Using Self-Assessment to Improve College Students’ Engagement and Performance in Introductory Genetics

Year 2013, Volume: 7 Issue: 2, 1 - 17, 01.12.2013

Mehmet Aydeniz Michael A. Gilchrist

https://doi.org/10.12973/nefmed200

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to explore the role of structured self-assessment in receiving feedback on students’ perceptions of classroom instruction, the learning strategies they use, and the type of instructional support they need to comprehend the course material in a 90-student college sophomore genetics course. The results indicate that weekly-administered structured self-assessments make a range of information accessible to the professor and engage students in self-reflection about their learning and the teaching strategies used in the classroom. Preliminary statistical analysis of participation in self-assessment and student performance on exams suggest that self-assessments have a moderately positive effect on student performance. Our discussion focuses on the challenges and opportunities presented to the course professor while administering and evaluating self-assessments. Finally, we discuss the role of technology in facilitating students’ effective engagement with self-assessment

Keywords

self-assessment, college science, instruction, genetics

Using Self-Assessment to Improve College Students’ Engagement and Performance in Introductory Genetics

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, öz-değerlendirmenin üniversite öğrencilerinin genetik dersindeki derse etkin
katılımı ve dersteki başarıları üzerindeki etkilerini araştırmaktır. Bu çalışmaya 90 üniversite öğrencisi katılmıştır.
Bu araştırmanın sonucunda öz-değerlendirmenin dersin hocasına ve öğrencilere çeşitli yararlı bilgilere
ulaşmasında katkı sağladığı görülmüştür. Öz-değerlendirmeler sayesinde öğrenciler, konuyla ilgili değişik
zayıflıklarının farkına varma şansı elde edebilmiş ve bu zayıflıklarını gidermek için değişik çalışma metotları
hakkında düşünme aktivitelerine girişmişlerdir. Ders hocası öğrencilerden aldığı dönütler sayesinde kullandığı
öğretim metotlarının etkinliği ve öğrencilere faydası hakkında değişik bilgilere sahip olma şansı yakalamıştır.
Öğretim görevlisi bu bilgileri kullanarak derslerini daha etkili metotlar kullanarak anlatmak için motive
olmuştur. öz-değerlendirme her ne kadar öğrencilerin basarisi üzerinde olumlu bir etki yapsa da bu etki istatiksel
olarak anlamlı bir etki değil. Öğretim görevlisinin öz-değerlendirmeleri uygulama ve sonuçlarını kullanma
aşamasında yaşamış olduğu sorunlar hakkında bilgi verilmektedir. Bu noktada teknolojinin bu sureci
kolaylaştırma ve etkinleştirmesindeki rolü tartışılmıştır.

Keywords

öz-değerlendirme, üniversite fen dersi, öğretim, genetik.

References

• Aydeniz, M. (2007). Understanding the challenges of enacting assessment reform in public high school science classrooms. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL.
• Aydeniz, M & Pabuccu, A. (2011). Understanding the impact of formative assessment strategies on first year university students’ conceptual understanding of chemical concepts, Necatibey Faculty of Education, Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5(2), 18-41.
• Airasian, P. W. (2001). Classroom assessment: Concepts and applications (4thed.). Boston: McGraw Hill.
• Andrade, H., & Valtcheva, A. (2009). Promoting learning and achievement through self- assessment. Theory into Practice, 48(1), 12-19.
• Balinsky, M. G. (2007). Forging an identity: Four science doctoral students in a collaborative partnership with K-12 science teachers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Tallahassee, FL.
• Beatty, I. D., & Gerace, W. J. (2009). Technology-enhanced formative assessment: A research-based pedagogy for teaching science with classroom response technology. Journal of Science Education & Technology, 18(2), 146-162.
• Berry, R. & Adamson, B. (Eds.) (2011). Assessment Reform in Education: Policy and Practice. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
• Berry, R. (2008). Assessment for learning. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
• Berry, R. (2006). Activating learners using the learner autonomy approach: An action research on the relevance of teaching to classroom practice. Curriculum Perspectives, 26(3), 34–43.
• Black, P., & William, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 139-148.
• Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., &William, D. (2003). Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
• Bloxam, S. & Boyd, P. (2007). Developing effective assessment in higher education: a practical guide. Berkshire: Open Link Press.
• Dawson, D., Meadows, K., & Haffie T. (2010). The effect of performance feedback on student help-seeking and learning strategy use: Do clickers make a difference? The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 1(1).Retrieved from http://ir.lib.uwo.ca/cjsotl_rcacea/vol1/iss1/6/
• Furtak, E. M., & Ruiz-Primo, M. A. (2008). Making students' thinking explicit in writing and discussion: An analysis of formative assessment prompts. Science Education, 92, 799- 824.
• Gopal, T., Herron, S. S., Mohn, R. S., Hartsell, T., Jawor, J. M., & Blickenstaff, J. S. (2010). Effect of an interactive web-based instruction in the performance of undergraduate anatomy and physiology lab students. Computers & Education, 55, 500 - 512. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.013.
• Kearney, S. P., & Perkins T. (2010, Nov). Developing students’ capacity for innovation, creativity and critical thinking through contemporary forms of assessment: a case study in progress. Paper presented at ATN Assessment Conference, University of Technology, Sydney.
• Lin, H.-S., Hong, Z.-R., Wang, H.-H., & Lee, S.-T. (2011). Using reflective peer assessment to promote students' conceptual understanding through asynchronous discussions. Educational Technology & Society, 14 (3), 178–189.
• McMillan, J. H., &. Hearn, J. (2009). Student self-assessment: the key to stronger student motivation and higher achievement. The Education Digest, 74, 39-44.
• National Research Council [NRC]. (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
• Rissing, S.W. & Cogan, J.G. (2009). Can an inquiry approach improve college student learning in a teaching laboratory? CBE Life Science Education, 8, 55-61.
• Ross, J.A. (2006). The reliability, validity, and utility of self-assessment. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 11(10), 1-13
• Schunk, D. H. (2001). Social cognitive theory and self-regulated learning. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives(2nd ed., pp. 125–151). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Siebert, E. D. (2001). Science education program standards. In E.D.Siebert & W.J .McIntosh (Eds.), College pathways to the science education standards (pp. 115–138). Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association Press.
• Stiggins, R. J. (2004). Classroom assessment for student learning. Portland, OR: Assessment Training Institute.
• Sundström, A. (2004). Self-assessment of knowledge and abilities – a literature study. (Em no 54). Umeå university: Department of Educational Measurement.
• Schunk, D. H. (1996). Goal and self-evaluative influences during children's cognitive skill learning. American Educational Research Journal, 33(2), 359-382.
• Taylor, P., Gilmer, P., & Tobin, K. (Eds) (2002). Transforming undergraduate science teaching: Social constructivist perspectives. New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing
• Zoller, U., Tsapaiiis, G., Fatsow, M., & Lubezky, A. (1997).Student self-assessment of higher-order cognitive skills in college science teaching. Journal of College Science Teaching, 27(2), 99-101.