فنون ارزیابی یادگیری در آموزش‌های الکترونیکی دانشگاهی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانش آموخته دکتری مدیریت آموزشی، گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روان‌شناسی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

2 دانشیار، گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روان‌شناسی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران.

3 استادیار، گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روان‌شناسی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

4 دانشیار مدیریت آموزشی، گروه رهبری و توسعه آموزش، دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روان‌شناسی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

10.22034/emes.2021.249161

چکیده

هدف: از آنجایی که همچنان نحوه ارزیابی در یادگیری الکترونیکی به عنوان یک علامت سؤال باقی مانده است، هدف پژوهش حاضر، شناسایی فنون ارزیابی یادگیری در آموزش‌های الکترونیکی دانشگاهی است.
روش پژوهش: پژوهش با دو روش، مرور نظام‌مند ترکیبی در مجلات معتبر علمی حوزه یادگیری الکترونیکی و رویکرد کیفی با استراتژی پدیدارشناسی انجام شد. در روش مرور نظام‌مند ترکیبی، ده مجله کیو وان در حوزه یادگیری الکترونیکی که از نظام رتبه‌بندی مجلات سایمگو انتخاب شدند، مورد جستجو قرار گرفتند. در رویکرد کیفی نیز اعضای هیأت علمی و مدرسان آموزش‌های الکترونیکی دانشگاهی در رشته علوم تربیتی و روانشناسی تربیتی، میدان این پژوهش بودند که با استفاده از روش نمونه‌گیری هدفمند ملاک محور، انتخاب و از طریق مصاحبه نیمه ساختارمند نسبت به جمع آوری داده‌ها تا دستیابی محقق به اشباع نظری اقدام و در مصاحبه دوازدهم، اشباع نظری حاصل گردید. داده‌ها با استفاده از روش کدگذاری کلایزی مورد تجزیه و تحلیل قرار گرفتند. 
یافته‌ها: براساس نتایج مرور نظام‌مند ترکیبی، فنون ارزیابی مختلفی در دوره‌های آموزش الکترونیکی دانشگاهی در سطح بین المللی شناسایی شدند. همچنین، بر اساس یافته‌های حاصل از مصاحبه­ها، دو مضمون «در طول ترم» و «در پایان ترم» و تعداد دوازده زیرمضمون حاصل شد.
نتیجه‌گیری: ارزیابی یادگیری در محیط‌های الکترونیکی، یادگیرنده محور است که بر نقش فعال یادگیرنده در فرایند یادگیری تأکید دارد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Learning assessment techniques in university e-learning

نویسندگان [English]

  • Maedeh Zarei Saroukolaei 1
  • Gholamreza Shams 2
  • Morteza Rezaeizadeh 3
  • Mohammad Ghahremani 4
1 . PhD in Educational Administration, Department of Educational Science, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.
2 Associate Professor, Department of Educational Science, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.
3 Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Science, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.
4 Associate Professor of Educational Administration, Department of Education Leadership and Development, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Objective: Since learning assessment in e-learning courses is still a question mark, the aim of this study is to identify e-learning assessment techniques in university e-learning.
Methods: The research was conducted in two ways, mixed systematic review in valid scientific journals in the field of e-learning and qualitative approach with phenomenological strategy. In the mixed systematic review method, 10 Q1 journals in the field of e-learning that were selected from SCImago Journal Rank, were searched. In the qualitative approach, faculty members and instructors of e-learning courses in universities in the field of educational sciences and educational psychology were the population of this study that were selected using a criterion-based purposeful sampling method. And through semi-structured interviews, data were collected until the researcher achieved theoretical saturation, and in the twelfth interview, theoretical saturation was achieved. The data obtained from the interview were analysed by Colaizzi coding method.
Results: Based on the results of mixed systemetic review, various assessment techniques were identified in university e-learning courses at the international level. Also, based on the findings of the interviews, two themes were obtained: "during the semester" and "at the end of the semester", and twelve subcategories were obtained.
Conclusion: Assessment of learning in e-learning environments is learner-centered, which emphasizes the active role of the learner in the learning process.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Assessment of learning
  • techniques
  • Qualitative Approach
  • Mixed systematic review
  • e-learning
Al-Fraihat, D., Joy, M., & Sinclair, J. (2020). Evaluating E-learning systems success: An empirical study. Computers in Human Behavior, 102, 67-86.
Altınay, Z. (2017). Evaluating peer learning and assessment in online collaborative learning environments. Behaviour & Information Technology, 36(3), 312-320.
Ashton, S., & Davies, R. S. (2015). Using scaffolded rubrics to improve peer assessment in a MOOC writing course. Distance education, 36(3), 312-334.
Barteit, S., Guzek, D., Jahn, A., Bärnighausen, T., Jorge, M. M., & Neuhann, F. (2020). Evaluation of e learning for medical education in low-and middle-income countries: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 145, 103726.
Buchan, J. F., & Swann, M. (2007). A Bridge too Far or a Bridge to the Future? A case study in online assessment at Charles Sturt University. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23(3).
Chang, C. C., & Tseng, K. H. (2009). Use and performances of Web‐based portfolio assessment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2), 358-370.
Chauhan, A. (2014). Massive open online courses (MOOCS): Emerging trends in assessment and accreditation. Digital Education Review, (25), 7-17.
Ching, Y. H., & Hsu, Y. C. (2011). Design-grounded assessment: A framework and a case study of Web 2.0 practices in higher education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(5), 781-797.
Christensen, M., Welch, A., & Barr, J. (2017). Husserlian Descriptive Phenomenology: A review of intentionality, reduction and the natural attitude. Journal of Nursing Education and Practice, 7(8), 113-118.
Cidral, W. A., Oliveira, T., Di Felice, M., & Aparicio, M. (2018). E-learning success determinants: Brazilian empirical study. Computers & Education, 122, 273-290.
Clarke-Midura, J., & Dede, C. (2010). Assessment, technology, and change. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 309-328.
Conrad, D., & Openo, J. (2018). Assessment strategies for online learning: Engagement and authenticity. Athabasca University Press.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage publications.
Dahalan, H. M., & Hussain, R. M. R. (2010). Development of web-based assessment in teaching and learning management system (e-ATLMS). Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, 244-248.
Debuse, J. C., & Lawley, M. (2016). Benefits and drawbacks of computer‐based assessment and feedback systems: Student and educator perspectives. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(2), 294-301.
Dermo, J. (2009). e‐Assessment and the student learning experience: A survey of student perceptions of e‐assessment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2), 203-214.
Dikli, S. (2003). Assessment at a Distance: Traditional vs. Alternative Assessments. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 2(3), 13-19.
Edward, K. L., & Welch, T. (2011). The extension of Colaizzi’s method of phenomenological enquiry. Contemporary nurse, 39(2), 163-171.
Fandiño, F. G. E., Muñoz, L. D., & Velandia, A. J. S. (2019). Motivation and E-Learning English as a foreign language: A qualitative study. Heliyon, 5(9), e02394, 1-7.
Fontanillas, T. R., Carbonell, M. R., & Catasús, M. G. (2016). E-assessment process: giving a voice to online learners. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 13(20), 1-14.
Gaytan, G. (2004). Effective assessment techniques for online instruction. Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal, 23(1), 25-33.
Gaytan, J., & McEwen, B. C. (2007). Effective online instructional and assessment strategies. The American Journal of Distance Education, 21(3), 117-132.
Gikandi, J. W., Morrow, D., & Davis, N. E. (2011). Online formative assessment in higher education: A review of the literature. Computers & education, 57(4), 2333-2351.
Govindasamy, T. (2001). Successful implementation of e-learning: Pedagogical considerations. The internet and higher education, 4(3-4), 287-299.
Guàrdia, L., Crisp, G., & Alsina, I. (2017). Trends and challenges of e-assessment to enhance student learning in Higher Education, In Innovative practices for higher education assessment and measurement. IGI Global.
Guerrero-Roldán, A. E., & Noguera, I. (2018). A model for aligning assessment with competences and learning activities in online courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 38, 36-46.
Heinrich, E., Milne, J., & Moore, M. (2009). An investigation into e-tool use for formative assignment assessment–status and recommendations. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 176-192.
Heyvaert, M., Maes, B., & Onghena, P. (2013). Mixed methods research synthesis: definition, framework, and potential. Quality & Quantity, 47(2), 659-676.
Hou, H. T., Chang, K. E., & Sung, Y. T. (2007). An analysis of peer assessment online discussions within a course that uses project-based learning. Interactive learning environments, 15(3), 237-251.
Hubalovsky, S., Hubalovska, M., & Musilek, M. (2019). Assessment of the influence of adaptive E-learning on learning effectiveness of primary school pupils. Computers in Human Behavior, 92, 691-705.
Huisman, B., Admiraal, W., Pilli, O., van de Ven, M., & Saab, N. (2018). Peer assessment in MOOCs: The relationship between peer reviewers’ ability and authors’ essay performance. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(1), 101-110.
Kay, R. H. (2006). Developing a comprehensive metric for assessing discussion board effectiveness. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37(5), 761-783.
Klisc, C., McGill, T., & Hobbs, V. (2009). The effect of assessment on the outcomes of asynchronous online discussion as perceived by instructors. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(5), 666-682.
Kurucay, M., & Inan, F. A. (2017). Examining the effects of learner-learner interactions on satisfaction and learning in an online undergraduate course. Computers & Education, 115, 20-37.
Lee, Y. H., Hsieh, Y. C., & Hsu, C. N. (2011). Adding innovation diffusion theory to the technology acceptance model: Supporting employees' intentions to use e-learning systems. Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 14(4), 124-137.
Lehmann, T., H€ahnlein, I., & Ifenthaler, D. (2014). Cognitive, metacognitive and motivational perspectives on preflection in self-regulated online learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 32, 313-323.
Li, L., Liu, X., & Steckelberg, A. L. (2010). Assessor or assessee: How student learning improves by giving and receiving peer feedback. British journal of educational technology, 41(3), 525-536.
Liaw, S.-S., Huang, H.-M., & Chen, G.-D. (2007), Surveying instructor and learner attitudes toward e-learning, Computers & Education, 49 (4), 1066-80.
Lin, J. W., Tsai, C. W., Hsu, C. C., & Chang, L. C. (2019). Peer assessment with group awareness tools and effects on project-based learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 29 (4), 583-589.
Louhab, F. E., Bahnasse, A., & Talea, M. (2018). Towards an adaptive formative assessment in context-aware mobile learning. Procedia Computer Science, 135, 441-448.
Macdonald, J., & Twining, P. (2002). Assessing activity–based learning for a networked course. British journal of educational technology, 33(5), 603-618.
Marriott, P. (2009). Students' evaluation of the use of online summative assessment on an undergraduate financial accounting module. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2), 237-254.
Martin, F., Ritzhaupt, A., Kumar, S., & Budhrani, K. (2019). Award-winning faculty online teaching practices: Course design, assessment and evaluation, and facilitation. The Internet and Higher Education, 42, 34-43.
Martínez‐Caro, E. (2011). Factors affecting effectiveness in e‐learning: An analysis in production management courses. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 19(3), 572-581.
Milne, J., Heinrich, E., & Morrison, D. (2008). Technological support for assignment assessment: A New Zealand higher education survey. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(5), 487-504.
Mora, M. C., Sancho-Bru, J. L., Iserte, J. L., & Sánchez, F. T. (2012). An e-assessment approach for evaluation in engineering overcrowded groups. Computers & Education, 59(2), 732-740.
Muller, K., Gradel, K., Deane, S., Forte, M., McCabe, R., Pickett, A. M., Piorkowski, R., Scalzo, K., & Sullivan, R. (2019, October). Assessing student learning in the online modality (Occasional Paper No. 40). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois and Indiana University, National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment (NILOA).
Nicol, D. (2007). Laying a foundation for lifelong learning: Case studies of e‐assessment in large 1st‐year classes. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(4), 668-678.
Olt, M. R. (2002). Ethics and distance education: Strategies for minimizing academic dishonesty in online assessment. Online journal of distance learning administration, 5(3), 1-7.
Orlando, J. (2011). How to effectively assess online learning. Magna Publications.
Palmer, S., Holt, D., & Bray, S. (2008). Does the discussion help? The impact of a formally assessed online discussion on final student results. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 847-858.
Paton, R. M., Fluck, A. E., & Scanlan, J. D. (2018). Engagement and retention in VET MOOCs and online courses: A systematic review of literature from 2013 to 2017. Computers & Education, 125, 191-201.
Perera-Diltz, D. M., & Moe, J. L. (2014). Formative and summative assessment in online education. Journal of research in innovative teaching, 7(1), 130-142.
Rovai, A. P. (2000). Online and traditional assessments: what is the difference? The Internet and Higher Education, 3(3), 141-151.
Sekendiz, B. (2018). Utilisation of formative peer-assessment in distance online education: a case study of a multi-model sport management unit. Interactive Learning Environments, 26(5), 682-694.
Shosha, G. A. (2012). Employment of Colaizzi's strategy in descriptive phenomenology: A reflection of a researcher. European Scientific Journal, 8(27), 31-43.
Spector, J. M., Ifenthaler, D., Samspon, D., Yang, L., Mukama, E., Warusavitarana, A., ... Gibson, D. C. (2016). Technology enhanced formative assessment for 21st century learning. Educational Technology & Society, 19(3), 58–71.
Sun, P. C., Tsai, R. J., Finger, G., Chen, Y. Y., & Yeh, D. (2008). What drives a successful e-Learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction. Computers & education, 50(4), 1183-1202.
Tempelaar, D., Rienties, B., Mittelmeier, J., & Nguyen, Q. (2018). Student profiling in a dispositional learning analytics application using formative assessment. Computers in Human Behavior, 78, 408-420.
Thomas, G., Martin, D., & Pleasants, K. (2011). Using self-and peer-assessment to enhance students' future-learning in higher education. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 8(1), 1-17.
Tíjaro-Rojas, R., Arce-Trigatti, A., Cupp, J., Pascal, J., & Arce, P. E. (2016). A Systematic and Integrative Sequence Approach (SISA) for mastery learning: Anchoring Bloom's Revised Taxonomy to student learning. Education for Chemical Engineers, 17, 31-43.
Van der Kleij, F., Feskens, R., & Eggen, T. (2015). Effects of feedback in a computer-based learning environment on students' learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85(4), 475–511.
Vanitha, V., Krishnan, P., & Elakkiya, R. (2019). Collaborative optimization algorithm for learning path construction in E-learning. Computers & Electrical Engineering, 77, 325-338.
Wang, P., & Jeffrey, R. (2017). Listening to learners: An investigation into college students’ attitudes towards the adoption of e‐portfolios in English assessment and learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(6), 1451-1463.
Wang, T. H. (2011). Implementation of Web-based dynamic assessment in facilitating junior high school students to learn mathematics. Computers & Education, 56(4), 1062-1071.
Wang, T. H. (2014). Developing an assessment-centered e-Learning system for improving student learning effectiveness. Computers & Education, 73, 189-203.
Webb, M., Gibson, D., & Forkosh‐Baruch, A. (2013). Challenges for information technology supporting educational assessment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(5), 451-462.
Weleschuk, A., Dyjur, P., & Kelly, P. (2019). Online Assessment in Higher Education. Taylor Institute for Teaching and Learning Guide Series. Calgary, AB: Taylor Institute for Teaching and Learning at the University of Calgary.
Wirihana, L., Welch, A., Williamson, M., Christensen, M., Bakon, S., & Craft, J. (2018). Using Colaizzi’s method of data analysis to explore the experiences of nurse academics teaching on satellite campuses. Nurse Researcher, 25(4), 30-34.
Yang, M., Tai, M., & Lim, C. P. (2016). The role of e‐portfolios in supporting productive learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(6), 1276-1286.
Yastibas, A. E., & Yastibas, G. C. (2015). The use of e-portfolio-based assessment to develop students’ self-regulated learning in English language teaching. Procedia-social and behavioral sciences, 176, 3-13.
Zareisaroukolaei, M., Shams, G., Rezaeizadeh, M., ghahremani, M. (2020). Determinants of e-learning effectiveness: A qualitative study on the instructor. Research in Teaching, 8(2), 55-79.
Zareisaroukolaei, M., Shams, G., Rezaeizadeh, M., ghahramani, M. (2021). Factors affecting the effectiveness of e-learning: Phenomenological analysis of learner characteristics. Studies in Learning & instruction, 13(1), 181-202.