Rialy Andriamiseza, Franck Silvestre, J. Parmentier, J. Broisin
{"title":"TEFA过程中的数据知情决策:来自同伴指导的过程的实证研究","authors":"Rialy Andriamiseza, Franck Silvestre, J. Parmentier, J. Broisin","doi":"10.1145/3430895.3460153","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"When formative assessment involves a large number of learners, Technology-Enhanced Formative Assessments are one of the most popular solutions. However, current TEFA processes lack data-informed decision-making. By analyzing a dataset gathered from a formative assessment tool, we provide evidence about how to improve decision-making in processes that ask learners to answer the same question before and after a confrontation with peers. Our results suggest that learners' understanding increases when the proportion of correct answers before the confrontation is close to 50%, or when learners consistently rate peers' rationales. Furthermore, peer ratings are more consistent when learners' confidence degrees are consistent. These results led us to design a decision-making model whose benefits will be studied in future works.","PeriodicalId":125581,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Eighth ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale","volume":"22 5","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Data-informed Decision-making in TEFA Processes: An Empirical Study of a Process Derived from Peer-Instruction\",\"authors\":\"Rialy Andriamiseza, Franck Silvestre, J. Parmentier, J. Broisin\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3430895.3460153\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"When formative assessment involves a large number of learners, Technology-Enhanced Formative Assessments are one of the most popular solutions. However, current TEFA processes lack data-informed decision-making. By analyzing a dataset gathered from a formative assessment tool, we provide evidence about how to improve decision-making in processes that ask learners to answer the same question before and after a confrontation with peers. Our results suggest that learners' understanding increases when the proportion of correct answers before the confrontation is close to 50%, or when learners consistently rate peers' rationales. Furthermore, peer ratings are more consistent when learners' confidence degrees are consistent. These results led us to design a decision-making model whose benefits will be studied in future works.\",\"PeriodicalId\":125581,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the Eighth ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale\",\"volume\":\"22 5\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the Eighth ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3430895.3460153\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the Eighth ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3430895.3460153","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Data-informed Decision-making in TEFA Processes: An Empirical Study of a Process Derived from Peer-Instruction
When formative assessment involves a large number of learners, Technology-Enhanced Formative Assessments are one of the most popular solutions. However, current TEFA processes lack data-informed decision-making. By analyzing a dataset gathered from a formative assessment tool, we provide evidence about how to improve decision-making in processes that ask learners to answer the same question before and after a confrontation with peers. Our results suggest that learners' understanding increases when the proportion of correct answers before the confrontation is close to 50%, or when learners consistently rate peers' rationales. Furthermore, peer ratings are more consistent when learners' confidence degrees are consistent. These results led us to design a decision-making model whose benefits will be studied in future works.