The impact of frequency and stakes of formative assessment on student achievement in higher education: A learning analytics study

IF 5.1 2区教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Pub Date : 2024-11-13 DOI:10.1111/jcal.13087

Okan Bulut, Guher Gorgun, Seyma Nur Yildirim-Erbasli

{"title":"The impact of frequency and stakes of formative assessment on student achievement in higher education: A learning analytics study","authors":"Okan Bulut, Guher Gorgun, Seyma Nur Yildirim-Erbasli","doi":"10.1111/jcal.13087","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Research shows that how formative assessments are operationalized plays a crucial role in shaping their engagement with formative assessments, thereby impacting their effectiveness in predicting academic achievement. Mandatory assessments can ensure consistent student participation, leading to better tracking of learning progress. Optional assessments may encourage voluntary engagement, potentially leading to a more genuine reflection of student understanding. Also, frequent assessments provide continuous opportunities for feedback and adjustment, which can keep students actively engaged in the learning process.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>This study aims to investigate two crucial facets of formative assessments: frequency and the level of stakes involved (mandatory vs. optional). We examine how modifying the frequency of formative assessments affects students' course performance. Additionally, we evaluate the impact of mandatory versus optional formative assessments on students' course performance in higher education.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>The sample of this study consisted of undergraduate students (<i>n</i> = 336) enrolled in three sections of a large asynchronous course at a Canadian university. We extracted features associated with online formative assessments (e.g., the number of attempts and average scores) from the learning management system. Next, we used these features to predict students' performance in summative assessments (two midterms and a final exam).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results and Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Our findings indicated that increasing the frequency of online formative assessments did not consistently improve student performance. Also, participation frequency in online formative assessments seemed to vary depending on assessment stakes (i.e., optional vs. mandatory). We recommend that instructors examine what conditions can maximize the contribution of formative assessments to students' academic achievement before building predictive models.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48071,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Computer Assisted Learning","volume":"41 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jcal.13087","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Computer Assisted Learning","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcal.13087","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Research shows that how formative assessments are operationalized plays a crucial role in shaping their engagement with formative assessments, thereby impacting their effectiveness in predicting academic achievement. Mandatory assessments can ensure consistent student participation, leading to better tracking of learning progress. Optional assessments may encourage voluntary engagement, potentially leading to a more genuine reflection of student understanding. Also, frequent assessments provide continuous opportunities for feedback and adjustment, which can keep students actively engaged in the learning process.

Objectives

This study aims to investigate two crucial facets of formative assessments: frequency and the level of stakes involved (mandatory vs. optional). We examine how modifying the frequency of formative assessments affects students' course performance. Additionally, we evaluate the impact of mandatory versus optional formative assessments on students' course performance in higher education.

Methods

The sample of this study consisted of undergraduate students (n = 336) enrolled in three sections of a large asynchronous course at a Canadian university. We extracted features associated with online formative assessments (e.g., the number of attempts and average scores) from the learning management system. Next, we used these features to predict students' performance in summative assessments (two midterms and a final exam).

Results and Conclusions

Our findings indicated that increasing the frequency of online formative assessments did not consistently improve student performance. Also, participation frequency in online formative assessments seemed to vary depending on assessment stakes (i.e., optional vs. mandatory). We recommend that instructors examine what conditions can maximize the contribution of formative assessments to students' academic achievement before building predictive models.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

高等教育中形成性评估的频率和利害关系对学生成绩的影响：一项学习分析研究

研究表明，形成性评估的操作方式在塑造学生参与形成性评估的过程中起着至关重要的作用，从而影响其预测学业成绩的有效性。强制性评估可以确保学生的持续参与，从而更好地跟踪学习进度。可选的评估可能会鼓励自愿参与，可能会更真实地反映学生的理解。此外，频繁的评估为反馈和调整提供了持续的机会，这可以使学生积极地参与到学习过程中。本研究旨在探讨形成性评估的两个关键方面：频率和涉及的利害关系水平（强制性与可选性）。我们研究如何修改形成性评估的频率影响学生的课程表现。此外，我们评估了强制性和可选性形成性评估对学生在高等教育中的课程表现的影响。方法本研究的样本包括参加加拿大一所大学大型异步课程的三个部分的本科生（n = 336）。我们从学习管理系统中提取了与在线形成性评估相关的特征（例如，尝试次数和平均分数）。接下来，我们使用这些特征来预测学生在总结性评估中的表现（两次期中考试和一次期末考试）。结果和结论我们的研究结果表明，增加在线形成性评估的频率并不能持续提高学生的表现。此外，参与在线形成性评估的频率似乎因评估风险而异（即，可选与强制性）。我们建议教师在建立预测模型之前，检查哪些条件可以最大限度地发挥形成性评估对学生学业成绩的贡献。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Computer Assisted Learning EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-

CiteScore

9.70

自引率

6.00%

发文量

116

期刊介绍： The Journal of Computer Assisted Learning is an international peer-reviewed journal which covers the whole range of uses of information and communication technology to support learning and knowledge exchange. It aims to provide a medium for communication among researchers as well as a channel linking researchers, practitioners, and policy makers. JCAL is also a rich source of material for master and PhD students in areas such as educational psychology, the learning sciences, instructional technology, instructional design, collaborative learning, intelligent learning systems, learning analytics, open, distance and networked learning, and educational evaluation and assessment. This is the case for formal (e.g., schools), non-formal (e.g., workplace learning) and informal learning (e.g., museums and libraries) situations and environments. Volumes often include one Special Issue which these provides readers with a broad and in-depth perspective on a specific topic. First published in 1985, JCAL continues to have the aim of making the outcomes of contemporary research and experience accessible. During this period there have been major technological advances offering new opportunities and approaches in the use of a wide range of technologies to support learning and knowledge transfer more generally. There is currently much emphasis on the use of network functionality and the challenges its appropriate uses pose to teachers/tutors working with students locally and at a distance. JCAL welcomes: -Empirical reports, single studies or programmatic series of studies on the use of computers and information technologies in learning and assessment -Critical and original meta-reviews of literature on the use of computers for learning -Empirical studies on the design and development of innovative technology-based systems for learning -Conceptual articles on issues relating to the Aims and Scope