A study of the effect of HyperCard and pen-paper performance assessment methods on expert-novice chemistry problem solving

Dumar, David D.; White, Arthur L.; Helgeson, Stanley L.

doi:10.1007/bf01575179

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the majority of studies of the use of ICT for assessment of creative and critical thinking, reviewed by Harlen & Deakin Crick (2003b), the assessment was intended to help development of understanding and skills as well as to assess attainment in understanding and skills. The effectiveness of computer programs for both these purposes was demonstrated by those studies where computer-based assessment was compared with assessment by paper and pencil (Jackson, 1989;Kumar et al, 1993). The mechanism for the formative impact was the feedback that students received from the program.…”

Section: Using Summative Assessment To Help Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teachers' summative practices and assessment for learning – tensions and synergies

Harlen

2005

The Curriculum Journal

299

165

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article concerns the use of assessment for learning (formative assessment) and assessment of learning (summative assessment), and how one can affect the other in either positive or negative ways. It makes a case for greater use of teachers' judgements in summative assessment, the reasons for this being found in the research that is reviewed in the first sections of the article. This research, concerning the impact of summative assessment, particularly high-stakes testing and examinations, on students' motivation for learning and on teachers and the curriculum, reveals some seriously detrimental effects. Suggestions for changes that would reduce the negative effects include making greater use of teachers' summative assessment. However, this raises other issues, about the reliability and validity of teachers' assessment. Research on ways of improving the dependability of teachers' summative assessment suggests actions that would equally support more effective use of assessment to help learning. The later sections of the article address the issues and opportunities relating to the possibility of assessment that serves both formative and summative purposes, with examples of what this means in practice, leading to the conclusion that the distinction between formative and summative purposes of assessment should be maintained, while assessment systems should be planned and implemented to enable evidence of students' ongoing learning to be used for both purposes.

show abstract

Section: Using Summative Assessment To Help Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teachers' summative practices and assessment for learning – tensions and synergies

Harlen

2005

The Curriculum Journal

299

165

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This interpretation is supported by previous studies involving the role of the graphing environment (Sinclair and de Freitas 2013), graphing experience (Roth and McGinn, 1997), work on other assessments showing such learning through intermediate constraint question formats (Meir et al, 2019) and in a constrained experimental design task (Meir, in preparation). While prior studies explicitly comparing science skill assessment by environment are rare, at least one prior study in a similar context also found that students performed better on digital assessment than on pen-and-paper, and similarly speculated that the constraints and affordances aided students in drawing on latent knowledge (Kumar et al, 1994).…”

Section: The Constraints and Affordances Of Digital Assessments May Amentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With notable exceptions (e.g., in biology Urban-Lurain et al, 2013;Beggrow et al, 2014;Weston et al, 2015;Vitale et al, 2015Vitale et al, , 2019Zhai et al, 2020), there are fewer examples of digital tools designed to automatically measure practices in complex, less well-defined problem spaces, in large part because of the difficulty in valid automatic scoring (e.g., Beggrow et al, 2014;Ha and Nehm, 2016). Furthermore, few studies compare assessment between pen and paper vs. digital formats, and those have differing conclusions about student performance across the two environments (e.g., Kumar et al, 1994;Aberg-Bengtsson, 2006;Guimaraes et al, 2018;Oqvist and Nouri, 2018). As development of digital assessment tools increases, the field would benefit from more research on how differences in paper versus digital environment interact with the way students demonstrate understanding through performance tasks.…”

Section: Revealing and Assessing Student Science Practice Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

Biology Undergraduate Students’ Graphing Practice in Digital Versus Pen and Paper Graphing Environments

Gardner

Suazo‐Flores²,

Maruca

et al. 2021

J Sci Educ Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Graphing is an important practice for scientists and in K-16 science curricula. Graphs can be constructed using an array of software packages as well as by hand, with pen-and-paper. However, we have an incomplete understanding of how students’ graphing practice vary by graphing environment; differences could affect how best to teach and assess graphing. Here we explore the role of two graphing environments in students’ graphing practice. We studied 43 undergraduate biology students’ graphing practice using either pen-and-paper (PP) (n = 21 students) or a digital graphing tool GraphSmarts (GS) (n = 22 students). Participants’ graphs and verbal justifications were analyzed to identify features such as the variables plotted, number of graphs created, raw data versus summarized data plotted, and graph types (e.g., scatter plot, line graph, or bar graph) as well as participants’ reasoning for their graphing choices. Several aspects of participant graphs were similar regardless of graphing environment, including plotting raw vs. summarized data, graph type, and overall graph quality, while GS participants were more likely to plot the most relevant variables. In GS, participants could easily make more graphs than in PP and this may have helped some participants show latent features of their graphing practice. Those students using PP tended to focus more on ease of constructing the graph than GS. This study illuminates how the different characteristics of the graphing environment have implications for instruction and interpretation of assessments of student graphing practices.

show abstract

“…Kumar, White, and Helgeson found that high school students who used a Hypercard-based chemistry test outperformed students using a pen-paper version of the same task [36]. The task consisted of balancing five chemical equations.…”

Section: Student Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hypermedia in Science and Mathematics: Applications in Teacher Education, Problem Solving and Student Testing

Kumar

Sherwood

1997

Journal of Educational Computing Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A review of selected hypermedia applications in teacher education, problem solving, and student testing is presented. In science teacher education, hypermedia provides opportunities for preservice teachers to gain an indepth view of classroom episodes, analyze models of instruction such as discovery learning, and contrast effective and ineffective instructional strategies. Reported outcomes include significant differences in student-centered instruction, mostly in favor of the video groups among student teachers, and in favor of the baseline groups among practicum students. Also, significant improvements were reported for student teachers over practicum students in most paired observation ratings. In mathematics problem solving, hypermedia provides an environment for anchoring instruction in video-based macrocontexts for students to gain control over the problem situation, and helps to improve student ability to solve complex problems. In student testing, the role of the hypermedia is only emerging. The hypermedia seems to provide a convenient tool for developing and administering science tests with outcomes such as increased achievement levels, correctness, number of attempts, and time-on-task. More research is needed before establishing hypermedia as a viable tool for testing in science.

show abstract

A study of the effect of HyperCard and pen-paper performance assessment methods on expert-novice chemistry problem solving

Cited by 8 publications

References 19 publications

Teachers' summative practices and assessment for learning – tensions and synergies

Teachers' summative practices and assessment for learning – tensions and synergies

Biology Undergraduate Students’ Graphing Practice in Digital Versus Pen and Paper Graphing Environments

Hypermedia in Science and Mathematics: Applications in Teacher Education, Problem Solving and Student Testing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About