April 6, 2024
We just published an article in the International Journal of Engineering Education on multiple chance testing in an engineering course.
A. Kaw, R. Clark, “Effects of Standards-Based Testing via Multiple-Chance Testing on Cognitive and Affective Outcomes in an Engineering Course,” International Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 40, (2), 2024, pp. 303-321.
The article is behind a paywall, but you can ask me to send a preprint.
In this article, we explore the concept of standards-based grading and its potential benefits for student learning. We also discussed my reservations about adopting standards-based grading in a large enrollment class and proposed an alternative approach, standards-based testing with multiple-chance testing. The findings of our study indicate that implementing multiple-chance testing resulted in higher student performance, more ‘A’ grades, and a more positive classroom environment. Students appreciated the enhanced learning experience, the opportunity for retakes, and the reduced stress associated with standards-based testing. However, some students mentioned the issue of not knowing their ongoing overall grade in the course. I believe that this manuscript will be of interest to your readers, as it provides a practical approach to implementing standards-based grading principles in large enrollment classes. It also raises important questions about using multiple-chance testing and its potential advantages and drawbacks for students and instructors.
Abstract: Multiple-chance testing was used to conduct standards-based testing in a blended-format numerical methods course for engineering undergraduates. The process involved giving multiple chances on tests and post-class learning management system quizzes. The effectiveness of standards-based testing was evaluated through various forms of assessment, including an analysis of cognitive and affective outcomes, and compared to a blended classroom that did not use standards-based testing. Based on a two-part final exam, a concept inventory, final course grades, a classroom environment inventory, and focus groups, the results showed that standards-based testing had overall positive effects. Standards-based testing was associated with a more significant percentage of students (15% vs. 3%) earning a high final exam score, a higher proportion of A grades (36% vs. 27%), and a better classroom environment on dimensions of involvement, cohesiveness, and satisfaction. Focus group discussions revealed that students appreciated the benefits of enhanced learning, second chances, and reduced stress with standards-based testing. The study also included an analysis of the impact of standards based testing on underrepresented minorities, Pell Grant recipients (low socioeconomic groups), and low-GPA students, as well as an examination of test-retaking behaviors. The methodology and comprehensive results of the study are presented in this paper.