Practical approaches to technology-mediated formative assessment for middle school educators

Mohamad Ahmad Saleem Khasawneh

Article ID: 5241
Vol 8, Issue 9, 2024

VIEWS - 1303 (Abstract)

Abstract


This research quantitatively examines how technology-mediated formative assessment techniques affect student learning outcomes in middle school education. The research investigates the correlation between instructors’ technology use, attitudes, and student performance in several academic disciplines using surveys and evaluations conducted with teachers and students. Results show strong positive connections between how often technology is used, the specific digital tools used, how effective technology-mediated formative assessment is judged to be, and the results of student learning. On the other hand, obstacles to implementation were shown to have a negative relationship with student accomplishment. The research emphasizes that technology-mediated formative assessment is more successful in some subjects, emphasizing the necessity to customize teaching methods for each subject’s requirements. The study revealed a positive correlation between student learning outcomes and the frequency of technology use, the types of digital tools used, and the perceived effectiveness of technology-mediated formative assessment. These results suggest ways to improve the use of technology and formative assessment in middle school instruction.


Keywords


technology-mediated formative assessment; middle school education; student learning outcomes; technology integration

Full Text:

PDF


References

  1. Acuña, A. B., & de Dávila, R. C. (2021). Management of formative assessment and feedback. Revista Iberoamericana de la Educación.
  2. Albadareen, G. S. (2017). Identifying evidence-based teaching strategies that instructors use and practice in their classroom and their relationship with academic performance. New Trends and Issues Proceedings on Humanities and Social Sciences, 4(1), 563–573. https://doi.org/10.18844/prosoc.v4i1.2302
  3. Alnasser, S. M. N. (2018). Exploring Student-Writers’ Views on Replacing Teacher Feedback with Peer Feedback and Computer-Based Feedback. Arab World English Journal, 9(3), 345–366. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol9no3.23
  4. Belessova, D., Ibashova, A., Bosova, L., et al. (2023). Digital Learning Ecosystem: Current State, Prospects, and Hurdles. Open Education Studies, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1515/edu-2022-0179
  5. Bonner, S., Chen, P., Jones, K., et al. (2021). Formative Assessment of Computational Thinking: Cognitive and Metacognitive Processes. Applied Measurement in Education, 34(1), 27–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2020.1835912
  6. Burke, D. (2014). “Feedback was very helpful”: the benefits of feedback on drafts for students learning. DISKUS, 14(0). https://doi.org/10.18792/diskus.v14i0.18
  7. Cagasan, L., Care, E., Robertson, P., et al. (2020). Developing a Formative Assessment Protocol to Examine Formative Assessment Practices in the Philippines. Educational Assessment, 25(4), 259–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2020.1766960
  8. Chanpet, P., Chomsuwan, K., & Murphy, E. (2018). Online Project-Based Learning and Formative Assessment. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 25(3), 685–705. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9363-2
  9. Fernando, W. (2020). Moodle quizzes and their usability for formative assessment of academic writing. Assessing Writing, 46, 100485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100485
  10. Gaddis, M. L. (2020). Faculty and Student Technology Use to Enhance Student Learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(4), 39–60. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v21i3.4600
  11. Goertzen, L., Schils, T., & Heeneman, S. (2023). Co-designing formative assessment practices: A collaboration between elementary school teachers and researchers to conceptualize and implement formative assessment as a unified practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 134, 104306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104306
  12. Grier, D., Lindt, S. F., & Miller, S. C. (2021). Formative Assessment with Game-based Technology. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 5(2), 193–202. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijtes.97
  13. Hamouma, C., & Menezla, N. (2019). The Impact of Digital Literacy Proficiency on EFL Students’ Academic Writing Performance. International Journal of Digital Literacy and Digital Competence, 10(4), 40–55. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijdldc.2019100103
  14. Henseruk, H. R., & Martyniuk, S. V. (2020). DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES OF FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT. Innovate Pedagogy, 2(30), 155–158. https://doi.org/10.32843/2663-6085/2020/30-2.31
  15. Hutain, J., & Michinov, N. (2022). Collective feedback based on quizzes in online learning: a “double-edged sword” effect on attitude to courses, emotions, and academic behaviors. Interactive Learning Environments, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2131831
  16. López García, N. J. (2022). Kahoot! Plickers And Socrative: ICT resources to assess musical content in Primary Education. Apertura, 14(1), 6–25. https://doi.org/10.32870/ap.v14n1.2134
  17. Montiel, J. T. (2013). A Win-Win Metacognitive Formative Assessment: The Self Evaluation Exercise. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2245730
  18. Naik, G., Chitre, C., Bhalla, M., et al. (2020). Impact of use of technology on student learning outcomes: Evidence from a large-scale experiment in India. World Development, 127, 104736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104736
  19. Nicholas, H., & Ng, W. (2019). Mobile Digital Literacy of Australian Adolescent Students. International Journal of Digital Literacy and Digital Competence, 10(3), 32–48. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijdldc.2019070103
  20. Piaget, J. (1964). Part I: Cognitive development in children: Piaget development and learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2(3), 176–186. Portico. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660020306
  21. Prasetyo, M. M., & Nurhidayah, N. (2021). The Effect of Internet Use on Improving Student Learning Outcomes. Journal of Education Technology, 5(4), 511–519. https://doi.org/10.23887/jet.v5i4.40748
  22. Salo, A.-E., & Kajamies, A. (2024). Teacher candidates’ preparedness to address diverse situations that can threaten pupils’ well-being. Teaching and Teacher Education, 140, 104470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104470
  23. Sheard, M. K., & Chambers, B. (2014). A case of technology-enhanced formative assessment and achievement in primary grammar: How is quality assurance of formative assessment assured? Studies in Educational Evaluation, 43, 14–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2014.02.001
  24. Smith, L. (2017). Expanding Educational Technology Applications for Formative Assessment in Legal Education. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3028671
  25. Veerasamy, A. K., Laakso, M.-J., & D’Souza, D. (2021). Formative assessment tasks as indicators of student engagement for predicting at-risk students in programming courses. Informatics in Education. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2022.15
  26. Yan, Z., & Pastore, S. (2022). Assessing Teachers’ Strategies in Formative Assessment: The Teacher Formative Assessment Practice Scale. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 40(5), 592–604. https://doi.org/10.1177/07342829221075121


DOI: https://doi.org/10.24294/jipd.v8i9.5241

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2024 Mohamad Ahmad Saleem Khasawneh

License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.