Student Perceptions of Performance-Based Assessments for In-Person and Online Courses

Authors

  • Man-Wai Chu University of Calgary
  • Heather Craig University of Calgary
  • Felecia Hoey University of Calgary

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55016/ojs/ajer.v70i2.73401

Keywords:

performance-based assessment; online learning; in-person learning; large lectures; post-secondary education évaluation basée sur la performance ; apprentissage en ligne ; apprentissage en personne ; grands cours magistraux ; enseignement post-secondaire

Abstract

COVID-19 social distancing measures forced many university courses to be offered online. The performance-based assessments originally designed for in-person learning may not work well in online environments. This study investigated students’ perceptions of performance-based assessments, and their associated resources, during a course that was offered both in-person and online. The results from 312 undergraduate education students (n = 248 in-person and n = 64 online) indicated all the resources for one of the two assessments were rated statistically significantly higher by students who attended the course in-person. This indicated students who completed the course in-person had a stronger interaction with the assessment resources and rating having higher cognitive and affective skills needed to perform a similar assessment task in their future classrooms. Online students indicated some resources, such as assessment instructions and scoring rubrics, should be better explained during the course for more clarity regarding expectations.

Les mesures de distanciation sociale ont contraint de nombreuses universités à proposer des cours en ligne. Les évaluations basées sur les performances, conçues à l'origine pour l'apprentissage en personne, peuvent ne pas fonctionner correctement dans les environnements en ligne. Cette étude s'est intéressée à la perception qu'ont les étudiants des évaluations basées sur les performances et des ressources associées, dans le cadre d'un cours dispensé à la fois en présentiel et en ligne. Les résultats obtenus auprès de 312 étudiants en éducation de premier cycle (n = 248 en personne et n = 64 en ligne) indiquent que toutes les ressources pour l'une des deux évaluations ont été évaluées de manière statistiquement significative plus élevée par les étudiants qui ont suivi le cours en personne. Cela indique que les étudiants qui ont suivi le cours en personne ont eu une interaction plus forte avec les ressources d'évaluation et qu'ils ont évalué les compétences cognitives et affectives nécessaires pour effectuer une tâche d'évaluation similaire dans leurs futures salles de classe. Les étudiants en ligne ont indiqué que certaines ressources, telles que les instructions d'évaluation et les grilles de notation, devraient être mieux expliquées pendant le cours pour que les attentes soient plus claires.

Author Biographies

Man-Wai Chu, University of Calgary

Dr. Man-Wai Chu, PhD, is an Associate Professor at the University of Calgary in the Learning Sciences area. Her research focuses on using innovative assessments, such as interactive digital environments, to measure students’ performance-based skills in the classroom and on standardized tests. An extension of her research with these assessments has led her to studying students’ development of mental models and their associations with affective variables that enhance assessment performance; this research is guided by the Learning Errors and Formative Feedback (LEAFF) model.

Heather Craig, University of Calgary

Dr. Heather Craig, PhD, RPsych, is the Divisional Psychologist in a rural school division in Southern Alberta. She also operates a small private practice and is a Sessional instructor with the University of Calgary and Athabasca University. Her research specializes in inclusive education and teacher education. Dr. Craig has presented her work on a variety of topics at several national conferences and has published articles in the Canadian Journal of School Psychology.

Felecia Hoey, University of Calgary

Felecia Hoey, MSc, RPsych, is a Psychologist practising within private schools in Calgary, Alberta. She is a Sessional Instructor at the University of Calgary. Her research specializes in inclusive education and teachers’ knowledge and attitudes for common childhood disorders seen in the classroom. She has presented her work on several topics at various national conferences and has published articles in Behavioural Brain Research and the Inclusive Educator Journal.

References

Anderson, T. (2003). Modes of interaction in distance education: Recent developments and research questions. In M. G. Moore & W. G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 129–144). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Blackwell, W. H., & Rossetti, Z. S. (2014). The development of individualized education programs: Where have we been and where should we go now? SAGE Open, 4(2), https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014530411

Brookhart, S. M. (1997). A theoretical framework for the role of classroom assessment in motivating student effort and achievement. Applied Measurement in Education, 10(2), 161–180, https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324818ame1002_4

Caruth, G. D. (2013). Demystifying mixed methods research design: A review of the literature. Mevlana International Journal of Education, 3(2), 112–122. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED544121

Castro, M. D. B., & Tumibay, G. M. (2021). A literature review: Efficacy of online learning courses for higher education institution using meta-analysis. Education and Information Technologies, 26(2), 1367–1385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10027-z

Center for Applied Special Technology (2021). About universal design for learning. https://www.cast.org/impact/universal-design-for-learning-udl

Chase, R. (2021, May 18). Lawsuits over university COVID-19 shutdown can proceed. The Associated Press. https://apnews.com/article/business-coronavirus-pandemic-lawsuits-education-health-3a5d8062ca11e6e9b75b1154666b352f

Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299088

Creswell, J.W. & Guetterman, T.C. (2019). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating qualitative and quantitative research. Pearson.

Daniel, J. & Mackintosh, W. (2003). Learning ODL futures in the eternal triangle: The mega-university response to the greatest moral challenge for our age. In M. G. Moore & W. G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 811–827). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Ferguson, J., & Tryjankowski, A. M. (2009). Online versus face-to-face learning: Looking at modes of instruction in master's-level course. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 33(3), 219–228. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/104418/

Glass, G. V., & Hopkins, K. D. (2008) Statistical methods in education and psychology. Allyn & Bacon. Boston.

Gravetter, F. J. and Wallnau, L. B. (2017). Statistics for the behavioral sciences (10th ed.). Cengage Learning.

Hillman, D. C. A., Willis, D. J., & Gunawardena, C. N. (1994). Learner-interface interaction in distance education: An extension of contemporary models and strategies for practitioners. American Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), 30–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923649409526853

Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020, March 27). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning

Hussain, E. T., Daoud, S., Alrabaiah, H., & Owais, A. K. (2020). Students' perception of online assessment during the COVID-19 pandemic: The case of undergraduate students in the UAE [Paper presentation]. 2020 21st International Arab Conference on Information Technology (ACIT). https://doi.org/10.1109/acit50332.2020.9300099

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (2004). https://sites.ed.gov/idea/

Jimenez, L. (2020). Student assessment during COVID-19. Center for American Progress. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED610407.pdf

Keegan, D. J. (1980). On defining distance education. Distance Education, 1(1), 13–36, https://doi.org/10.1080/0158791800010102

Kozma, R. B. (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology and Development, 42(2), 7–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299087

Lack, K. A., (2013, March 21). Current status of research on online learning in postsecondary education. ITHAKA S+R. https://doi.org/10.18665/sr.22463

Luna (2024). LUNA child and youth advocacy centre. https://www.lunacentre.ca/about

Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923648909526659

Moore, M. (1997). Theory of transactional distance. D. Keegan (Ed.), Theoretical Principles of Distance Education (pp. 22–38). Routledge.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2023). Distance learning. https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=80

Neuhauser, C. (2002). Learning style and effectiveness of online and face-to-face instruction. American Journal of Distance Education, 16(2), 99–113. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15389286AJDE1602_4

Newton, D. (2021, March 31). The worst of times for online education. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/dereknewton/2021/03/31/the-worst-of-times-for-online-education/?sh=47ab93313a5a

Özden, M. Y., Ertürk, I., & Sanli, R. (2004). Students’ perceptions of online assessment: A case study. Journal of Distance Education / Revue de l’éducation à distance, 19(2), 77–92. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ807820.pdf

Shearer, R. L. (2009). Transactional distance and dialogue: An exploratory study to refine the theoretical construct of dialogue in online learning [Doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University]. https://etda.libraries.psu.edu/paper/10196/5490

Simonson, M., Zvacek, S., & Smaldino, S. (2019). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (7th ed.). Information Age Publishing.

Stack, S. (2015). Learning outcomes in an online vs traditional course. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 9(1), Article 5. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2015.090105

Statistics Canada (2020, May 14). COVID-19 pandemic: Academic impacts on postsecondary students in Canada. Statistics Canada. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/45-28-0001/2020001/article/00015-eng.htm

Tichavsky, L. P.; Hunt, A. N.; Driscoll, A., & Jicha, K. (2015). “It’s just nice having a real teacher”: Student perceptions of online versus face-to-face instruction. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 9(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2015.090202

Zhang, Z., & Kenny, R. (2010). Learning in an online distance education course: Experiences of three international students. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 11(1), 17–36. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v11i1.775

Downloads

Published

2024-07-30

How to Cite

Chu, M.-W., Craig, H., & Hoey, F. (2024). Student Perceptions of Performance-Based Assessments for In-Person and Online Courses. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 70(2), 165–181. https://doi.org/10.55016/ojs/ajer.v70i2.73401

Issue

Vol. 70 No. 2 (2024): Summer

Section

ARTICLES

License

UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA COPYRIGHT LICENSE AND PUBLICATION AGREEMENT

If accepted, authors will be asked to sign a copyright agreement with the following points:

A. Where there is any inconsistency between this Copyright License and Publication Agreement and any other document or agreement in relation to the same subject matter, the terms of this Agreement shall govern.

B. This document sets out the rights you are granting in relation to publication of your article, book review, or research note entitled (the “Article”) through inclusion in the academic journal titled Alberta Journal of Educational Research (the “Journal”) published through the Faculty of Education, representing the Governors of the University of Alberta (the “Journal Editor”).

C. There will be no payment to you for this publication and grant of rights. In consideration of the agreement to publish the Article in the Journal:

1. You are warranting that:

  1. the content of the Article is your original work, and its content does not contain any material infringing the copyright of others; or, where the Article is not entirely your original work, you have obtained all necessary permissions in writing to grant the rights you are giving in this agreement;
  2. the content of the Article does not contain any material that is defamatory of, or violates the privacy rights of, or discloses the confidential information of, any other person;
  3. the Article has not been published elsewhere in whole or in part, and you will not allow publication of the Article elsewhere without the consent of the Journal Editor;
  4. the names of all co-authors and contributors to the Article are:

2. You agree to license the copyright in the Article to the Journal Editor, on a worldwide, perpetual, royalty free basis; and to the extent required by the terms of this agreement. You shall retain the right at all times to be acknowledged as the/an author of the Article.

3. You further agree that the Journal Editor has the entitlement to deal with the Article as the Journal Editor sees fit, and including in the following manner;

  1. The right to print, publish, market, communicate and distribute the Article and the Journal, in this and any subsequent editions, in all media (including electronic media), in all languages, and in all territories, ing the full term of copyright, and including any form of the Article separated from the Journal, such as in a database, abstract, offprint, translation or otherwise, and to authorize third parties to do so;
  2. The right to register copyright of the Journal;
  3. The right to edit the Article, to conform to editorial policy as the Journal Editor sees fit.

4. If any co-author or contributor to the Article does not sign this agreement, the Journal Editor reserves the right to refuse to publish the Article.