BibTex RIS Cite

Web-tabanlı Öz-Değerlendirme Sisteminde Öğrenenlerin Öz-Müdahale Algısı ve Test Alma Davranışlarının Başarı Üzerine Etkisi

Year 2016, Volume: 7 Issue: 1, 221 - 236, 15.06.2016
https://doi.org/10.21031/epod.46283

Abstract

Günümüzde eğitimin her kademesinde öğrenci merkezli değerlendirme türlerinden olan öz-değerlendirme yaklaşımı yaygınlaşmaktadır. Biçimlendirmeye dönük değerlendirme (formative) kapsamında ele alınan bu yaklaşımda dönüt ön plana çıkmaktadır. Öğrenenler bu değerlendirmeler aracılığıyla ölçütlere (criterion-referenced) ve gruba (norm-referenced) göre var olan performans durumları hakkında; kendilerini yeniden değerlendirerek de gelişim süreçleri hakkında (self-referenced) dönütler alabilirler. Öğrenenler aldıkları bu dönütlere dayalı olarak öğrenmelerini iyileştirmek için öğrenme süreçlerine kendileri müdahalede bulunabilirler. Bu süreçte dönütleri ele almaları, müdahaleye karar vermeleri ve müdahaleyi uyguladıktan sonra etkililiğini belirlemeleri öz-müdahale algısı olarak isimlendirilmiştir. Çalışma kapsamında, öğrenenlerin öz-değerlendirmelerini desteklemek için geliştirilen web-tabanlı sistemde bir testteki sorulara cevap vererek, test sonunda performansı ile ilgili dönütlerine ulaşması “test alma davranışı” olarak isimlendirilmiş ve test alma davranışının hem başarı hem de öz-müdahale algısı üzerine etkisi incelenmiştir. Aynı zamanda öğrenenlerin öz-müdahale algılarının başarıları üzerine etkisi olup olmadığını araştırılmıştır. Bu amaç için Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesinde Eğitimde Ölçme ve Değerlendirme dersini alan öğrenciler çalışmaya katılmış ve web-tabanlı bir öz-değerlendirme sistemini kullanmıştır. Başarı üzerine etkisi incelenen faktörler arasındaki bağıntılar yapısal eşitlik modeli ile sınanmıştır. Yapısal örüntülere göre; öz-müdahale algısının alınan test alma davranışından bağımsız olduğu bulgusuna ulaşılmıştır. Bununla beraber hem test alma davranışının hem de öz-müdahale algısının başarı üzerine istatistiksel olarak anlamlı etkisi olduğu belirlenmiştir. 

References

  • Andrade, H., & Valtcheva, A. (2009). Promoting learning and achievement through self-assessment. Theory into Practice, 48(1), 12-19. doi: 10.1080/00405840802577544
  • Bangert-Drowns, R. L. Kulik, J. A. & Kulik, G. L. C. (1991). The effects of frequent class-room testing. Journal of Educational Research , 85, 89-99.
  • Bayrak, F. (2014). Web tabanlı öz-değerlendirme sisteminde algılanan öz müdahalenin etkililiği. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in continuing education, 22(2), 151-167.
  • Brew, A. (1999) Towards autonomous assessment: using self-assessment and peer assessment. In: S. Brown & A. Glasner (Eds), Assessment matters in higher education: choosing and using diverse assessment, (pp. 159–171). Buckingham, Open University Press/SRHE.
  • Brookhart, S. M. (2008). How to give effective feedback to your students. Alexandria, VA: ASCD
  • Brown, G. T., Andrade, H. L., & Chen, F. (2015). Accuracy in student self-assessment: directions and cautions for research. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 22(4), 444-457. doi: : 10.1080/0969594X.2014.996523
  • Conejo, R., Guzmán, E., Millán, E., Trella, M., Pérez-De-La-Cruz, J. L., & Ríos, A. (2004). SIETTE: A web–based tool for adaptive testing. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 14(1), 1-33
  • Deno, S. L. (1998). Curriculum-based measurement and special education services: A fundamental and direct relationship. In M. R.
  • Shinn, (Eds.), Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 1-17). Guilford Press.
  • Doğan, N., & İnal, H. (2012). Eğitim Fakültesi öğrencilerinin öğrenme stilleri ve ölçme ve değerlendirme dersi başarısı arasındaki ilişki. Paper presented at Eğitimde ve Psikolojide Ölçme ve Değerlendirme III. Ulusal Kongresi, Bolu, September, 19-21.
  • Dobson, J. L. (2008). The use of formative online quizzes to enhance class preparation and scores on summative exams. Advances in Physiology Education, 32(4), 297-302.
  • Dunn, K. E., & Mulvenon, S. W. (2009). A critical review of research on formative assessment: The limited scientific evidence of the impact of formative assessment in education. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 14(7), 1-11.
  • Earl, L. M., & Katz, M. S. (2006). Rethinking classroom assessment with purpose in mind: Assessment for learning, assessment as learning, assessment of learning. Manitoba Education, Citizenship & Youth
  • Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39-50.
  • Geist, J. R. & Soehren, S. E. (1997). The Effect of Frequent Quizzes on Short- and Long-Term Academic Performance. Journal of Dental Education, 61(4), 339-345.
  • Hattie, J., & Gan, M., (2011). Instruction Based on Feedback. In R. E. Mayer & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Learning (pp. 249-271), New York, New York, USA: Routledge
  • Johnson, G. M. (2006). Optional online quizzes: College student use and relationship to achievement. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie, 32(1).
  • Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Publicaton, Inc.
  • Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Publicaton, Inc.
  • Leeming, F. C. (2002). The exam-a-day procedure improves performance in psychology classes. Teaching of Psychology, 29(3), 210-212.
  • Lentz, F. E., Allen, S. J., & Ehrhardt, K. E. (1996). The conceptual elements of strong interventions in school settings. School Psychology Quarterly, 11(2), 118-136.
  • McMillan, J. H. (Ed.). (2007). Formative classroom assessment: Research, theory and practice. New York: Teacher’s College Press.
  • Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGrawHill.
  • Özçelik, D. A., (2011). Ölçme ve Değerlendirme (3. Baskı). PEGEM Akademi, Ankara
  • Pinchok, N., & Brandt, W. C. (2009). Connecting formative assessment research to practice: An introductory guide for educators. New York, NY: Learning Point.
  • Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional science, 18(2), 119-144.
  • Sadler, D. R. (1998). Formative assessment: revisiting the territory. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 77-84
  • Terry, W. S. (2011). Öğrenme ve bellek. (Çev. Ed. B. Cangöz). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık. (Orijinal eserin yayın tarihi 2009).
  • Terzis, V., & Economides, A. A. (2011). The acceptance and use of computer based assessment. Computers & Education, 56(4), 1032-1044. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.11.017
  • Timmers, C. F., van den Broek, J. B., & van den Berg, S. M. (2013). Motivational beliefs, student effort, and feedback behaviour in computer-based formative assessment. Computers & Education, 60(1) , 25-31. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.07.007
  • Van der Kleij, F. M., Eggen, T. J. H. M., Timmers, C. F., & Veldkamp, B. P. (2012). Effects of feedback in a computer-based assessment for learning. Computers & Education, 58, 263 – 272. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.020.
  • Vaughn, S., & Fuchs, L. S. (2003). Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction: The promise and potential problems. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 137-146.
  • Wang, T. H. (2007). What strategies are effective for formative assessment in an e-learning environment?. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 23(3), 171–186.
  • Wang, T. H. (2014). Developing an assessment-centered e-Learning system for improving student learning effectiveness. Computers & Education, 73, 189-203. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.12.002
  • Wang, T. H., Wang, K. H., Wang, W. L., Huang, S. C., & Chen, S. Y. (2004). Web‐based Assessment and Test Analyses (WATA) system: development and evaluation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(1), 59-71.
Year 2016, Volume: 7 Issue: 1, 221 - 236, 15.06.2016
https://doi.org/10.21031/epod.46283

Abstract

References

  • Andrade, H., & Valtcheva, A. (2009). Promoting learning and achievement through self-assessment. Theory into Practice, 48(1), 12-19. doi: 10.1080/00405840802577544
  • Bangert-Drowns, R. L. Kulik, J. A. & Kulik, G. L. C. (1991). The effects of frequent class-room testing. Journal of Educational Research , 85, 89-99.
  • Bayrak, F. (2014). Web tabanlı öz-değerlendirme sisteminde algılanan öz müdahalenin etkililiği. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in continuing education, 22(2), 151-167.
  • Brew, A. (1999) Towards autonomous assessment: using self-assessment and peer assessment. In: S. Brown & A. Glasner (Eds), Assessment matters in higher education: choosing and using diverse assessment, (pp. 159–171). Buckingham, Open University Press/SRHE.
  • Brookhart, S. M. (2008). How to give effective feedback to your students. Alexandria, VA: ASCD
  • Brown, G. T., Andrade, H. L., & Chen, F. (2015). Accuracy in student self-assessment: directions and cautions for research. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 22(4), 444-457. doi: : 10.1080/0969594X.2014.996523
  • Conejo, R., Guzmán, E., Millán, E., Trella, M., Pérez-De-La-Cruz, J. L., & Ríos, A. (2004). SIETTE: A web–based tool for adaptive testing. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 14(1), 1-33
  • Deno, S. L. (1998). Curriculum-based measurement and special education services: A fundamental and direct relationship. In M. R.
  • Shinn, (Eds.), Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 1-17). Guilford Press.
  • Doğan, N., & İnal, H. (2012). Eğitim Fakültesi öğrencilerinin öğrenme stilleri ve ölçme ve değerlendirme dersi başarısı arasındaki ilişki. Paper presented at Eğitimde ve Psikolojide Ölçme ve Değerlendirme III. Ulusal Kongresi, Bolu, September, 19-21.
  • Dobson, J. L. (2008). The use of formative online quizzes to enhance class preparation and scores on summative exams. Advances in Physiology Education, 32(4), 297-302.
  • Dunn, K. E., & Mulvenon, S. W. (2009). A critical review of research on formative assessment: The limited scientific evidence of the impact of formative assessment in education. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 14(7), 1-11.
  • Earl, L. M., & Katz, M. S. (2006). Rethinking classroom assessment with purpose in mind: Assessment for learning, assessment as learning, assessment of learning. Manitoba Education, Citizenship & Youth
  • Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39-50.
  • Geist, J. R. & Soehren, S. E. (1997). The Effect of Frequent Quizzes on Short- and Long-Term Academic Performance. Journal of Dental Education, 61(4), 339-345.
  • Hattie, J., & Gan, M., (2011). Instruction Based on Feedback. In R. E. Mayer & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Learning (pp. 249-271), New York, New York, USA: Routledge
  • Johnson, G. M. (2006). Optional online quizzes: College student use and relationship to achievement. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie, 32(1).
  • Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Publicaton, Inc.
  • Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Publicaton, Inc.
  • Leeming, F. C. (2002). The exam-a-day procedure improves performance in psychology classes. Teaching of Psychology, 29(3), 210-212.
  • Lentz, F. E., Allen, S. J., & Ehrhardt, K. E. (1996). The conceptual elements of strong interventions in school settings. School Psychology Quarterly, 11(2), 118-136.
  • McMillan, J. H. (Ed.). (2007). Formative classroom assessment: Research, theory and practice. New York: Teacher’s College Press.
  • Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGrawHill.
  • Özçelik, D. A., (2011). Ölçme ve Değerlendirme (3. Baskı). PEGEM Akademi, Ankara
  • Pinchok, N., & Brandt, W. C. (2009). Connecting formative assessment research to practice: An introductory guide for educators. New York, NY: Learning Point.
  • Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional science, 18(2), 119-144.
  • Sadler, D. R. (1998). Formative assessment: revisiting the territory. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 77-84
  • Terry, W. S. (2011). Öğrenme ve bellek. (Çev. Ed. B. Cangöz). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık. (Orijinal eserin yayın tarihi 2009).
  • Terzis, V., & Economides, A. A. (2011). The acceptance and use of computer based assessment. Computers & Education, 56(4), 1032-1044. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.11.017
  • Timmers, C. F., van den Broek, J. B., & van den Berg, S. M. (2013). Motivational beliefs, student effort, and feedback behaviour in computer-based formative assessment. Computers & Education, 60(1) , 25-31. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.07.007
  • Van der Kleij, F. M., Eggen, T. J. H. M., Timmers, C. F., & Veldkamp, B. P. (2012). Effects of feedback in a computer-based assessment for learning. Computers & Education, 58, 263 – 272. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.020.
  • Vaughn, S., & Fuchs, L. S. (2003). Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction: The promise and potential problems. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 137-146.
  • Wang, T. H. (2007). What strategies are effective for formative assessment in an e-learning environment?. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 23(3), 171–186.
  • Wang, T. H. (2014). Developing an assessment-centered e-Learning system for improving student learning effectiveness. Computers & Education, 73, 189-203. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.12.002
  • Wang, T. H., Wang, K. H., Wang, W. L., Huang, S. C., & Chen, S. Y. (2004). Web‐based Assessment and Test Analyses (WATA) system: development and evaluation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(1), 59-71.
There are 36 citations in total.

Details

Journal Section Articles
Authors

Fatma Bayrak

Halil Yurdugül

Publication Date June 15, 2016
Published in Issue Year 2016 Volume: 7 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Bayrak, F., & Yurdugül, H. (2016). Web-tabanlı Öz-Değerlendirme Sisteminde Öğrenenlerin Öz-Müdahale Algısı ve Test Alma Davranışlarının Başarı Üzerine Etkisi. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 7(1), 221-236. https://doi.org/10.21031/epod.46283