corrective feedback in discovery-based multimedia. Instructional Science, 32(1e2), 99-113.

[26]

Moses, P., Ali, W.Z., & Krauss, S.E. (2014). Cause analysis of learning management system: role of moderator in improving students’ performance. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 9(1), 83-105.

[27]

Norton, P., & Wilburg, K.W. (2003). Teaching with technology, designing opportunities to learn (2nd ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning Inc.

[28]

Pauli, C. (2010). Fostering understanding and thinking in discursive cultures of learning. Unpublished paper presented at the meeting of EARLI SIG 10 and SIG 21, Utrecht, Netherlands.

[29]

Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT Journal, 59, 23-30.

[30]

Schoology. (2016). The definitive guide to building a great blended learning program. Best Practice Series, 1-35. Retrieved August 12, 2017, from https://info.schoology.com/rs/601-CPX-764/ images/The-Definitive-Guide-to-Blended-Learning-by-Schoology.pdf

[31]

Tan, D.A. (2018). Mathematical problem solving heuristics and solution strategies of senior high school students. International Journal of English and Education, 7(3), 1-17.

[32]

Van der Hulst, J., van Boxel, P., & Meeder, S. (2014). Digitalizing feedback: Reducing teachers’ time investment while maintaining feedback quality. A paper presented in European Conference on e-Learning (p. 243). Academic Conferences International Limited.

[33]

Voerman, L., Meijer, P.C., Korthagen, F.A.J., & Simons, R.J. (2012). Types and frequencies of feedback interventions in classroom interaction in secondary education, Teaching and Teacher Education, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.06.006

[34]

Waha, B., & Davis, K. (2014). University students’ perspective on blended learning. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 36(2), 172-182.

[35]

Wiggins, G. (2012). 7 keys to effective feedback. Educational leadership, 70(1), 10-16.

[36]

William, D., Lee, C., Harrison, C., & Black, P. (2004). Teachers developing assessment for learning: Impact on student achievement. Assessment in Education, 11, 49-65.

[37]

Wininger, R. S. (2005). Using your tests to teach: Formative summative assessment. Teaching Psychology, 32(2), 164-166.

[38]

Yusof, J., Ab Manan, N.A., & Alias, A.A. (2012). Guided peer feedback on academic writing tasks using Facebook notes: An exploratory study. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 67, 216-228.

Cited By

Aerts K(2024)Improving Students’ Engagement and Learning Outcomes in a Primer Course on Object Oriented Programming in Java.2024 47th MIPRO ICT and Electronics Convention (MIPRO)10.1109/MIPRO60963.2024.10569397(642-647)Online publication date: 20-May-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/MIPRO60963.2024.10569397

Recommendations

Lesson Playlist: Its Effects on the Academic Achievement and Attitude in Mathematics among Grade 7 Students
IC4E '22: Proceedings of the 2022 13th International Conference on E-Education, E-Business, E-Management, and E-Learning

Since the current trends in education involve integrating technologies in the classroom, this study aims to identify the effects of using Lesson Playlist in the academic achievement and attitude of students towards Mathematics. The study involved sixty-...
Effects of a computer-assisted formative assessment intervention based on multiple-tier diagnostic items and different feedback types

Computer-assisted formative assessments with multiple-tier items are a valid instrument for diagnosing students' conceptual understanding in learning domains with well-structured declarative knowledge (e.g. science education). However, it is unknown how ...
Enhance Students' Computing Skills via Web-Mediated Self-Regulated Learning with Feedback in Blended Environment

The vocational colleges in Taiwan regard professional certifications as a badge of skills achievement. To enhance student learning in this specific context, the authors conducted a quasi-experiment to explore effects of web-mediated self-regulated ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences

IC4E '22: Proceedings of the 2022 13th International Conference on E-Education, E-Business, E-Management, and E-Learning

January 2022

626 pages

ISBN:9781450387187

DOI:10.1145/3514262

Copyright © 2022 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 19 April 2022

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed limited

Conference

IC4E 2022

IC4E 2022: 2022 13th International Conference on E-Education, E-Business, E-Management, and E-Learning

January 14 - 17, 2022

Tokyo, Japan

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

1
Total Citations
View Citations
117
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)41
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)9

Reflects downloads up to 16 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Aerts K(2024)Improving Students’ Engagement and Learning Outcomes in a Primer Course on Object Oriented Programming in Java.2024 47th MIPRO ICT and Electronics Convention (MIPRO)10.1109/MIPRO60963.2024.10569397(642-647)Online publication date: 20-May-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/MIPRO60963.2024.10569397

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents