skip to main content
10.1145/3637907.3637958acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicetmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Strategy Design and Application Research on Renewable Assessment in Blended Learning Environments

Published:31 January 2024Publication History

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this paper is to design and apply strategies for renewable assessment in a hybrid environment. Open educational practices and renewable assessment are important pillars for future educational development. They provide a more open, inclusive, innovative and sustainable education model in the context of globalized, networked and complex and diverse societies. The study, based on the research base of the present literature, designed teaching strategies for renewable assessment that included the principles of collaboration and exchange of information, continuous adaptation of key terms and objectives, sharing of academic outputs, collaborative evaluation and encouragement of innovation. After analyzing the study, it was found that the introduction of renewable assessment mechanisms in a blended learning environment had a positive impact on the evaluation of student work. The renewable assessment strategy was optimized through an iterative process of three rounds of action research, and the impact effects of the renewable assessment teaching strategy were examined in terms of students' willingness to evaluate and revise, renewable learning motivation and learning performance. The study showed that students made significant gains in general competence, but the number of students in the excellent rating was relatively stable, indicating that top students' performance is difficult to significantly improve in the short term. Therefore, these aspects should be considered more carefully in future instructional design and assessment.

References

  1. Ching, T., Himmelstein, D. S., Beaulieu-Jones, B. K., Kalinin, A. A., Do, B. T., Way, G. P., ... & Greene, C. S. (2018). Opportunities and obstacles for deep learning in biology and medicine. Journal of The Royal Society Interface, 15(141), 20170387.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. McTighe J, Thomas R S. Backward design for forward action[J]. Educational leadership, 2003, 60(5): 52-55.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Jhangiani R. Pilot testing open pedagogy[J]. Rajiv Jhangiani, Ph. D, 2015, 23.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Zimmerman B J. Becoming Self-Regulated Learner Theory Into Practice[J]. Ohio: College of Education Ohio State University, 2002, 41.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Ariely D, Kamenica E, Prelec D. Man's search for meaning: The case of Legos[J]. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 2008, 67(3-4): 671-677.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Allan B A, Duffy R D, Collisson B. Helping others increases meaningful work: Evidence from three experiments[J]. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 2018, 65(2): 155.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Locke E A. Social foundations of thought and action: A social-cognitive view[J]. 1987.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Van Allen J, Katz S. Developing open practices in teacher education: An example of integrating OER and developing renewable assignments[J]. Open Praxis, 2019, 11(3): 311-319.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Schunk D H, Rice J M. Enhancing comprehension skill and self-efficacy with strategy value information[J]. Journal of Reading Behavior, 1987, 19(3): 285-302.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Schunk D H. Self-efficacy and achievement behaviors[J]. Educational psychology review, 1989, 1: 173-208.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Bandura A. Growing primacy of human agency in adaptation and change in the electronic era[J]. European psychologist, 2002, 7(1): 2.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Baraniuk, R. (2010). Challenges and opportunities for the open education movement: A Connexions case study. In T. liyoshi & M. Kumar (Eds.), Opening up education. The collective advancement of education through open technology, open conten, and open knowledge (pp. 229-246).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Clinton-Lisell V. Open pedagogy: a systematic review of empirical findings[J]. Journal of Learning for Development, 2021, 8(2): 255-268.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Hall J F .Psychology of Motivation[J].Lippincott, 1961.DOI:10.2307/1420155 Add to Citavi project by DOI.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Deci E L, Ryan R M. The" what" and" why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior[J]. Psychological inquiry, 2000, 11(4): 227-268.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Ryan R M. Self-Determination Theory: Basic Psychological Needs in Motivation, Development, and Wellness[M]. The Guilford Press A Division of Guilford Publications, Inc. New York, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Wang JCK, N g BLL, Liu W C, Can being autonomy-supportive in teaching improve students’ self-regulation and performance. [J]. Building autonomous learners: Perspectives from research and practice using self-determination theory, 2016: 227-243.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Deci E L, Vallerand R J, Pelletier L G, Motivation and education: The self-determination perspective[J]. Educational psychologist, 1991, 26(3-4): 325-346.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Wang Z , Chen L .Conceptual interaction and learning assessment in distance learning[J].Distance Education in China, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. S. (1996). The Effects of Feedback Interventions on Performance: A Historical Review, a Meta-Analysis, and a Preliminary Feedback Intervention Theory[J]. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2):254-284.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Dong L, Wu J, Zhao X, Zhang Y, Gu P. The Connotation, Mechanism and Intervention Strategies of Learners'Internal Feedback[J]. Research on Modern Distance Education, 2023,35(03):55-64.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Narciss, S., Prescher, C., & Khalifah, L. (2022). Providing External Feedback and Prompting the Generation of Internal Feedback Fosters Achievement, Strategies and Motivation in Concept Learning[J]. Learning and Instruction, 82:101658.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Strategy Design and Application Research on Renewable Assessment in Blended Learning Environments

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      ICETM '23: Proceedings of the 2023 6th International Conference on Educational Technology Management
      November 2023
      281 pages
      ISBN:9798400716676
      DOI:10.1145/3637907

      Copyright © 2023 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 31 January 2024

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)5
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format