Premium
An Analysis of Assessment Modalities in High‐Enrollment Course Sections
Author(s) -
Kingsbury Jeffrey,
Penkrot Tonya,
Lisenbee Cayle S,
Hyatt JonPhilippe K
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
the faseb journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.709
H-Index - 277
eISSN - 1530-6860
pISSN - 0892-6638
DOI - 10.1096/fasebj.31.1_supplement.576.40
Subject(s) - modalities , clicker , class (philosophy) , test (biology) , statistical analysis , medical education , mathematics education , computer science , psychology , medicine , statistics , mathematics , biology , artificial intelligence , social science , sociology , paleontology
Student performance in biological science courses is an important factor in a diverse set of programs and majors in undergraduate and graduate education. Evaluating student learning in a secure and timely manner for high‐enrollment courses can be problematic, and the selection of assessment modalities in these courses has generated considerable debate in pedagogical arenas. The purpose of this study was to determine whether student performance was impacted by different testing modalities in high‐enrollment courses that balanced both exam security and timeliness of feedback of the results. Three principal modalities were assessed from Anatomy and Physiology and General Biology: 1) traditional in‐class scan‐tron (ST; n=155) exams, 2) in‐class testing using an electronic “clicker” communication device (CLK; n=1,294), and 3) remotely administered exams using an on‐line learning management system (LMS; n=987). Student exam scores were collected over 3 semesters, which encompassed 7308 exams from 3 courses in A&P and Biology. Mean test scores were 69.7, 68.9, and 70.1% in ST, CLK, and LMS groups, respectively. The average time until students received feedback was 2 days for ST exams and 4 hours for CLK and LMS exams. Statistical analyses using one‐way ANOVAs and student t‐tests indicated no differences in mean exam scores between groups (p>0.05). Timeliness of feedback, however, was faster in CLK and LMS than ST groups (p<0.05). These findings suggest that use of on‐line testing modalities (LMS) are as secure as traditional (ST and CLK) in‐person exams if class mean grades are accepted as a measure of security. Additionally, both LMS and clicker‐administered exams are better than traditional scan‐tron exams for reporting scores to the students, which has been attributed to learning and student satisfaction. The study also has illuminated the need for on‐going evaluation of the rate of student data entry errors amongst the various modalities that became apparent during this study, as well as the need to further explore the perceived and real value of rapid feedback.Comparison of Modalities