How Do Mathematics Teachers in Higher Education Look at E-assessment with Multiple-Choice Questions

Jose Manuel Azevedo, Ema Patrícia Oliveira, Patrícia Damas Beites

2017

Abstract

This paper presents a part of a global proposal aimed to create and put forward an e–assessment strategy using tests with multiple–choice questions (MCQ) implemented in Moodle. This strategy was planned in order to allow the use of continuous summative assessment in mathematics’ courses in a higher education institution, in classes with a large number of students. The main goal of this work was to analyse how this procedure can affect the teaching and learning processes. Changes in educational practices were ascertained using interviews with teachers. It was found an improvement in the way teachers create questions as well as in teamwork promotion. Furthermore, teachers reported that they pay more attention now on how they teach. Thus, the implementation of this e–assessment approach can be considered successful, namely because it allowed an adequate response to the main needs initially identified.

References

  1. Azevedo, J. (2015) 'e-Assessment in Mathematics Courses with Multiple-choice Questions Tests', in Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2015). Lisboa, pp. 260- 266. doi: 10.5220/0005452702600266.
  2. Bible, L., Simkin, M. G. and Kuechler, W. L. (2008) 'Using multiple-choice tests to evaluate students' understanding of accounting', Accounting Education, 17(sup1), pp. S55-S68. doi: 10.1080/09639280802009249.
  3. Boticki, I. and Milašinovic, B. (2008) 'Knowledge assessment at the faculty of electrical engineering and computing', in Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Technology Interfaces, ITI. Cavtat, pp. 111-116. doi: 10.1109/ITI.2008.4588392.
  4. Brown, G. (2001) Assessment series n.o 3 - assessment: a guide for lectures. York: Learning and Teaching Support Network (LTNS).
  5. Bull, J. and Danson, M. (2001) Assessment series N.o 14 - computer-assisted assessment (CAA). York: Learning and Teaching Support Network (LTNS).
  6. Burton, S., Sudweeks, R., Merrill, P. and Wood, B. (1991) How to prepare better multiple-choice test items: guidelines for university faculty, Brigham Young University Testing Services and The Department of Instructional Science. Available at: http:// testing.byu.edu/info/handbooks/betteritems.pdf.
  7. Bush, M. (2015) 'Reducing the need for guesswork in multiple-choice tests', Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 40(2), pp. 218-231. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2014.902192.
  8. Camilo, H. and Silva, J. A. P. da (2008) Os testes de escolha múltipla (TEM), Essências EDUcare. Departamento de Educação Médica da Faculdade de Medicina - Universidade de Coimbra.
  9. Clegg, V. L. and Cashin, W. E. (1986) Improving multiplechoice tests. Kansas State University: Center for Faculty Evaluation & Development.
  10. Douglas, M., Wilson, J. and Ennis, S. (2012) 'Multiplechoice question tests: a convenient, flexible and effective learning tool? A case study', Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 49(2), pp. 111- 121. doi: 10.1080/14703297.2012.677596.
  11. Ferrão, M. (2010) 'E-assessment within the bologna paradigm: evidence from Portugal', Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(7), pp. 819-830. doi: 10.1080/02602930903060990.
  12. Frankland, S. (2007) Enhancing teaching and learning through assessment. Dordrecth: Springer.
  13. Garfield, J. B. and Ben-Zvi, D. (2008) Developing students' statistical reasoning: connecting research and teaching practice. Dordrecht: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-1- 4020-8383-9.
  14. Green, A. and Mitchell, C. (2009) 'E-assessment: opportunities and challenges for the sports marketing and educator', in Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference of Teaching and Learning (ICTL 2009). Kuching, pp. 1-9.
  15. Guo, R., Palmer-Brown, D., Lee, S. W. and Cai, F. F. (2014) 'Intelligent diagnostic feedback for online multiple-choice questions', Artificial Intelligence Review, 42(3), pp. 369-383. doi: 10.1007/s10462-013- 9419-6.
  16. Haladyna, T. M. (2004) Developing and validating multiple-choice test items - third edition. 3rd edn. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. doi: 10.1177/0146621605280143.
  17. Haladyna, T. M., Downing, S. M. and Rodriguez, M. C. (2002) 'A review of multiple-choice item-writing guidelines for classroom assessment', Applied Measurement in Education, 15(3), pp. 309-333. doi: 10.1207/S15324818AME1503_5.
  18. Heron, G. and Lerpiniere, J. (2013) 'Re-engineering the multiple choice question exam for social work', European Journal of Social Work, 16(4), pp. 521-535. doi: 10.1080/13691457.2012.691873.
  19. Holmes, N. (2015) 'Student perceptions of their learning engagement in response to the use of a continuous eassement in a undergratuate module', Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 40(1), pp. 1-14. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2014.881978.
  20. Jacob, S. M., Issac, B. and Sebastian, Y. (2006) 'Impact on student learning from traditional continuous assessment and an e-assessment proposal', in Proceedings of the PACIS 2006 - The 10th Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems. Kuala Lumpur, pp. 1482-1496.
  21. Jarvis, P., Holford, J. and Griffin, C. (2003) Theory & practice of learning - 2nd edition. 2nd edn. New York: Routledge Falmer.
  22. JISC (2007) Effective practice with e-assessment: an overview of technologies, policies and practice in further and higher education, Joint Information Systems Committe. Available at: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/ documents/ themes/ elearning/ effpraceassess. pdf (Accessed: 15 September 2014).
  23. Jordan, S. (2013) 'E-assessment: past, present and future', New Directions, 9(1), pp. 87-106.
  24. Lee, H.-S., Liu, L. and Linn, M. C. (2011) 'Validating measurement of knowledge integration in science using multiple-choice and explanation items', Applied Measurement in Education, 24(2), pp. 115-136. doi: 10.1080/08957347.2011.554604.
  25. Liu, O. L., Lee, H.-S. and Linn, M. C. (2011) 'An investigation of explanation multiple-choice items in science assessment', Educational Assessment, 16(3), pp. 164-184. doi: 10.1080/10627197.2011.611702.
  26. McAlpine, M. (2002) Design requirements of a databank. Leicestershire: The CAA Centre TLTP Project.
  27. Nicol, D. (2007) 'E-assessment by design: using multiplechoice tests to good effect', Journal of Further and Higher Education, 31(1), pp. 53-64. doi: 10.1080/03098770601167922.
  28. Redecker, C. (2013) The use of ICT for the assessment of key competences. Luxembourg: European Union. doi: 10.2791/87007.
  29. Redecker, C. and Johannessen, Ø. (2013) 'Changing assessment - towards a new assessment paradigm using ICT', European Journal of Education, 48(1), pp. 79-96. doi: 10.1111/ejed.12018.
  30. Rod, J. K., Eiksund, S. and Fjaer, O. (2010) 'Assessment based on exercise work and multiple-choice tests', Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 34(1), pp. 141-153. doi: 10.1080/03098260903062039.
  31. Scouller, K. (1998) 'The influence of assessment method on students' learning approaches: multiple choice question examinations versus assignment essay', Higher Education, 35(4), pp. 453-472. doi: 10.1023/A:1003196224280.
  32. Smith, G., Wood, L., Coupland, M., Stephenson, B., Crawford, K. and Ball, G. (1996) 'Constructing mathematical examinations to access a range of knowledge and skills', International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 27(1), pp. 65-77. doi: 10.1080/0020739960270109.
  33. Stödberg, U. (2012) 'A research review of e-assessment', Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(5), pp. 591-604. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2011.557496.
  34. Wild, C., Triggs, C. and Pfannkuch, M. (1997) 'Assessment on a budget: using traditional methods imaginatively', in Gal, I. and Garfield, J. B. (eds) The assessment challenge in statistics education. Amsterdam: IOS Press, pp. 205-220.
  35. Yorke, M. (2001) Assessment series n.o 1 - assessment: a guide for senior managers. York: Learning and Teaching Support Network (LTNS).
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Manuel Azevedo J., Patrícia Oliveira E. and Damas Beites P. (2017). How Do Mathematics Teachers in Higher Education Look at E-assessment with Multiple-Choice Questions . In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computer Supported Education - Volume 2: CSEDU, ISBN 978-989-758-240-0, pages 137-145. DOI: 10.5220/0006324801370145


in Bibtex Style

@conference{csedu17,
author={Jose Manuel Azevedo and Ema Patrícia Oliveira and Patrícia Damas Beites},
title={How Do Mathematics Teachers in Higher Education Look at E-assessment with Multiple-Choice Questions},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computer Supported Education - Volume 2: CSEDU,},
year={2017},
pages={137-145},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0006324801370145},
isbn={978-989-758-240-0},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computer Supported Education - Volume 2: CSEDU,
TI - How Do Mathematics Teachers in Higher Education Look at E-assessment with Multiple-Choice Questions
SN - 978-989-758-240-0
AU - Manuel Azevedo J.
AU - Patrícia Oliveira E.
AU - Damas Beites P.
PY - 2017
SP - 137
EP - 145
DO - 10.5220/0006324801370145