Use of technology in the readiness assurance process of team based learning: Paper, automated response system, or computer based testing

2015 ◽  
Vol 46 ◽  
pp. 38-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jumana Antoun ◽  
Rihab Nasr ◽  
Nathalie K. Zgheib
2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua Phillips ◽  
Sachin Kogekar ◽  
Julie A. Adams

Author(s):  
Joshua Phillips ◽  
Sachin Kogekar ◽  
Julie A. Adams

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Josiah Koh ◽  
Michael A Cowling ◽  
Meena Jha ◽  
Kwong Nui Sim

With the advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI), much has been made of the use of AI in education. Central to that is the idea of an Automated Response System (ARS). Current adoption of ARS’s in education has been mainly in the realm of administrative tasks but is likely to move into the support of teaching. ARS can be used as a supplement for teaching as it provides instant feedback, and 24/7 support. Having a highly accessible, 24/7 ARS can help relieve some of the burdens placed on teachers, especially in a post COVID-19 environment, where teachers expect work to intensify, rather than simplify. In this paper we present a work-in-progress that proposes what features an ARS for education should have, how these would be useful and how these features help teachers assist students meet their learning outcomes in a holistic manner.


2020 ◽  
Vol 58 (7) ◽  
pp. 1256-1278
Author(s):  
Lawrence Smolinsky ◽  
Brian D. Marx ◽  
Gestur Olafsson ◽  
Yanxia A. Ma

Computer-based testing is an expanding use of technology offering advantages to teachers and students. We studied Calculus II classes for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics majors using different testing modes. Three sections with 324 students employed: paper-and-pencil testing, computer-based testing, and both. Computer tests gave immediate feedback and allowed multiple submissions and pooling. Paper-and-pencil tests (PPTs) required work and explanation allowing inspection of high cognitive demand tasks. Each test mode used the strength of its method. Students were given the same lecture by the same instructor on the same day and the same homework assignments and due dates. The design is quasi-experimental, but students were not aware of the testing mode at registration. Two basic questions examined were as follows: (a) Do paper-and-pencil and computer-based tests (CBTs) measure knowledge and skill in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics Calculus II in a consistent manner? (b) How does the knowledge and skill gained by students in a fully computer-based Calculus II class compare to students in a class requiring pencil-and-paper tests and hence some paper-and-pencil work. These results indicate that CBTs are as consistent with PPTs as CBTs are with themselves. Results are also consistent with classes using PPTs having slightly better outcomes than fully computer-based classes using only computer assessments.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document