nach oben

Journal of Computers in Education

Erschienen in:

15.10.2020

Incorporating feedback in online cognitive diagnostic assessment for enhancing grade five students’ achievement in ‘time’

verfasst von: Huan Chin, Cheng Meng Chew, Hooi Lian Lim

Erschienen in: Journal of Computers in Education | Ausgabe 2/2021

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Time is a difficult topic for many elementary students. We evaluated the effect of the feedback incorporated in online Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment (CDA) on students’ achievement in this topic by conducting a sequential explanatory mixed method case study which involved 125 Grade Five students from the six classrooms in six Malaysian elementary schools. Simple feedback and detailed feedback were delivered to the participants in the control and experimental groups, respectively as intervention through the online CDA. The findings indicated that the detailed feedback was more effective than the simple feedback in enhancing the participants’ achievement in the topic of time. The findings of the follow-up interviews suggested that the comprehensiveness of the feedback, the usefulness of the feedback and the ability of feedback to engage students were the main factors which explained the effectiveness of the detailed feedback. This study sheds light on the advantages of incorporating detailed feedback in the online CDA. Thus, teachers may be encouraged to use it as a classroom assessment tool for providing instant detailed feedback in supporting students’ learning of the topic of Time.

Vorheriger Artikel Effects of an interest-driven creation approach on students’ mobile learning performance and creativity in learning science in a science museum

Nächster Artikel Assessing computational thinking abilities among Singapore secondary students: a Rasch model measurement analysis

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Alves, C. B. (2012). Making diagnostic inferences about student performance on the Alberta Education Diagnostic Mathematics Project: An application of the Attribute Hierarchy Method (Doctoral thesis). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (Publication No. 919011661)

Boora, S., Pasiphol, S., & Tangdhanakanond, K. (2015). Development of cognitive diagnostic testing on basic arithmetic operation. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 769–772.

Boud, D., & Molloy, E. (2013). Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The challenge of design. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), 698–712.

Broaddus, A. E. (2011). An investigation into foundational concepts related to slope: An application of the Attribute Hierarchy Method (Doctoral thesis). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global database. (Publication No. 3487353)

Brookhart, S. M. (2011). Teacher feedback in formative classroom assessment. In C. Webber & J. Lupart (Eds.), Leading student assessment (pp. 225–239). Dordrecht: Springer.

Chan, Y. L., Maun, R., & Krishnan, G. (2017). Dual language programme mathematics year 5 textbook. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.

Chin, S. F., & Lim, H. L. (2018). The effect of computerized feedback on students’ misconceptions in algebraic expression. Pertanika Social Science & Humanities, 26(3), 1387–1403.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Routledge Academic.

Cui, Y., Gierl, M. J., & Chang, H. H. (2012). Estimating classification consistency and accuracy for cognitive diagnostic assessment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 49(1), 19–38.

Dann, R. (2016). Developing understanding of pupil feedback using Habermas’ notion of communicative action. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 23(3), 396–414.

Dawson, P., Henderson, M., Mahoney, P., Phillips, M., Ryan, T., Boud, D., et al. (2019). What makes for effective feedback: Staff and student perspectives. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(1), 25–36.

de la Torre, J., & Minchen, N. (2014). Cognitively diagnostic assessments and the cognitive diagnosis model framework. Psicología Educativa, 20(2), 89–97.

Earnest, D. (2015). When "half an hour" is not "thirty minutes": Elementary students solving elapsed time problem. In T. G. Bartell, K. N. Bieda, R. T. Putnam, K. Bradfield, & H. Dominguez (Eds.), Proceedings of the 37th annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 285–291). East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University.

Evans, C. (2013). Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education. Review of Educational Research, 83(1), 70–120.

Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. W. (2012). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.

Guo, W., & Wei, J. (2019). Teacher feedback and students’ self-regulated learning in mathematics: A study of chinese secondary students. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 28(3), 265–275.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Hampshire: Cengage Learning.

Harris, S. (2008). It's about time: Difficulties in developing time concepts. Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, 13(1), 28–31.

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

Jedtke, E., & Greefrath, G. (2019). A computer-based learning environment about quadratic functions with different kinds of feedback: Pilot study and research design. Technology in mathematics teaching (pp. 297–322). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

Jonsson, A., & Panadero, E. (2018). Facilitating students’ active engagement with feedback. In A. A. Lipnevich & J. K. Smith (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of instructional feedback (pp. 531–553). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Kamii, C., & Russell, K. A. (2012). Elapsed time: Why is it so difficult to teach? Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 43(3), 296–315.

Kehrer, P., Kelly, K. & Heffernan, N. (2013). Does immediate feedback while doing homework improve learning. In C. Boonthum-Denecke & G. M. Youngblood (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Conference(pp. 542–545). California: AAAI Press.

Ketterlin-Geller, L. R. (2017). Understanding and improving accessibility for special populations. In A. A. Rupp & J. P. Leighton (Eds.), The handbook of cognition and assessment: Frameworks, methodologies, and applications (pp. 198–225). United Kingdom: Wiley.

Ketterlin-Geller, L. R., & Yovanoff, P. (2009). Diagnostic assessments in mathematics to support instructional decision making. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 14(16), 1–11.

Leighton, J. P., & Gierl, M. J. (2007). Why cognitive diagnostic assessment? In J. P. Leighton & M. J. Gierl (Eds.), Cognitive diagnostic assessment for education: Theory and applications (pp. 3–18). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Manson, E., & Ayres, P. (2019). Investigating how errors should be flagged and worked examples structured when providing feedback to novice learners of mathematics. Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2019.1650895.CrossRef

McLaren, B. M., van Gog, T., Ganoe, C., Karabinos, M., & Yaron, D. (2016). The efficiency of worked examples compared to erroneous examples, tutored problem solving, and problem solving in computer-based learning environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 87–99.

Ministry of Education Malaysia [MOE]. (2016). Gred sekolah rendah [Primary school grade]. https://sapsnkra.moe.gov.my/dokumen/GRED.pdf

Multon, K. D., & Coleman, J. S. M. (2010). Coefficient alpha. In N. Salkind (Ed.), Encyclopedia of research design (pp. 159–162). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Nichols, P. D. (1994). A framework for developing cognitively diagnostic assessments. Review of Educational Research, 64(4), 575–603.

Ohlsson, S. (1996a). Learning from error and the design of task environments. International Journal of Educational Research, 25(5), 419–448.

Ohlsson, S. (1996b). Learning from performance errors. Psychological Review, 103(2), 241–262.

Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2006). The Content Validity Index: Are you sure you know what's being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in Nursing and Health, 29(5), 489–497.

Polit, D. F., Beck, T., & Owen, S. V. (2007). Focus on research methods: Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity. Research in Nursing and Health, 30, 459–467.

Price, M., Handley, K., Millar, J., & O'Donovan, B. (2010). Feedback: All that effort, but what is the effect? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(3), 277–289.

Renkl, A. (2014). Toward an instructionally oriented theory of example-based learning. Cognitive Science, 38(1), 1–37.

Roberts, M. R., & Gierl, M. J. (2010). Developing score reports for cognitive diagnostic assessments. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 29(3), 25–38.

Roberts, M. R., Alves, C. B., Chu, M. W., Thompson, M., Bahry, L. M., & Gotzmann, A. (2014). Testing expert based versus student based cognitive models for a Grade 3 diagnostic mathematics assessment. Applied Measurement in Education, 27(3), 173–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2014.905787.CrossRef

Roschelle, J., Rafanan, K., Bhanot, R., Estrella, G., Penuel, B., Nussbaum, M., et al. (2010). Scaffolding group explanation and feedback with handheld technology: Impact on students’ mathematics learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(4), 399–419.

Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119–144.

Santos, L., & Pinto, J. (2010). The evolution of feedback practice of a mathematics teacher. In Proceedings of 34th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 145–152). Belo Horizonte, Brazil: PME.

Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189.

Sia, C. J. L., & Lim, C. S. (2018). Cognitive diagnostic assessment: An alternative mode of assessment for learning. In D. R. Thompson, M. Burton, A. Cusi, & D. Wright (Eds.), Classroom assessment in mathematics (pp. 123–137). Cham, Switzedland: Springer.

Sia, C. J. L., Lim, C. S., Chew, C. M., & Kor, L. K. (2019). Expert-based cognitive model and student-based cognitive model in the learning of “Time”: Match or mismatch? International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(6), 1–19.

Small, F., & Attree, K. (2016). Undergraduate student responses to feedback: Expectations and experiences. Studies in Higher Education, 41(11), 2078–2094. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1007944.CrossRef

Stacey, K., Price, B., Steinle, V., Chick, H., & Gvozdenko, E. (2009, September 28–October 1). SMART assessment for learning. Paper presented at Conference of the International Society for Design and Development in Education, Queensland, Australia.

Stacey, K., Steinle, V., Price, B., & Gvozdenko, E. (2018). Specific Mathematics Assessments that Reveal Thinking: An online tool to build teachers’ diagnostic competence and support teaching. In L. Timo, K. Philipp, & J. Leuders (Eds.), Diagnostic competence of mathematics teachers (pp. 241–261). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

Van de Walle, J. A., Karp, K. S., & Bay-Williams, J. M. (2018). Elementary and middle school mathematics: Teaching developmentally (10th ed.). United Kingdon: Pearson.

Van der Kleij, F. M., Eggen, T. J. H. M., Timmers, C. F., & Veldkamp, B. P. (2012). Effects of feedback in a computer-based assessment for learning. Computers & Education, 58(1), 263–272.

Van der Kleij, F. M., Feskens, R. C., & Eggen, T. J. (2015). Effects of feedback in a computer-based learning environment on students’ learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85(4), 475–511.

Van Steenbrugge, H., Valcke, M., & Desoete, A. (2010). Mathematics learning difficulties in primary education: Teachers’ professional knowledge and the use of commercially available learning packages. Educational Studies, 36(1), 59–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055690903148639.CrossRef

Winstone, N. E., Nash, R. A., Rowntree, J., & Parker, M. (2017). ‘It'd be useful, but I wouldn't use it’: Barriers to university students’ feedback seeking and recipience. Studies in Higher Education, 42(11), 2026–2041.

Wu, L. J., Chen, H. H., Sung, Y. T., & Chang, K. E. (2012, July). Developing cognitive diagnostic assessments system for mathematics learning. In Proceedings of 2012 IEEE 12th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (pp. 228–229). Italy: IEEE.

Zamora, Á., Suárez, J. M., & Ardura, D. (2018). Error detection and self-assessment as mechanisms to promote self-regulation of learning among secondary education students. The Journal of Educational Research, 111(2), 175–185.

Zhou, Z., Peverly, S. T., Boehm, A. E., & Chongde, L. (2000). American and Chinese children's understanding of distance, time, and speed interrelations. Cognitive Development, 15(2), 215–240.

Titel: Incorporating feedback in online cognitive diagnostic assessment for enhancing grade five students’ achievement in ‘time’
verfasst von: Huan Chin
Cheng Meng Chew
Hooi Lian Lim
Publikationsdatum: 15.10.2020
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Journal of Computers in Education / Ausgabe 2/2021
Print ISSN: 2197-9987
Elektronische ISSN: 2197-9995
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-020-00176-3

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2021

The effect of basic robotic coding in-service training on teachers’ acceptance of technology, self-development, and computational thinking skills in technology use

Assessing computational thinking abilities among Singapore secondary students: a Rasch model measurement analysis

Effects of an interest-driven creation approach on students’ mobile learning performance and creativity in learning science in a science museum

Development and validation of online cognitive diagnostic assessment with ordered multiple-choice items for ‘Multiplication of Time’

Flipping an EFL classroom with the LINE application: students’ performance and perceptions