Evaluation of Two Quiz Response Formats: Effects on Student Perceptions and Achievement
The purpose of this study was to investigate two modes of student response to course quizzes; Scantron sheets, which provide students with delayed feedback, and Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique (IF-AT) cards, which provide students with immediate feedback regarding the accuracy of their respo...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | NACTA journal 2017-06, Vol.61 (2), p.157-161 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 161 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 157 |
| container_title | NACTA journal |
| container_volume | 61 |
| creator | Shoulders, Catherine W. Johnson, Donald M. Wiedenmann, Robert N. |
| description | The purpose of this study was to investigate two modes of student response to course quizzes; Scantron sheets, which provide students with delayed feedback, and Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique (IF-AT) cards, which provide students with immediate feedback regarding the accuracy of their responses. Results indicated no difference in knowledge gained between students using Scantron or IF-AT cards, but did display a difference in student perceptions regarding the quiz response formats. Students using the IF-AT cards were more positive in their attitudes toward their quiz response method than were students in the Scantron group, indicating they liked the immediate feedback, opportunities for content learning, correction of misconceptions, and increased confidence they received while taking the quizzes. We recommend instructors consider using IF-AT cards when seeking methods to improve student satisfaction of a course, as they improved student perceptions without negatively impacting student learning. |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2001049825</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A498129782</galeid><jstor_id>90021197</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>A498129782</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-g895-4881fe79311521dc1b755a7bb98db3198fc40aba403488b5cdd4086d5672e8323</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotkF9LwzAUxfOg4Jx-BKHgg0-V_F2SxzE2HQxE6XtJmmSktE1NWkU_vRmV-3Dg8jvncs8VWEFEZUklgjfgNqUWQoywZCvwtP9S3awmH4YiuKL6DsX77H-LD5vGMCRbHELs1ZTuwLVTXbL3_7oG1WFf7V7L09vLcbc9lWchWUmFQM5ySRBiGJkGac6Y4lpLYTRBUriGQqUVhSSjmjXGUCg2hm04toJgsgaPS-wYw-ds01S3YY5DvlhjCBGkUmCWqeeFOqvO1n5wYYqqyWNs75swWOfzfpvh_CQXl9iHxdCmKcR6jL5X8aeWlxqQ5OQPeP5TKg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2001049825</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluation of Two Quiz Response Formats: Effects on Student Perceptions and Achievement</title><source>Education Source</source><source>JSTOR</source><creator>Shoulders, Catherine W. ; Johnson, Donald M. ; Wiedenmann, Robert N.</creator><creatorcontrib>Shoulders, Catherine W. ; Johnson, Donald M. ; Wiedenmann, Robert N.</creatorcontrib><description>The purpose of this study was to investigate two modes of student response to course quizzes; Scantron sheets, which provide students with delayed feedback, and Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique (IF-AT) cards, which provide students with immediate feedback regarding the accuracy of their responses. Results indicated no difference in knowledge gained between students using Scantron or IF-AT cards, but did display a difference in student perceptions regarding the quiz response formats. Students using the IF-AT cards were more positive in their attitudes toward their quiz response method than were students in the Scantron group, indicating they liked the immediate feedback, opportunities for content learning, correction of misconceptions, and increased confidence they received while taking the quizzes. We recommend instructors consider using IF-AT cards when seeking methods to improve student satisfaction of a course, as they improved student perceptions without negatively impacting student learning.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0149-4910</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Twin Falls: North American Colleges and Teachers of Agriculture (NACTA)</publisher><subject>Academic achievement ; Agricultural education ; Agriculture ; Answer Sheets ; Beliefs, opinions and attitudes ; Cards ; Educational tests ; Experimental psychology ; Feedback ; Influence ; Learning ; Learning Strategies ; Learning Theories ; Methods ; Observations ; Researchers ; Student attitudes ; Students ; Studies ; Teachers ; Teaching methods ; Undergraduate Students</subject><ispartof>NACTA journal, 2017-06, Vol.61 (2), p.157-161</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2017 North American Colleges and Teachers of Agriculture (NACTA)</rights><rights>Copyright North American Colleges and Teachers of Agriculture Jun 2017</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/90021197$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/90021197$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,782,786,805,58026,58259</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Shoulders, Catherine W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnson, Donald M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wiedenmann, Robert N.</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluation of Two Quiz Response Formats: Effects on Student Perceptions and Achievement</title><title>NACTA journal</title><description>The purpose of this study was to investigate two modes of student response to course quizzes; Scantron sheets, which provide students with delayed feedback, and Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique (IF-AT) cards, which provide students with immediate feedback regarding the accuracy of their responses. Results indicated no difference in knowledge gained between students using Scantron or IF-AT cards, but did display a difference in student perceptions regarding the quiz response formats. Students using the IF-AT cards were more positive in their attitudes toward their quiz response method than were students in the Scantron group, indicating they liked the immediate feedback, opportunities for content learning, correction of misconceptions, and increased confidence they received while taking the quizzes. We recommend instructors consider using IF-AT cards when seeking methods to improve student satisfaction of a course, as they improved student perceptions without negatively impacting student learning.</description><subject>Academic achievement</subject><subject>Agricultural education</subject><subject>Agriculture</subject><subject>Answer Sheets</subject><subject>Beliefs, opinions and attitudes</subject><subject>Cards</subject><subject>Educational tests</subject><subject>Experimental psychology</subject><subject>Feedback</subject><subject>Influence</subject><subject>Learning</subject><subject>Learning Strategies</subject><subject>Learning Theories</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Observations</subject><subject>Researchers</subject><subject>Student attitudes</subject><subject>Students</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Teachers</subject><subject>Teaching methods</subject><subject>Undergraduate Students</subject><issn>0149-4910</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNotkF9LwzAUxfOg4Jx-BKHgg0-V_F2SxzE2HQxE6XtJmmSktE1NWkU_vRmV-3Dg8jvncs8VWEFEZUklgjfgNqUWQoywZCvwtP9S3awmH4YiuKL6DsX77H-LD5vGMCRbHELs1ZTuwLVTXbL3_7oG1WFf7V7L09vLcbc9lWchWUmFQM5ySRBiGJkGac6Y4lpLYTRBUriGQqUVhSSjmjXGUCg2hm04toJgsgaPS-wYw-ds01S3YY5DvlhjCBGkUmCWqeeFOqvO1n5wYYqqyWNs75swWOfzfpvh_CQXl9iHxdCmKcR6jL5X8aeWlxqQ5OQPeP5TKg</recordid><startdate>20170601</startdate><enddate>20170601</enddate><creator>Shoulders, Catherine W.</creator><creator>Johnson, Donald M.</creator><creator>Wiedenmann, Robert N.</creator><general>North American Colleges and Teachers of Agriculture (NACTA)</general><general>North American Colleges and Teachers of Agriculture</general><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PADUT</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20170601</creationdate><title>Evaluation of Two Quiz Response Formats</title><author>Shoulders, Catherine W. ; Johnson, Donald M. ; Wiedenmann, Robert N.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-g895-4881fe79311521dc1b755a7bb98db3198fc40aba403488b5cdd4086d5672e8323</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Academic achievement</topic><topic>Agricultural education</topic><topic>Agriculture</topic><topic>Answer Sheets</topic><topic>Beliefs, opinions and attitudes</topic><topic>Cards</topic><topic>Educational tests</topic><topic>Experimental psychology</topic><topic>Feedback</topic><topic>Influence</topic><topic>Learning</topic><topic>Learning Strategies</topic><topic>Learning Theories</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Observations</topic><topic>Researchers</topic><topic>Student attitudes</topic><topic>Students</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Teachers</topic><topic>Teaching methods</topic><topic>Undergraduate Students</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Shoulders, Catherine W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnson, Donald M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wiedenmann, Robert N.</creatorcontrib><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Research Library China</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>NACTA journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Shoulders, Catherine W.</au><au>Johnson, Donald M.</au><au>Wiedenmann, Robert N.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluation of Two Quiz Response Formats: Effects on Student Perceptions and Achievement</atitle><jtitle>NACTA journal</jtitle><date>2017-06-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>61</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>157</spage><epage>161</epage><pages>157-161</pages><issn>0149-4910</issn><abstract>The purpose of this study was to investigate two modes of student response to course quizzes; Scantron sheets, which provide students with delayed feedback, and Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique (IF-AT) cards, which provide students with immediate feedback regarding the accuracy of their responses. Results indicated no difference in knowledge gained between students using Scantron or IF-AT cards, but did display a difference in student perceptions regarding the quiz response formats. Students using the IF-AT cards were more positive in their attitudes toward their quiz response method than were students in the Scantron group, indicating they liked the immediate feedback, opportunities for content learning, correction of misconceptions, and increased confidence they received while taking the quizzes. We recommend instructors consider using IF-AT cards when seeking methods to improve student satisfaction of a course, as they improved student perceptions without negatively impacting student learning.</abstract><cop>Twin Falls</cop><pub>North American Colleges and Teachers of Agriculture (NACTA)</pub><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0149-4910 |
| ispartof | NACTA journal, 2017-06, Vol.61 (2), p.157-161 |
| issn | 0149-4910 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2001049825 |
| source | Education Source; JSTOR |
| subjects | Academic achievement Agricultural education Agriculture Answer Sheets Beliefs, opinions and attitudes Cards Educational tests Experimental psychology Feedback Influence Learning Learning Strategies Learning Theories Methods Observations Researchers Student attitudes Students Studies Teachers Teaching methods Undergraduate Students |
| title | Evaluation of Two Quiz Response Formats: Effects on Student Perceptions and Achievement |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-03T02%3A48%3A33IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluation%20of%20Two%20Quiz%20Response%20Formats:%20Effects%20on%20Student%20Perceptions%20and%20Achievement&rft.jtitle=NACTA%20journal&rft.au=Shoulders,%20Catherine%20W.&rft.date=2017-06-01&rft.volume=61&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=157&rft.epage=161&rft.pages=157-161&rft.issn=0149-4910&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA498129782%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2001049825&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A498129782&rft_jstor_id=90021197&rfr_iscdi=true |