Mini-cases of professional-inspired activities in e-learning platforms: An experience for the formative assessment
Keywords:
Additional Files
Abstract
The formative assessment is a strategy that allows students to be aware of the state of their learning and to establish ways to correct the identified deficiencies; at the same time, it provides information to the instructor about those issues where misunderstandings occur. In the present study, we study its application to the solving of problems in university subject of scientific field. The activity involved short extension cases, coming from professional situations combined to self-learning tasks and supported on e-learning platform (Sakai software). The methodology was designed to achieve deep learning and a continuous evaluation of the process, not only the final product. The evidences collected (student’s documents, interviews and smartphone-based surveys) informed about the impact of the presented approach. The participants positively valued the initiative against the more traditional methodologies. In conclusion, the study demonstrates that students can actively participate in the learning-oriented assessment, maintaining the guarantees of the educational process, mainly suitable for large classes, limited schedule or on-line classes.
Downloads
References
Bailey, R., & Garner, M. (2010). Is the feedback in higher education assessment worth the paper it is written on? Teachers' reflections on their practices. Teaching in Higher Education, 15(2), 187-198.
Google Scholar CrossrefBennett, R. E. (2011). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(1), 5-25.
Google Scholar CrossrefBernholt, S., & Parchmann, I. (2011). Assessing the complexity of students' knowledge in chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 12(2), 167-173.
Google Scholar CrossrefBiggs, J. (1999). What the student does: Teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research & Development, 18(1), 57-75.
Google Scholar CrossrefCarless, D. (2007). Learning‐oriented assessment: conceptual bases and practical implications. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44 (1), 57-66.
Google Scholar CrossrefCarless, D. (2015). Exploring learning-oriented assessment processes. Higher Education, 69(6), 963-976.
Google Scholar CrossrefDarling-Hammond, L., & Snyder, J. (2000). Authentic assessment of teaching in context. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16(5-6), 523-545.
Google Scholar CrossrefDochy, F. J. R. C., Segers, M., & Sluijsmans, D. (1999). The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in Higher Education, 24(3), 331-350.
Google Scholar CrossrefGikandi, J. W., Morrow, D., & Davis, N. E. (2011). Online formative assessment in higher education: A review of the literature. Computers & education, 57(4), 2333-2351.
Google Scholar CrossrefGonzález, J., & Wagenaar, R. (Eds.). (2003). Tuning educational structures in Europe. Final report. Phase one. Bilbao: University of Deusto.
Google Scholar CrossrefHughes, C., & Barrie, S. (2010). Influences on the assessment of graduate attributes in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(3), 325-334.
Google Scholar CrossrefKrathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 212-218.
Google Scholar CrossrefLópez-Pastor, V. M. (2008). Implementing a formative and shared assessment system in higher education teaching. European Journal of Teacher Education, 31(3), 293-311.
Google Scholar CrossrefLópez-Pastor, V., & Sicilia-Camacho, A. (2017). Formative and shared assessment in higher education. Lessons learned and challenges for the future. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(1), 77-97.
Google Scholar CrossrefMueller, J. (2005). The authentic assessment toolbox: enhancing student learning through online faculty development. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 1-7.
Google Scholar CrossrefNicol, D. J., & Macfarlane‐Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in higher education, 31(2), 199-218.
Google Scholar CrossrefSchuwirth, L. W., & Van der Vleuten, C. P. (2011). Programmatic assessment: from assessment of learning to assessment for learning. Medical Teacher, 33(6), 478-485.
Google Scholar CrossrefStiggins, R. J. (1987). Design and development of performance assessments. Educational Measurement: Issues and practice, 6(3), 33-42.
Google Scholar CrossrefTaras, M. (2005). Assessment–summative and formative–some theoretical reflections. British Journal of Educational Studies, 53(4), 466-478.
Google Scholar CrossrefTortajada-Genaro, L.A. (2014). Collaborative activities for solving multi-step problems in general chemistry. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 4(4)
Google Scholar CrossrefVaino, K., Holbrook, J., & Rannikmäe, M. (2012). Stimulating students' intrinsic motivation for learning chemistry through the use of context-based learning modules. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13(4), 410-419.
Google Scholar CrossrefWiggins, G. (1993). Assessment: Authenticity, context, and validity. Phi delta kappan, 75(3), 200-08.
Google Scholar CrossrefWiggins, G. (1998). Educative Assessment. Designing assessments to inform and improve student performance. Jossey-Bass Publishers, 350 Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA 94104.
Google Scholar CrossrefAdditional Files
Published
Almetric
Dimensions
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Multidisciplinary Journal of Educational Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All articles are published under Creative Commons copyright (CC BY). Authors hold the copyright and retain publishing rights without restrictions, but authors allow anyone to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute, and/or copy articles as the original source is cited.
