Adding confidence to knowledge
Main Article Content
Abstract
This paper reviews knowledge surveys as a best practice in assessment and illustrates how this assessment tool was used to compare teaching methods and its value to students during a 5-year study. The goal was to improve assessment, active learning, and course design. On each survey, students rated a type of confidence known as self-efficacy before and after instruction, used the survey as a study guide during instruction, and rated its value at the end of the course. Results showed gains in self-efficacy (p<.001), high value for the survey experience, and differences in scores across teaching methods (p<.001).
Downloads
Article Details
- Authors retain copyright and grant the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (JoSoTL) right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License, (CC-BY) 4.0 International, allowing others to share the work with proper acknowledgement and citation of the work's authorship and initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
- Authors are able to enter separate, additional contractual agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
- In pursuit of manuscripts of the highest quality, multiple opportunities for mentoring, and greater reach and citation of JoSoTL publications, JoSoTL encourages authors to share their drafts to seek feedback from relevant communities unless the manuscript is already under review or in the publication queue after being accepted. In other words, to be eligible for publication in JoSoTL, manuscripts should not be shared publicly (e.g., online), while under review (after being initially submitted, or after being revised and resubmitted for reconsideration), or upon notice of acceptance and before publication. Once published, authors are strongly encouraged to share the published version widely, with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
References
Anderson, L.W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Addison, Wesley, Longman, Inc.
Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In T. Urdan & F. Pajares (Eds.), Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adolescents, (pp. 307-337). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Bell, P., & Volckmann, D. (2011). Knowledge surveys in general chemistry: Confidence, overconfidence, and performance. Journal of Chemical Education, 88(11), 1469-1476. doi: 10.1021/ed100328c
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, the classification of educational goals—Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Company, Inc.
Bowers, N., Brandon, M., & Hill, C.D. (2005). The use of a knowledge survey as an indicator of student learning in an introductory biology course. Cell Biology Education: a Journal of Life Science Education, 4(4), 311-322. doi: 10.1187/cbe.04-11-0056
Chickering, A. W. & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. American Association of Higher Education Bulletin, 39, 3-7.
Clark, R. E., Feldon, D. van Merriënboer, J. J. G., Yates, K. & Early, S. (2007). Cognitive task analysis. In J.M. Spector, M.D. Merrill, J.J.G. van Merriënboer, & M.P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Clauss, J. (2006). Moodle questionnaire. Retrieved from http://dmc.augustana.edu/KS/KSFinMA329.pdf
Clauss, J., & Geedey, K. (2010). Knowledge surveys: Students ability to self-assess. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(2), 14-24.
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).
Fink, D. L. (2007). The power of course design to increase student engagement and learning. Peer Review, 9(1).
Fleisher, S.C. (2008). Knowledge survey: Psychology 211 Survey of Psychology (Cognition and Learning). Retrieved from http://familymedicine.medschool.ucsf.edu/paetc/resources/asilomar_2009/psychology.pdf
Feldon, D. F. & Stowe, K. (2009). A case study of instruction from experts: Why does cognitive task analysis make a difference? Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning, 7, 103-120.
Frary, M. (2009). Knowledge surveys. Retrieved from http://scholarworks.boisestate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=ctl_teaching
Gagné, R. M. (1974). Task analysis—its relation to content analysis. Educational Psychologist, 11(1). doi:10.1080/00461527409529118
Gagné, R. M. (1977). Analysis of objectives. In L.J. Briggs, (Ed.), Instructional Design: Principles and Applications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Gagné, R. M., Wager, W. W., Golas, K., Keller, J. M. (2005). Principles of instructional design, (5th Ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
Gilpin, L. (2013). Enhancing teaching and learning. Mountain Rise: The International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 8(1).
Girgis, M. (2010). A new engineering taxonomy for assessing conceptual and problem-solving skills. Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Conference, USA, AC 2010-1793.
Harper, S. P. (2007). Instructional design for affective learning in online nursing education. (Doctoral dissertation). Capella University. Retrieved from http://udini.proquest.com/view/instructional-design-for-affective-goid:304722378/
Herman, J. L. (2013). Formative assessment for next generation science standards: A proposed model. Resource Paper No. 16. National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing. Retrieved at https://www.cse.ucla.edu/products/resource/cresst_resource16.pdf
Johnson, E. (2009). Formative and summative assessment. Retrieved at http://www.education.com/reference/article/formative-and-summative-assessment/
Jonassen, D. H., Tessmer, M., & Hannum, W. H. (1999). Task analysis methods for instructional design. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kasunic, M. (2005). Designing an effective survey. Carnegie Mellon University. Retrieved at http://www.sei.cmu.edu/reports/05hb004.pdf
Keller, J. M. (2000, February). Applying the ARCS model of motivational design. Paper presented at VII Semanario, Santiago, Cuba.
Keller, J. M. (2010). Motivational design for learning and performance: The ARCS model approach. New York, NY: Springer.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(4).
Marshall, S. & Nuhfer, E. B. (2013, November). Knowledge surveys and course-based learning outcomes for soil science courses. Presentation at Soil Science Society of America Symposium, Tampa, Florida.
Merrill, M.D. (2009). What makes e3 (effective, efficient and engaging) instruction? Presented at World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2009. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/31461
Moseley, D., Baumfield, V., Elliott, J., Higgins, S., Miller, J., Newton, D. P., & Gregson, M. (2005). Frameworks for thinking: A handbook for teaching and learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Nilson, L. B. (2013). Creating Self-Regulated Learners: Strategies to Strengthen Student SelfAwareness and Learning Skills. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing, LLC.
Nuhfer, E. (n.d.). Knowledge surveys (KS). MERLOT ELIXR. California State University Channel Islands. Retrieved from http://elixr.merlot.org/assessment-evaluation/knowledgesurveys/knowledge-surveys2
Nuhfer, E. & Knipp, D. (2003). The knowledge survey: A tool for all reasons. To Improve the Academy, 21, 59-78.
Nuhfer, E. B. & Knipp, D. (2006). Re: The use of a knowledge survey as an indicator of student learning in an introductory biology course. CBE Life Science Education, 5(4): 313–314. doi: 10.1187/cbe.06-05-0166
Panadero, E. & Alonso-Tapia, J. (2014). How do students self-regulate? Review of Zimmerman’s cyclical model of self-regulated learning. Anales de Psicología, 30(2), 450-462.
Price, B. A. & Randall, C. H. (2008, May/June). Assessing learning outcomes in quantitative courses: Using embedded questions for direct assessment, Journal of Education for Business, 288-294. doi: 10.3200/JOEB.83.5.288-294#preview
Sawchuk, S. (2013). Combined measures better at gauging teacher effectiveness, study finds. Education Week, 32(17), 1-16.
Shepard, L. A. (2005, October). Formative assessment: Caveat emptor. Presented at ETS Invitational Conference: The Future of Assessment: Shaping Teaching and Learning, New York.
Smith, P. L. & Ragan, T. J. (2005). Instructional design (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Strayhorn, T. L. (2006). Frameworks for assessing learning and development outcomes. Retrieved from Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education website: http://nau.edu/Student-Affairs/_Forms/FALDO/
Sweller, J., & Chandler, P. (1994). Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition & Instruction, 12(3), 185-233.
Tullis, T. & Dumas, J. (2009, May). Rating scales: What the research says. Presented at the Boston Usability Professionals' Association Mini-UPA Conference. Retrieved from http://www.measuringuserexperience.com/Mini_UPA-Dumas-Tullis.ppt
Vanags, T., Pammer, K., Brinker, J. (2013). Process-oriented guided-inquiry learning improves long-term retention of information. Advances in Physiology Education, 37, 233-241. doi: 10.1152/advan.00104.2012
Wirth, K. R. & Perkins, D. (2005). Knowledge surveys: An indispensable course design and assessment tool. Innovations in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. Retrieved from http://www.macalester.edu/geology/wirth/WirthPerkinsKS.pdf
Yeasmin, S. & Rahman, K. F. (2012). ‘Triangulation’ research method as the tool of social science research. Bangladesh University of Professionals Journal, 1(1), 154-163.