On-line Assessment of Comprehension Processes

Martínez, Tomás Sola; Vidal‐Abarca, Eduardo; Gil, Laura; Gilabert, Ramiro

doi:10.1017/s1138741600001700

Cited by 21 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Very few studies have been performed to compare actual student performance with more traditional methods. Some studies suggest that computer-based examinations draw similar results to those provided by the paper-andpencil versions (Martínez et al, 2009). Other studies indicate that students often feel their performance is adversely affected by the computer environment and believe that their grades on such examinations are lower than they would be on the more familiar paper-and-pencil format (Dillon and Clyman, 1992;Lee and Weerakoon, 2001;Folk et al, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Anatomy practical examinations: How does student performance on computerized evaluation compare with the traditional format?

Inuwa

Taranikanti

Al-Rawahy

et al. 2011

Anatomical Sciences Ed

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Practical examinations in anatomy are usually conducted on specimens in the anatomy laboratory (referred to here as the "traditional" method). Recently, we have started to administer similar examinations online using the quiz facility in Moodle™. In this study, we compare student scores between two assessment environments viz. online and traditional environments. We hypothesized that regardless of the examination medium (traditional or online) overall student performance would not be significantly different. For the online medium, radiological images, prosected specimens, and short video clips demonstrating muscle action were first acquired from resources used for teaching during anatomy practical classes. These were optimized for online viewing and then uploaded onto Moodle learning management software. With regards to the traditional format, actual specimens were usually laid out in a circular stream. Identification tags were then attached to specific spots on the specimens and questions asked regarding those identified spots. A cohort of students taking practical examinations in six courses was studied. The courses were divided into three pairs with each pair credit-weight matched. Each pair consisted of a course where the practical examination was conducted online and the other in the traditional format. There was no significant difference in the mean scores within each course pair. In addition, a significant positive correlation between score in traditional and online formats was found. We conclude that mean grades in anatomy practical examination conducted either online or in the traditional format were comparable. These findings should reassure teachers intending to use either format for their practical examinations.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Anatomy practical examinations: How does student performance on computerized evaluation compare with the traditional format?

Inuwa

Taranikanti

Al-Rawahy

et al. 2011

Anatomical Sciences Ed

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These analyses showed which fragments of the text information should be considered relevant to answer each question. The relationship between each question and the relevant text information has been empirically validated using a large sample of students of similar age to the ones in the present study (Martínez et al, 2009). Text segments with question-relevant information could be located together or separated by other sentences.…”

Section: Test Of Reading Literacy For Secondary Educationmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…Each question had four answer choices, with only one correct response, so that correct responses received a score of 1 and incorrect responses a zero (maximum score: 20). The psychometric properties of the computer-based TCP revealed moderate indices of reliability (Cronbach's alpha = .72) and validity (Pearson correlation between total scores obtained on the computerized version of the TCP and scores on the comprehension subtest of PROLEC-SE = .64) (Martínez et al, 2009). According to the authors, these indices were slightly lower than the reliability (.79) and validity (.72) obtained for the paper-and-pencil TCP version due to the variance introduced by the "moving window" technique.…”

Section: Test Of Reading Literacy For Secondary Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Computer-based Elaborated Feedback Influence the Students’ Question-Answering Process?

Máñez

Vidal‐Abarca

Martínez

2019

EJREP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction. Students usually answer comprehension questions from texts as part of their academic activities. Elaborated Feedback (EF) has been found to be relatively effective to improve comprehension and learning from texts. However, there is little research on how computer-based feedback influences the question-answering process. This study examines the effects of a specific EF on the students' question-answering performance and their accuracy to assess textual relevance. Further, the study explores whether this EF influences the question, the text-search, and the feedback processing. Method. Seventy-five 7th and 8th grade students answered a set of 20 questions from two texts (10 questions per text). During the question-answering process, students had the text available and were forced to highlight the text information they considered relevant to answer each question. While half the students received item-based EF that included information on the student's answer correctness and her accuracy to select question-relevant text information along with monitoring hints on task-specific strategies, the other half received non-formative feedback (i.e., control feedback group). Results. EF enhanced the students' question-answering performance and reduced the amount of non-relevant text information students assessed as question-relevant. However, EF did not affect the question-relevant text information highlighted. Although EF did not influence the question and the text-search processing times in comparison to the control feedback group, students who received EF devoted more time and accessed additional information more often than the control group. Discussion and Conclusion. Computer-based EF on the students' question-answering performance and their accuracy to assess textual relevance can be efficient to improve the students' question-answering process. This study sheds light on how to deliver EF in a digital environment. However, further research is necessary to explore the cognitive and metacognitive processes involved in feedback processing.

show abstract

“…Comparison between Read&Answer and paper-and-pencil data Martínez et al (2009) compared performance data from a paper-and-pencil version of a comprehension test and performance on the same test administered electronically with a previous and simpler version of Read&Answer. This version was very similar to the one presented here, except that the masking procedure was implemented by substituting letters with black balls, 2 instead of the blurring procedure used in this new version.…”

Section: Validation Of Readandanswer 20mentioning

confidence: 99%

Recording online processes in task-oriented reading with Read&Answer

et al. 2010

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present an application to study task-oriented reading processes called Read&Answer. The application mimics paper-and-pencil situations in which a reader interacts with one or more documents to perform a specific task, such as answering questions, writing an essay, or similar activities. Read&Answer presents documents and questions with a mask. The reader unmasks documents and questions so that only a piece of information is available at a time. This way the entire interaction between the reader and the documents on the task is recorded and can be analyzed. We describe Read&Answer and present its applications for research and assessment. Finally, we explain two studies that compare readers' performance on Read&Answer with students' reading times and comprehension levels on a paper-and-pencil task, and on a computer task recorded with eye-tracking. The use of Read&Answer produced similar comprehension scores, although it changed the pattern of reading times.

show abstract

On-line Assessment of Comprehension Processes

Cited by 21 publications

References 33 publications

Anatomy practical examinations: How does student performance on computerized evaluation compare with the traditional format?

Anatomy practical examinations: How does student performance on computerized evaluation compare with the traditional format?

Does Computer-based Elaborated Feedback Influence the Students’ Question-Answering Process?

Recording online processes in task-oriented reading with Read&Answer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About