Differential Effects of Additional Formative Assessments on Student Learning Behaviors and Outcomes

Q3 Social Sciences Studia Paedagogica Pub Date : 2024-04-02 DOI:10.5817/sp2023-3-1
Natalie Borter
{"title":"Differential Effects of Additional Formative Assessments on Student Learning Behaviors and Outcomes","authors":"Natalie Borter","doi":"10.5817/sp2023-3-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is well-established that formative assessments with accompanying feedback can enhance learning. However, the degree to which additional formative assessments on the same material further improve learning outcomes remains an open research question. Moreover, it is unclear whether providing additional formative assessments impacts self-regulated learning behavior, and if the benefits of such assessments depend on students' self-regulated learning behavior. The current study, conducted in a real-world blended learning setting and using a Learning Analytics approach, compares 154 students who completed additional formative assessments with 154 students who did not. The results indicate that the additional formative assessments led to an improvement in learning outcomes, but also had both positive and negative effects on students' self-regulated learning behavior. Students who completed additional formative assessments performed better on the assessments but reported lower levels of subjective comprehension and devoted more time to completing exercises. Simultaneously, they devoted less effort to additional learning activities (additional investment), such as class preparation and post-processing. Furthermore, the impact of additional formative assessments on learning success depended on students' self-regulated learning behavior. It was primarily the students who invested above-average time during formative assessments (time investment) who benefited from the additional exercises. Cluster analysis revealed that high-effort students (those with above-average time investment and above-average additional investment) gained the most from the extra exercises. In contrast, low-effort students and those who achieved high performance with relatively low effort (efficient students) did not benefit from additional formative assessments. In conclusion, providing students with additional formative assessments can enhance learning, but it should be done with caution as it can alter self-regulated learning behavior in both positive and negative ways, and not all students may benefit from it equally.","PeriodicalId":37607,"journal":{"name":"Studia Paedagogica","volume":"254 22","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studia Paedagogica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5817/sp2023-3-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

It is well-established that formative assessments with accompanying feedback can enhance learning. However, the degree to which additional formative assessments on the same material further improve learning outcomes remains an open research question. Moreover, it is unclear whether providing additional formative assessments impacts self-regulated learning behavior, and if the benefits of such assessments depend on students' self-regulated learning behavior. The current study, conducted in a real-world blended learning setting and using a Learning Analytics approach, compares 154 students who completed additional formative assessments with 154 students who did not. The results indicate that the additional formative assessments led to an improvement in learning outcomes, but also had both positive and negative effects on students' self-regulated learning behavior. Students who completed additional formative assessments performed better on the assessments but reported lower levels of subjective comprehension and devoted more time to completing exercises. Simultaneously, they devoted less effort to additional learning activities (additional investment), such as class preparation and post-processing. Furthermore, the impact of additional formative assessments on learning success depended on students' self-regulated learning behavior. It was primarily the students who invested above-average time during formative assessments (time investment) who benefited from the additional exercises. Cluster analysis revealed that high-effort students (those with above-average time investment and above-average additional investment) gained the most from the extra exercises. In contrast, low-effort students and those who achieved high performance with relatively low effort (efficient students) did not benefit from additional formative assessments. In conclusion, providing students with additional formative assessments can enhance learning, but it should be done with caution as it can alter self-regulated learning behavior in both positive and negative ways, and not all students may benefit from it equally.
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
附加形成性评估对学生学习行为和结果的不同影响
形成性评估和相应的反馈可以促进学习,这一点已经得到公认。然而,对同一材料进行额外的形成性评价能在多大程度上进一步提高学习效果,这仍然是一个有待研究的问题。此外,提供额外的形成性评价是否会影响自我调节的学习行为,以及这种评价的益处是否取决于学生的自我调节学习行为,这些问题都还不清楚。本研究在真实世界的混合学习环境中进行,采用学习分析方法,对完成额外形成性评估的 154 名学生和未完成额外形成性评估的 154 名学生进行了比较。结果表明,额外的形成性评估提高了学习成绩,但也对学生的自我调节学习行为产生了积极和消极的影响。完成额外形成性评估的学生在评估中表现较好,但报告的主观理解水平较低,完成练习花费的时间较多。同时,他们在课前准备和课后处理等额外学习活动(额外投资)上投入的精力较少。此外,附加形成性评价对学习成功的影响取决于学生的自我调节学习行为。在形成性评价中投入时间超过平均水平(时间投入)的学生主要从附加练习中受益。聚类分析显示,高努力学生(时间投入高于平均水平且额外投入高于平均水平的学生)从额外练习中获益最多。相反,努力程度低的学生和努力程度相对较低但成绩优秀的学生(高效学生)没有从额外的形成性评价中获益。总之,为学生提供额外的形成性评价可以提高学习效果,但应谨慎从事,因为它可能以积极和消极两种方式改变自我调节的学习行为,而且并非所有学生都能从中获益。
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
Studia Paedagogica
Studia Paedagogica Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Studia Paedagogica publishes original papers on education, upbringing and learning from all spheres of social life. The papers are theoretical, but mainly empirical as the journal publishes research undertaken in the Czech Republic and abroad. The journal publishes only original research papers and is open to both experienced and early researchers. Early researchers can publish their papers in the section Emerging Researchers of the journal and are offered intensive editorial support. The journal is interdisciplinary - it covers current topics in educational research while at the same time providing scope for studies grounded in other social sciences. The journal publishes four issues per year, two issues are dedicated to general interest articles and are in Czech, two issues are on a single topic and are in English. Studia Paedagogica is a peer reviewed journal published by the Masaryk University. The executive editors are members of the staff of the Department of Educational Sciences and the editorial board comprises of international experts. The name of the journal is derived from the name of its predecessor, Studia minora facultatis philosophicae universitatis brunensis (Sborník prací filozofické fakulty brněnské univerzity), which was issued from 1996 to 2008. However, the tradition of the journal dates much further back as the pedagogical-psychological series of the journal was published even between 1966 to 1995.
期刊最新文献
Vocabulary Learning Strategies, Self-Regulated Learning, and Learners' Outcomes in primary School Pair Work Differential Effects of Additional Formative Assessments on Student Learning Behaviors and Outcomes Decoding Student Success in Higher Education: A Comparative Study on Learning Strategies of Undergraduate and Graduate Students "I Should, but I Don't Feel Like It": Overcoming Obstacles in Upper Secondary Students' Self-regulation Using Learning Analytics A Scoping Review of Webcam Eye Tracking in Learning and Education
×
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