Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Citation preview
Creatively engaged online: student-generated content in anon-majors introductory course
Emily Altiere, Simon Bates, Firas Moosvi Department of Physics and AstronomyUniversity of British Columbia
AAPT Summer Meeting, July 2013, Portland OR
Monday, 15 July, 13
Outline
• Design and Methodology
• Engagement
• Question/Explanation Quality
Monday, 15 July, 13
a"web&based"MCQ"repository"created"by"students"Monday, 15 July, 13
Ins$tu$ons((signing(up(per(year:(!
2009:! ! !22(2010:! ! !66(2011:! ! !204(2012:! ! !266(2013!(Jan,Jun):! !214(
Growing(content(repository:(!Courses:! !2,500(Logins/month:! !75,000(Ques<ons:! !600,000(Answers:! !12,000,000(
Monday, 15 July, 13
Student'ownership'over'learning'resource'
Student'familiarity'with'social'so7ware'
Leveraging'student'energy'and'crea9vity'
Monday, 15 July, 13
Design and Methodology
Minimum participation requirements for each of two assessment exercises (PW1, PW2)
Write 1 Answer 5 Rate / comment 3
5% course credit
Physics 101, Energy & WavesWinter Semester: 3 sections, 791 students
Monday, 15 July, 13
Design and MethodologyTOCCLT'.' -
Qest\I\sct
How 1o...
q/t4osTer
Submit ond onswer questionson topics in lhe torget region,just obove lhe physicsyou hove olreody mostered.
Dislroclers
) l*"*"ò
rNrrltngIh s region corrk:ins llte
plrysics knowledgo ond colrco¡lsyou connol leorn yel
becouse the louncalionscrrc nol in plocc
PHYSICS TOPICS IN YOUR TARG T REGION
buo'5ot't1 'Den¡¡lu
B¿:o\v\vì 1 JF:rcq - YOUR CHOSEN TOPIC
à..\auC'q^ x@bôo'osro
pn ro, d logroo, \o 9tS
COMMON MISCONCEPÎIONS AND ERRORS(Sec hHÞ:/jÞhy¡.udofo¡.cdu/CJP/trêconcoÞllo¡t.pdt
tor o llil ol common mhconcepllons)
¿K N(,qht %cce Açxs no\ exi¡þ, c.rrrçr\J On oblec'-t \5 õÞYJrnr cìü?ÀI in rtuiò. ü
lrh'brot4ont eprç,e .I¡1enÀs crqden-s,\{^ c>Ç c.,þ¡ec\ , cìo+ .\*¿n:r
oÇ Çtu,8,fr- btrrqon! $crCe c¿c\s Àoc¡:'cr
fr¿lt{e- r *hcrn ú?
Trr¿e. $ììfifflsz hrrr: ¿lÕoolr-g lnnS
(**= tcpo þ/rnl {otr-* qrÇ bq.\\:. 0" Ooz
Physics knowledgeond conccpluol underslonding
you lrove olrcodyconslrucleC ¡n your heod
¡,<'t.lerJ rt)\^,¿z! Þ.rrp \r- \rr't\¡ ,l?
Chcck lhol yovr on3Íêr ¡t rêo!ànoblê ðnd potrlble
\'f<,,cc\
Photo by Seth Casteelhttp://www.littlefriendsphoto.comPermission to use agreed
Introduced in tutorials
Extensive scaffolding exercises
Revisited in subsequent tutorials
Tutorials delivered by 24 TAs
Monday, 15 July, 13
Engagement with PeerWise
Monday, 15 July, 13
Engagement with PeerWise
PW1 PW2
Contributed and met minimum requirementsContributed but did not meet mininum requirementsDid not participate
0.84 0.80
Total: 791
Monday, 15 July, 13
Engagement with PeerWise
Number Multiplier Number MultiplierQuestions 1105 [1.7] (1.4) 998 [1.6] (1.3)
Answers 11393 [17.2] (14.4) 11807 [18.7] (15.0)
Comments
4901 [7.4] (6.2) 5509 [8.7] (5.0)
PW 1PW 1 PW 2PW 2
Monday, 15 July, 13
Question/Explanation Quality
Monday, 15 July, 13
Question/Explanation Quality
Bloom’s Taxonomy of levels in the cognitive domain
Score Level Description
1 Remember Factual knowledge, trivial plugging in of numbers
2 Understand Basic understanding of content
3 Apply Implement, calculate / determine. Typically one-stage problem
4 Analyze Typical multi-step problem; requires identification of strategy
Evaluate Compare &assess various option possibilities; often conceptual
Synthesize Ideas and topics from disparate course sections combined. Significantly challenging problem.
Monday, 15 July, 13
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 40
20
40
60
Num
ber o
f que
stio
ns
Assessment 1 Assessment 2
Bloom's Taxonomy: Question Quality
Textp>0.05, NS
Monday, 15 July, 13
Question/Explanation Quality
Description of explanation quality
Score Level Description
0 Missing No explanation provided or explanation incoherent/irrelevant
1 Inadequate Wrong reasoning and/or answer; trivial or flippant
2 MinimalCorrect answer but with insufficient explanation/justification/ Some aspects may be unclear/incorrect/confused.
3 Good Clear and detailed exposition of correct method & answer.
4 ExcellentThorough description of relevant physics and solution strategy. Plausibility of all answers considered. Beyond normal expectation for a correct solution
Monday, 15 July, 13
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 40
20
40
60
Num
ber o
f que
stio
ns
Assessment 1 Assessment 2
Explanation Quality
p=0.02
Monday, 15 July, 13
Conclusions
Participation is generally well beyond the minimum requirements for course credit.
Unlike similar studies with Physics majors*, non-majors in this study produced questions of lower overall quality.
Evidence to suggest that question quality and detail of explanation improves with practice.
*Bates, et al ‘Assessing the quality of a student-generated question repository’ PRST-PER submitted
Monday, 15 July, 13
References
Student-facing system http://peerwise.cs.auckland.ac.nz/
All the research studies referenced and scaffolding materials referred to are accessible through the PeerWise community
site http://www.peerwise-community.org/
Monday, 15 July, 13
