A multiple mediation model of thinking style, student assessors’ online assessment performance, and critical thinking in online assessment environment

IF 4.8 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Education and Information Technologies Pub Date : 2024-09-13 DOI:10.1007/s10639-024-13044-9
Chi-Cheng Chang, Kuang-Hsiung Huang
{"title":"A multiple mediation model of thinking style, student assessors’ online assessment performance, and critical thinking in online assessment environment","authors":"Chi-Cheng Chang, Kuang-Hsiung Huang","doi":"10.1007/s10639-024-13044-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study adopted a framework based on social cognitive theory to explore the influence of thinking styles on critical thinking and multiple mediation effects of student assessors’ assessment performance (scoring and review comments) between them. Samples were 97 graduate students enrolled in the “Seminar” course at a university. Students used an online assessment system and the evaluation form to conduct peer assessments for peers’ reports. Findings revealed: (1) thinking styles primarily had an indirect effect on critical thinking solely through comment performance (complete mediation effect), and it indirectly influenced critical thinking serially through scoring performance and comment performance (completely serial mediation effect), but it cannot solely influence critical thinking through scoring performance. (2) thinking styles directly influenced both scoring and comment performance, and also indirectly affected comment performance through scoring performance (partial mediation effect). (3) scoring performance indirectly influenced critical thinking through comment performance (complete mediation effect), while comment performance directly influenced critical thinking. (4) scoring performance directly influenced comment performance. The main contribution of this study lies in proposing and validating a multiple mediation model of “Thinking Style-Online Assessment Performance-Critical Thinking”, indicating that student assessors’ online assessment performance (scoring and comment performance) has multiple mediation effects between thinking styles and critical thinking. This result holds significant academic and practical implications.</p>","PeriodicalId":51494,"journal":{"name":"Education and Information Technologies","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Education and Information Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13044-9","RegionNum":2,"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

This study adopted a framework based on social cognitive theory to explore the influence of thinking styles on critical thinking and multiple mediation effects of student assessors’ assessment performance (scoring and review comments) between them. Samples were 97 graduate students enrolled in the “Seminar” course at a university. Students used an online assessment system and the evaluation form to conduct peer assessments for peers’ reports. Findings revealed: (1) thinking styles primarily had an indirect effect on critical thinking solely through comment performance (complete mediation effect), and it indirectly influenced critical thinking serially through scoring performance and comment performance (completely serial mediation effect), but it cannot solely influence critical thinking through scoring performance. (2) thinking styles directly influenced both scoring and comment performance, and also indirectly affected comment performance through scoring performance (partial mediation effect). (3) scoring performance indirectly influenced critical thinking through comment performance (complete mediation effect), while comment performance directly influenced critical thinking. (4) scoring performance directly influenced comment performance. The main contribution of this study lies in proposing and validating a multiple mediation model of “Thinking Style-Online Assessment Performance-Critical Thinking”, indicating that student assessors’ online assessment performance (scoring and comment performance) has multiple mediation effects between thinking styles and critical thinking. This result holds significant academic and practical implications.

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
在线测评环境中思维风格、学生测评员在线测评表现和批判性思维的多重中介模型
本研究采用基于社会认知理论的框架,探讨了思维风格对批判性思维的影响,以及学生评估者的评估表现(打分和审查意见)在两者之间的多重中介效应。样本为某大学 "研讨会 "课程的 97 名研究生。学生使用在线评估系统和评估表对同学的报告进行互评。研究结果表明:(1) 思维风格主要通过评语表现对批判性思维产生间接影响(完全中介效应),并通过打分表现和评语表现对批判性思维产生序列间接影响(完全序列中介效应),但不能通过打分表现对批判性思维产生单独影响。(2) 思维方式直接影响评分和评语成绩,也通过评分成绩间接影响评语成绩(部分中介效应)。(3) 评分成绩通过评语成绩间接影响批判性思维(完全中介效应),而评语成绩直接影响批判性思维。(4) 评分成绩直接影响评语成绩。本研究的主要贡献在于提出并验证了 "思维风格-在线测评表现-批判性思维 "的多重中介模型,表明学生测评者的在线测评表现(打分和评语表现)在思维风格和批判性思维之间具有多重中介效应。这一结果具有重要的学术和实践意义。
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
Education and Information Technologies
Education and Information Technologies EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
12.70%
发文量
610
期刊介绍: The Journal of Education and Information Technologies (EAIT) is a platform for the range of debates and issues in the field of Computing Education as well as the many uses of information and communication technology (ICT) across many educational subjects and sectors. It probes the use of computing to improve education and learning in a variety of settings, platforms and environments. The journal aims to provide perspectives at all levels, from the micro level of specific pedagogical approaches in Computing Education and applications or instances of use in classrooms, to macro concerns of national policies and major projects; from pre-school classes to adults in tertiary institutions; from teachers and administrators to researchers and designers; from institutions to online and lifelong learning. The journal is embedded in the research and practice of professionals within the contemporary global context and its breadth and scope encourage debate on fundamental issues at all levels and from different research paradigms and learning theories. The journal does not proselytize on behalf of the technologies (whether they be mobile, desktop, interactive, virtual, games-based or learning management systems) but rather provokes debate on all the complex relationships within and between computing and education, whether they are in informal or formal settings. It probes state of the art technologies in Computing Education and it also considers the design and evaluation of digital educational artefacts.  The journal aims to maintain and expand its international standing by careful selection on merit of the papers submitted, thus providing a credible ongoing forum for debate and scholarly discourse. Special Issues are occasionally published to cover particular issues in depth. EAIT invites readers to submit papers that draw inferences, probe theory and create new knowledge that informs practice, policy and scholarship. Readers are also invited to comment and reflect upon the argument and opinions published. EAIT is the official journal of the Technical Committee on Education of the International Federation for Information Processing (IFIP) in partnership with UNESCO.
期刊最新文献
Development of a virtual reality creative enhancement system utilizing haptic vibration feedback via electroencephalography Is ChatGPT like a nine-year-old child in theory of mind? Evidence from Chinese writing Analysing factors influencing undergraduates’ adoption of intelligent physical education systems using an expanded TAM The importance of aligning instructor age with learning content in designing instructional videos for older adults Evaluating classroom response systems in engineering education: Which metrics better reflect student performance?
×
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