Investigating the impacts of differentiated stimulus materials in a learning by evaluating activity

IF 2 3区 工程技术 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH International Journal of Technology and Design Education Pub Date : 2024-01-05 DOI:10.1007/s10798-023-09871-5
Scott Bartholomew, Jessica Yauney, Nathan Mentzer, Scott Thorne
{"title":"Investigating the impacts of differentiated stimulus materials in a learning by evaluating activity","authors":"Scott Bartholomew, Jessica Yauney, Nathan Mentzer, Scott Thorne","doi":"10.1007/s10798-023-09871-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Classroom research has demonstrated the capacity for significantly influencing student learning by engaging students in evaluation of previously submitted work as an intentional priming exercise for learning; we call this experience <i>Learning by Evaluating </i>(LbE). Expanding on current LbE research, we set forth to investigate the impact on student learning by intentionally differing the quality of examples evaluated by the students using adaptive comparative judgement. In this research, university design students (N = 468 students) were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups; while each group evaluated previously collected student work as an LbE priming activity, the work evaluated by each group differed in quality. Using a three-group experimental design, one group of students only evaluated high quality examples, the second only evaluated low quality examples, and the third group of students evaluated a set of mixed-quality examples of the assignment they were about to work on. Following these LbE priming evaluations, students completed the assigned work and then their projects were evaluated to determine if there was a difference between student performance by treatment condition. Additional qualitative analysis was completed on student LbE rationales to explore similarities and differences in student cognitive judgments based on intervention grouping. No significant difference was found between the groups in terms of achievement, but several differences in group judgement approach were identified and future areas needing investigation were highlighted.</p>","PeriodicalId":50286,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Technology and Design Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Technology and Design Education","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-023-09871-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Classroom research has demonstrated the capacity for significantly influencing student learning by engaging students in evaluation of previously submitted work as an intentional priming exercise for learning; we call this experience Learning by Evaluating (LbE). Expanding on current LbE research, we set forth to investigate the impact on student learning by intentionally differing the quality of examples evaluated by the students using adaptive comparative judgement. In this research, university design students (N = 468 students) were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups; while each group evaluated previously collected student work as an LbE priming activity, the work evaluated by each group differed in quality. Using a three-group experimental design, one group of students only evaluated high quality examples, the second only evaluated low quality examples, and the third group of students evaluated a set of mixed-quality examples of the assignment they were about to work on. Following these LbE priming evaluations, students completed the assigned work and then their projects were evaluated to determine if there was a difference between student performance by treatment condition. Additional qualitative analysis was completed on student LbE rationales to explore similarities and differences in student cognitive judgments based on intervention grouping. No significant difference was found between the groups in terms of achievement, but several differences in group judgement approach were identified and future areas needing investigation were highlighted.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在评价学习活动中调查差异化刺激材料的影响
课堂研究表明,让学生参与对以前提交的作业的评价,作为一种有意的学习引导练习,能够显著影响学生的学习;我们将这种体验称为 "评价学习"(LbE)。在当前 LbE 研究的基础上,我们开始研究通过使用适应性比较判断有意识地改变学生所评价范例的质量对学生学习的影响。在这项研究中,大学设计专业的学生(468 名学生)被随机分配到三个处理组中的一个;虽然每个组都对之前收集的学生作品进行了评估,作为 LbE 的引子活动,但每个组评估的作品在质量上都有所不同。采用三组实验设计,一组学生只评价高质量的范例,第二组学生只评价低质量的范例,第三组学生则评价他们即将完成的作业的混合质量范例。在这些 LbE 引导评估之后,学生们完成了指定的作业,然后对他们的项目进行评估,以确定不同处理条件下的学生成绩是否存在差异。我们还对学生的 LbE 理由进行了额外的定性分析,以探究基于干预分组的学生认知判断的异同。在成绩方面,各组之间没有发现明显的差异,但在小组判断方法上发现了一些差异,并强调了未来需要研究的领域。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
19.00%
发文量
61
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Technology and Design Education seeks to encourage research and scholarly writing about any aspect of technology and design education. Critical, review, and comparative studies are particularly prominent, as are contributions which draw upon other literatures, such as those derived from historical, philosophical, sociological or psychological studies of technology or design, in order to address issues of concern to technology and design education. One of the most significant developments of recent years has been the emergence of technology and design education as an integral part of general education in many parts of the world. Its distinctive curriculum features are technological literacy and capability and it highlights the importance of `knowledge in action'', of `doing'' as well as `understanding''.
期刊最新文献
Adapting engineering design thinking for sustainability The mediating role of creative problem solving between design thinking and self-efficacy in STEM teaching for STEM teacher candidates Technology-enhanced learning practices in studio pedagogy: A scoping review Cultivating ethics sensitivity in design: Impact of integrating ethics within K-12 digital design education Research on K-12 maker education in the early 2020s – a systematic literature review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1