4.4 Article

Comparing Three OnlineTesting Modalities: Using Static, Active, and Interactive OnlineTesting Modalities to Assess Middle School Students' Understanding of Fundamental Ideas and Use of Inquiry Skills Related to Ecosystems

期刊

JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN SCIENCE TEACHING
卷 51, 期 4, 页码 523-554

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/tea.21145

关键词

assessment; online testing; ecosystems; inquiry; integrated knowledge structures; science education

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Online testing holds much promise for assessing students' complex science knowledge and inquiry skills. In the current study, we examined the comparative effectiveness of assessment tasks and test items presented in online modules that used either a static, active, or interactive modality. A total of 1,836 students from the classrooms of 22 middle school science teachers in 12 states participated in the study as part of normal classroom activities. Students took assessments in the three different modalities on three consecutive days. The assessments tested key concepts about ecosystems and students' ability to use inquiry skills in an ecosystems context. Our in-depth analyses focused on how the different modalities elicited specific content knowledge of ecosystems (e.g., producers, consumers, predator-prey relationships) and specific inquiry skills (e.g., designing and interpreting experiments). We also investigated student use of technology supports, such as replaying animations or inspecting graphs. The results showed that the interactive modality enabled the testing of more complex reasoning and that additional experience working in the online environment improved student performance for all the modalities, especially for the interactive modality. Each of the three modalities provided useful information about students' understanding of ecosystems and related inquiry skills as well as their misconceptions. The study begins to build a knowledge base of what types of science knowledge and skills may be effectively measured in three different modalities of online assessment. (c) 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 51: 523-554, 2014

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据