Student characteristics and effort during test-taking

IF 4.7 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Learning and Instruction Pub Date : 2024-06-07 DOI:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.101924
Lex Borghans , Ron Diris , Mariana Tavares
{"title":"Student characteristics and effort during test-taking","authors":"Lex Borghans ,&nbsp;Ron Diris ,&nbsp;Mariana Tavares","doi":"10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.101924","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Achievement tests are designed as measurement tools for student knowledge and learning, but also reflect student effort during the test. Understanding better what determines differences in (different dimensions of) effort can help in understanding what measured achievement differences reflect.</p></div><div><h3>Aim</h3><p>We analyze how test-taking effort relates to students’ demographic characteristics, past attainment and personality traits.</p></div><div><h3>Data</h3><p>13,791 9th grade students in the Netherlands, administered in 2012, 2014 and 2016, answering a total of 449,956 observations.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We distinguish between two measures of effort: solution behavior and response time given solution behavior. We estimate multi-level cross-classified models that include individual and test characteristics as predictors. We further include interaction terms between question position and individual characteristics, to identify how effort decline across the test differs by student type.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Girls, high achievers, more agreeable, more conscientious and less extravert students exert more effort. Differences by past achievement are especially large and further increase along the test, while differences in other characteristics tend to be more stable. Effort differences by socioeconomic status are relatively small.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Systematic differences between different types of students can partly reflect differences in test effort across these groups. Thus, test effort should be considered when analyzing achievement gaps and differences across learning outcomes. Tests with different test lengths imply different measures of educational inequality through differential effort declines.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48357,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Instruction","volume":"93 ","pages":"Article 101924"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning and Instruction","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959475224000513","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Achievement tests are designed as measurement tools for student knowledge and learning, but also reflect student effort during the test. Understanding better what determines differences in (different dimensions of) effort can help in understanding what measured achievement differences reflect.

Aim

We analyze how test-taking effort relates to students’ demographic characteristics, past attainment and personality traits.

Data

13,791 9th grade students in the Netherlands, administered in 2012, 2014 and 2016, answering a total of 449,956 observations.

Methods

We distinguish between two measures of effort: solution behavior and response time given solution behavior. We estimate multi-level cross-classified models that include individual and test characteristics as predictors. We further include interaction terms between question position and individual characteristics, to identify how effort decline across the test differs by student type.

Results

Girls, high achievers, more agreeable, more conscientious and less extravert students exert more effort. Differences by past achievement are especially large and further increase along the test, while differences in other characteristics tend to be more stable. Effort differences by socioeconomic status are relatively small.

Conclusions

Systematic differences between different types of students can partly reflect differences in test effort across these groups. Thus, test effort should be considered when analyzing achievement gaps and differences across learning outcomes. Tests with different test lengths imply different measures of educational inequality through differential effort declines.

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
学生特点与考试过程中的努力
背景成绩测验是作为测量学生知识和学习情况的工具而设计的,但也反映了学生在测验中的努力程度。我们分析了考试努力程度与学生的人口统计学特征、过往成就和个性特征之间的关系。数据来自荷兰的 13,791 名九年级学生,他们分别在 2012 年、2014 年和 2016 年参加了考试,共回答了 449,956 个问题。我们估计了多层次交叉分类模型,其中包括作为预测因素的个人特征和测试特征。我们还进一步加入了问题位置和个人特征之间的交互项,以确定不同类型的学生在整个测试中的努力下降情况有何不同。过去成绩的差异特别大,并在测试过程中进一步扩大,而其他特征的差异则趋于稳定。结论不同类型学生之间的系统性差异可以部分反映出这些群体在考试努力程度上的差异。因此,在分析成绩差距和不同学习成果之间的差异时,应考虑考试努力程度。考试时间长短不同的考试通过不同的努力程度下降意味着教育不平等的程度不同。
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
11.30
自引率
4.80%
发文量
109
期刊介绍: As an international, multi-disciplinary, peer-refereed journal, Learning and Instruction provides a platform for the publication of the most advanced scientific research in the areas of learning, development, instruction and teaching. The journal welcomes original empirical investigations. The papers may represent a variety of theoretical perspectives and different methodological approaches. They may refer to any age level, from infants to adults and to a diversity of learning and instructional settings, from laboratory experiments to field studies. The major criteria in the review and the selection process concern the significance of the contribution to the area of learning and instruction, and the rigor of the study.
期刊最新文献
Competitive and non-competitive school climate and students’ well-being Comparison effects on self- and external ratings: Testing the generalizability of the 2I/E model to parents and teachers of academic track school students Testing the CONIC model: The interplay of conscientiousness and interest in predicting academic effort Metacognitive scaffolding for digital reading and mind-wandering in adults with and without ADHD Retrieval supports word learning in children with Down syndrome
×
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