选择重考可减少焦虑,但可能加剧不同社会身份学生之间的分数差距。

IF 4.6 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Cbe-Life Sciences Education Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.1187/cbe.21-11-0320
K Supriya, Christofer Bang, Jessica Ebie, Christopher Pagliarulo, Derek Tucker, Kaela Villegas, Christian Wright, Sara Brownell
{"title":"选择重考可减少焦虑,但可能加剧不同社会身份学生之间的分数差距。","authors":"K Supriya, Christofer Bang, Jessica Ebie, Christopher Pagliarulo, Derek Tucker, Kaela Villegas, Christian Wright, Sara Brownell","doi":"10.1187/cbe.21-11-0320","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Use of high-stakes exams in a course has been associated with gender, racial, and socioeconomic inequities. We investigated whether offering students the opportunity to retake an exam makes high-stakes exams more equitable. Following the control value theory of achievement emotions, we hypothesized that exam retakes would increase students' perceived control over their performance and decrease the value of a single exam attempt, thereby maximizing exam performance. We collected data on exam scores and experiences with retakes from three large introductory biology courses and assessed the effect of optional exam retakes on gender, racial/ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities in exam scores. We found that Black/African American students and those who worked more than 20 h a week were less likely to retake exams. While exam retakes significantly improved student scores, they slightly increased racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in scores partly because of these differences in participation rates. Most students reported that retake opportunities reduced their anxiety on the initial exam attempt. Together our results suggest that optional exam retakes could be a useful tool to improve student performance and reduce anxiety associated with high-stakes exams. However, barriers to participation must be examined and reduced for retakes to reduce disparities in scores.</p>","PeriodicalId":56321,"journal":{"name":"Cbe-Life Sciences Education","volume":"23 3","pages":"ar30"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11440740/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Optional Exam Retakes Reduce Anxiety but may Exacerbate Score Disparities Between Students with Different Social Identities.\",\"authors\":\"K Supriya, Christofer Bang, Jessica Ebie, Christopher Pagliarulo, Derek Tucker, Kaela Villegas, Christian Wright, Sara Brownell\",\"doi\":\"10.1187/cbe.21-11-0320\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Use of high-stakes exams in a course has been associated with gender, racial, and socioeconomic inequities. We investigated whether offering students the opportunity to retake an exam makes high-stakes exams more equitable. Following the control value theory of achievement emotions, we hypothesized that exam retakes would increase students' perceived control over their performance and decrease the value of a single exam attempt, thereby maximizing exam performance. We collected data on exam scores and experiences with retakes from three large introductory biology courses and assessed the effect of optional exam retakes on gender, racial/ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities in exam scores. We found that Black/African American students and those who worked more than 20 h a week were less likely to retake exams. While exam retakes significantly improved student scores, they slightly increased racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in scores partly because of these differences in participation rates. Most students reported that retake opportunities reduced their anxiety on the initial exam attempt. Together our results suggest that optional exam retakes could be a useful tool to improve student performance and reduce anxiety associated with high-stakes exams. However, barriers to participation must be examined and reduced for retakes to reduce disparities in scores.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56321,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cbe-Life Sciences Education\",\"volume\":\"23 3\",\"pages\":\"ar30\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11440740/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cbe-Life Sciences Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.21-11-0320\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cbe-Life Sciences Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.21-11-0320","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

课程中使用高风险考试与性别、种族和社会经济不平等有关。我们研究了为学生提供重考机会是否会使高风险考试更加公平。根据成就情绪的控制价值理论,我们假设重考会增强学生对自己成绩的控制感,降低单次考试的价值,从而最大限度地提高考试成绩。我们从三门大型生物入门课程中收集了有关考试成绩和重考经历的数据,并评估了可选重考对考试成绩中性别、种族/民族和社会经济差异的影响。我们发现,黑人/非裔美国学生以及每周工作 20 小时以上的学生重考的可能性较低。虽然重考大大提高了学生的分数,但部分由于参与率的差异,重考略微增加了种族/民族和社会经济方面的分数差距。大多数学生表示,重考机会减轻了他们对初次考试的焦虑。总之,我们的研究结果表明,选择性重考可以成为提高学生成绩和减少与高考相关的焦虑的有效工具。然而,必须检查并减少重考的参与障碍,以减少分数差距。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Optional Exam Retakes Reduce Anxiety but may Exacerbate Score Disparities Between Students with Different Social Identities.

Use of high-stakes exams in a course has been associated with gender, racial, and socioeconomic inequities. We investigated whether offering students the opportunity to retake an exam makes high-stakes exams more equitable. Following the control value theory of achievement emotions, we hypothesized that exam retakes would increase students' perceived control over their performance and decrease the value of a single exam attempt, thereby maximizing exam performance. We collected data on exam scores and experiences with retakes from three large introductory biology courses and assessed the effect of optional exam retakes on gender, racial/ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities in exam scores. We found that Black/African American students and those who worked more than 20 h a week were less likely to retake exams. While exam retakes significantly improved student scores, they slightly increased racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in scores partly because of these differences in participation rates. Most students reported that retake opportunities reduced their anxiety on the initial exam attempt. Together our results suggest that optional exam retakes could be a useful tool to improve student performance and reduce anxiety associated with high-stakes exams. However, barriers to participation must be examined and reduced for retakes to reduce disparities in scores.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cbe-Life Sciences Education
Cbe-Life Sciences Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
13.50%
发文量
100
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: CBE—Life Sciences Education (LSE), a free, online quarterly journal, is published by the American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB). The journal was launched in spring 2002 as Cell Biology Education—A Journal of Life Science Education. The ASCB changed the name of the journal in spring 2006 to better reflect the breadth of its readership and the scope of its submissions. LSE publishes peer-reviewed articles on life science education at the K–12, undergraduate, and graduate levels. The ASCB believes that learning in biology encompasses diverse fields, including math, chemistry, physics, engineering, computer science, and the interdisciplinary intersections of biology with these fields. Within biology, LSE focuses on how students are introduced to the study of life sciences, as well as approaches in cell biology, developmental biology, neuroscience, biochemistry, molecular biology, genetics, genomics, bioinformatics, and proteomics.
期刊最新文献
Disrupting the Master Narrative in Academic Biology as LGBTQ+ Ph.D. Students: Learning, Teaching, and Conducting Research. Examining How Student Identities Interact with an Immersive Field Ecology Course and its Implications for Graduate School Education. Factors Influencing the Use of Evidence-based Instructional Practices by Community College Biology Instructors. Bee The CURE: Increasing Student Science Self-Efficacy, Science Identity, and Predictors of Scientific Civic Engagement in a Community College CURE. Is Support in the Anxiety of the Beholder? How Anxiety Interacts with Perceptions of Instructor Support in Introductory Biology Classes.
×
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