在交替评估中为学生提供复习机会的效果

IF 2.1 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Educational Assessment Pub Date : 2022-10-25 DOI:10.1080/10627197.2022.2138322
O. Bulut, H. Bulut, D. Cormier, Munevver Ilgun Dibek, Merve Sahin Kursad
{"title":"在交替评估中为学生提供复习机会的效果","authors":"O. Bulut, H. Bulut, D. Cormier, Munevver Ilgun Dibek, Merve Sahin Kursad","doi":"10.1080/10627197.2022.2138322","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Some statewide testing programs allow students to receive corrective feedback and revise their answers during testing. Despite its pedagogical benefits, the effects of providing revision opportunities remain unknown in the context of alternate assessments. Therefore, this study examined student data from a large-scale alternate assessment that allows students to make multiple attempts until they find the correct answer to multiple-choice items. The students receive partial credit based on the number of attempts being made. The effects of the multiple-attempt approach on both test characteristics and student performance were investigated. The results indicated that, despite making most items on the assessment relatively easier, the availability of partial credit improved the strength of the items in distinguishing low-achieving and high-achieving students while maintaining high internal consistency among the test items. Although the students were able to increase their scores due to the inclusion of partial credit based on the number of attempts, the relative positions of the students remained nearly the same.","PeriodicalId":46209,"journal":{"name":"Educational Assessment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Effects of Providing Students with Revision Opportunities in Alternate Assessments\",\"authors\":\"O. Bulut, H. Bulut, D. Cormier, Munevver Ilgun Dibek, Merve Sahin Kursad\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10627197.2022.2138322\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Some statewide testing programs allow students to receive corrective feedback and revise their answers during testing. Despite its pedagogical benefits, the effects of providing revision opportunities remain unknown in the context of alternate assessments. Therefore, this study examined student data from a large-scale alternate assessment that allows students to make multiple attempts until they find the correct answer to multiple-choice items. The students receive partial credit based on the number of attempts being made. The effects of the multiple-attempt approach on both test characteristics and student performance were investigated. The results indicated that, despite making most items on the assessment relatively easier, the availability of partial credit improved the strength of the items in distinguishing low-achieving and high-achieving students while maintaining high internal consistency among the test items. Although the students were able to increase their scores due to the inclusion of partial credit based on the number of attempts, the relative positions of the students remained nearly the same.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46209,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Assessment\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2022.2138322\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2022.2138322","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

一些全州范围的测试项目允许学生在测试期间收到纠正反馈并修改他们的答案。尽管它在教学上有好处,但在替代评估的背景下,提供复习机会的影响仍然未知。因此,这项研究从一个大规模的交替评估中检查了学生的数据,该评估允许学生多次尝试,直到他们找到多项选择题的正确答案。学生可以根据尝试次数获得部分学分。研究了多次尝试法对考试特点和学生成绩的影响。结果表明,尽管使大多数评估项目相对容易,但部分学分的可用性提高了项目区分低分和优分学生的强度,同时保持了测试项目之间的高度内部一致性。虽然学生们能够提高他们的分数,因为在尝试次数的基础上加入了部分学分,但学生们的相对位置几乎保持不变。
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
The Effects of Providing Students with Revision Opportunities in Alternate Assessments
ABSTRACT Some statewide testing programs allow students to receive corrective feedback and revise their answers during testing. Despite its pedagogical benefits, the effects of providing revision opportunities remain unknown in the context of alternate assessments. Therefore, this study examined student data from a large-scale alternate assessment that allows students to make multiple attempts until they find the correct answer to multiple-choice items. The students receive partial credit based on the number of attempts being made. The effects of the multiple-attempt approach on both test characteristics and student performance were investigated. The results indicated that, despite making most items on the assessment relatively easier, the availability of partial credit improved the strength of the items in distinguishing low-achieving and high-achieving students while maintaining high internal consistency among the test items. Although the students were able to increase their scores due to the inclusion of partial credit based on the number of attempts, the relative positions of the students remained nearly the same.
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
Educational Assessment
Educational Assessment EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: Educational Assessment publishes original research and scholarship on the assessment of individuals, groups, and programs in educational settings. It includes theory, methodological approaches and empirical research in the appraisal of the learning and achievement of students and teachers, young children and adults, and novices and experts. The journal reports on current large-scale testing practices, discusses alternative approaches, presents scholarship on classroom assessment practices and includes assessment topics debated at the national level. It welcomes both conceptual and empirical pieces and encourages articles that provide a strong bridge between theory and/or empirical research and the implications for educational policy and/or practice.
期刊最新文献
Dialect and Mathematics Performance in African American Children Who Use AAE: Insights from Explanatory IRT and Error Analysis An Analysis of DIF and Sources of DIF in Achievement Motivation Items Using Anchoring Vignettes Resolving and Re-Scoring Constructed Response Items in Mixed-Format Assessments: An Exploration of Three Approaches Extending Principles of Evidence-Centered Design for Diverse Populations: K–12 English Learners with the Most Significant Cognitive Disabilities Reading Comprehension Tests: Students’ Question Reading and Responding Behavior
×
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