Assessing the exams of the Faculty of Education students, and the extent it achieve the intended learning outcomes

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 damanhour university-faculty of education-educational psychology department

2 Faculty of education/Damanhour university/educational psychology department

Abstract

Abstract
   the current study aimed to study the extent to which  the achievement tests in the university(Faculty of Education, Damanhur University as example) achieved the demands of assessment quality in terms of the standard specifications of the exam paper , studying  its psychometric evidences , and the extent it achieved the intended learning outcomes; Considering viewpoint of the students and their satisfaction with it .
   A student satisfaction questionnaire about the final tests was applied after checking its validity on a sample consisting of (649 male and female students), and the  list of exam papers standard specifications was used to examine a sample of (46) exam  papers chosen for educational courses as they general for all specializations  , distributed on four consecutive semesters, and the  technical reports provided by the automated graded programs for a sample of (14) tests were examined to verify their psychometric evidences in measuring the intended learning outcomes. The results revealed:
1.         Students' satisfaction about  the formal specifications for the final exam papers was sufficient, while their opinions regarding the qualitative specifications varied; The overall verification percentage for the formal indicators was 73.31%,   while the verification  percentage for the qualitative indicators was 64.41%.
2.         The average reliability coefficient  across the sample of the mechanically graded tests was (0.74 average value) and the percentage of non-discriminative questions that have a discrimination factor (less than 0.2) increased in it.
3.         The percentage of the achievement average of learning outcomes (calculated by the results of students on each of the test items and their conformity with the learning outcome that the item set for measuring it ) ranged from 69.76% to 90.78% with an average of 80.48% at the total level of exam papers and this result consider acceptable only in The state of stability of the tests and the quality of their items.
A set of recommendations was presented to decision makers in both the college and the university for inclusion in corrective plans in addition to some future research had been suggested.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

المراجع الاجنبيه
1-      Adam, S. (2004). "Using Learning Outcomes: A Consideration of the Nature, Role,Application and Implications for European Education of Employing Learning Outcomes at the Local, National and International levels",  Report on United Kingdom Bologna Seminar, Herriot-Watt University,1-23.
2-      Agnantis, K., Alexiadis, A., Refanidis, I. (2016)." COURSR2: an integrated time management system for lifelong learners", international journal on artificial intelligence tools,25(06),1650029.
3-      Ahmedani,S.M. (2017)." Direct Methods Used to measure Program Learning Outcomes" ,available @ https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316190040 ,1-9.
4-      Anderson, H.M., Moor, D.L., Anaya, G., Bird, E.(2005)." Student Learning Outcomes Assessment: A Component of Program Assessment", American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 69(2), 256–268 .
5-      Anderson, L.W., Krathwohl, D.R.(2001)." A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives", Addison, Wesley, Longman ,New York .
6-      Bacolod,P. M. & Tobias,L.J .(2006). "School quality and achievement Growth evidence from the Philippines ",economics of education review, 25 (6) , 619 – 632.
7-      Biggs ,J.B. (1973). "Study behaviour and performance in objective and essay formats",Australian Journal of Education. 17, 157–167.
8-      Biggs, J., and C. Tang. (2011). "Teaching for Quality Learning at University: Assessing for learning quality: II. Practice ",  available @  https://www.researchgate.net/publication/215915395  ,1-36.
9-      Bingham, J. (1999)." How to write learning outcomes" In:"AGuide to developing learning outcomes",The learning and Teaching Institute Sheffled Hallam University, Sheffled,1-18.
10-  Bloom, B.S., Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., Krathwohl, D.R.(1956)." Taxonomy of Educational Objectives", Handbook 1 Cognitive Domain. David McKay, New York ,201-207.
11-  Boulton-Lewis, G.M. (1995). "The SOLO taxonomy as a means of shaping and assessing learning in higher education", Higher Education Research and Development .14, 143–154.
12-  Brady,B.M.(2005). "Assessment of learning with multiple-choice questions", Nurse Education in Practice .5, 238–242.
13-  Brown, C. A. (2002)." Portfolio Assessment: How Far Have We Come?"Available@  https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED477941.pdf.
14-  Dodeen,H.(2003)."Assessing test –taking strategies of university students:developing ascale and estimating its psychometric indices",Assessment &Evaluation in Higher Education.33(4)409-419.
15-  Dodridge, M.(1999)." Learning Outcomes and Their Assessment in Higher Education" ,EngineeringScience and Education Journal, 161–168 .
16-  Dolly, J.P., & Williams, K.S. (1986). "Using Test Taking Strategies ToMaximize ultiple-choice Test Scores", Journal of Educational &Psychological Measurement. (46) 3: 619 – 625.
17-  Entwistle, A., & Entwistle, N. (1992). "Experiences of understanding in revising for degree examinations", Learning and Instruction .2, 1–22.
18-  Ewais,A.&Awad,M.& Hadia,Kh.(2020)" Aligning Learning Materials and Assessment with Course Learning Outcomes in MOOCs Using Data Mining Techniques", in: " Hatzilygeroudis I., Perikos I., Grivokostopoulou F," Advances in Integrations of Intelligent Methods", Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies,1-25.
19-  Farley, J.(1989)." The multiple-choice test: writing the question",Nurse Educator. 14 (6), 3–5.
20-  Frederickson, J.R. , & Collins, A. (1989). "A systems approach to educational testing", Educational Researcher. 18, 27–31.
21-  Gibbs, G., Lucas, L., & Spouse, J., (1997). "The effects of class size and form of assessment on nursing student’s performance,approaches to study and course perceptions", Nurse EducationToday. 17 (4), 311–318.
22-  Gilbert, L., Gale, V.(2008)." Principles of E-Learning Systems Engineering", Chandos Publishing,Oxford .
23-  Hammond, E.J., McIndoe, A.K., Sansome, A.J., & Spargo, P.M.(1998). "Multiple-choice examination: adopting an evidencebased approach to exam technique", Anaesthesia. 53, 1105-1108.
24-  Harden, R.M., Crosby, J.R., Davis, M.H.(1999)." AMEE Guide No.14: Outcome-Based Education":Part1 – An Introduction to Outcome-Based Education. Medical Teacher 21(1), 7–14.
25-  Holsgrove, G.( 1992). "Guide to post graduate exams: multiplechoicequestions British", Journal of Hospital Medicine .48(11), 757–761.
26-  Jenkins, A., Unwin, D. (2007)." Writing and Using Learning Outcomes: A Practical Guide ", available@ https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238495834 ,1-30.
27-  Kennedy, D., Hyland, A., Ryan, N.(2007)." Writing and Using Learning Outcomes", A PracticalGuide. University College Cork ,available@ : https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238495834
28-  Kenny, N ., Desmarais, S., (2012). "A Guide to Developing and Assessing Learning Outcomes at the University of Guelph",office of the associate Vice-president(Academic).available@ https://docplayer.net/8753501-A-guide-to-developing-and-assessing-learning-outcomes-at-the-university-of-guelph.html.
29-  Marnat,G.G.(2003)."Hand book of psychological assessment", (4)ed,          wiley,New jersey,1-10.
30-  Masters, J., Hulsmeyer, B., Pike, M., Leichty, K., Miller, M., &Verst, A., (2001)." Assessment of multiple-choice questions in selected test banks accompanying test books used in nursing education", Journal of Nursing Education. 40 (1), 25–32.
31-  Merrill, M.D.(1973)." Content and Instructional Analysis for Cognitive Transfer Tasks". Audio Visual Communications Review, 21, 109–125 (1973).
32-   Merrill, M.D.(1994)." The Descriptive Component Display Theory". In: Twitchell, D.G. (ed.) "Instructional Design Theory", Educational Technology Publications, New Jersey.111-157.
33-  Millman, J., Bishop, C. H., & Ebel, R. (1965). "An Analysis of Test Wiseness", Journal of Educational & psychological Measurement.(25) 3: 707 -726.
34-  Oermann, M.(1999). "Developing and scoring essay tests", NurseEducator .24 (2), 29–32.
35-  Pepple,D.J., Young,L.E, & Carroll,R.G.(2010). "A comparison of student performance in multiple-choice and long essay questions in the MBBS stage I Physiology examination at the University of the West Indies (Mona Campus)", Adv Physiol Educ .34: 86–89.
36-  Pilli, O.,Admiraal,W. (2017)." Students ’ learning outcomes inmassive open online courses (MOOCs):some suggestions for course design", J. Higher Educ. 7(1), 46–71.
37-  Race, P., & Brown, S. (2001). "The Lecturers Toolkit: A Practical Guide to Assessment, Learning and Teaching ", Kogan, London,1-28.
38-  Ramsden, P. (1988b). "Studying learning: Improving teaching", in Ramsden, P. (ed.)," Improving Learning: New Perspectives", Kogan, London, pp. 13–31.
39-  Sarnacki, R. E. (1979). "An Examination of Test Wiseness in the Cognitive Test Domain", Journal of Review of Educational Research. (49) 2: 252 – 279.
40-  Tangworakitthaworn P., Gilbert L., Wills G.B. (2013)." A Conceptual Model of Intended Learning Outcomes Supporting Curriculum Development", In: Ng W., Storey V.C., Trujillo J.C. (eds) Conceptual Modeling, ER 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, (8217). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg,161-173.
41-  Wilson ,A. , Howitt,S.,& Higgins,D. (2016)." A fundamental misalignment: intended learning and assessment practices in undergraduate science research projects", Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41:6, 869-884, DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2015.1048505.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics