Catalytic assessment: understanding how MCQs and EVS can foster deep learning

One technology for education whose adoption is currently expanding rapidly in UK higher education is that of electronic voting systems (EVS). As with all educational technology, whether learning benefits are achieved depends not on the technology but on whether an improved teaching method is introduced with it. EVS inherently relies on the multiple-choice question (MCQ) format, which many feel is associated with the lowest kind of learning of disconnected facts. This paper, however, discusses several ways in which teaching with MCQs, and so with EVS, has transcended this apparent disadvantage, has based itself on deep learning in the sense of focusing on learning relationships between items rather than on recalling disconnected true–false items, and so has achieved substantial learning advantages. Six possible learning designs based on MCQs are discussed, and a new function for (e-)assessment is identified, namely catalytic assessment, where the purpose of test questions is to trigger subsequent deep learning without direct teaching input. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

[1]  D. Sadler Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems , 1989 .

[2]  D. Nicol,et al.  Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice , 2006 .

[3]  Andrew Tolmie,et al.  The acquisition of conceptual knowledge in science by primary school children : group interaction and the understanding of motion down an incline , 1992 .

[4]  P. Black,et al.  Assessment and Classroom Learning , 1998 .

[5]  D. Sadler,et al.  Formative Assessment: revisiting the territory , 1998 .

[6]  E. Mazur,et al.  Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results , 2001 .

[7]  Naomi Miyake Constructive interaction and the iterative process of understanding , 1986 .

[8]  R. Hake Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses , 1998 .

[9]  R. Clark Reconsidering Research on Learning from Media , 1983 .

[10]  D. Middleton,et al.  An Experimental Evaluation of Four Face-to-Face Teaching Strategies , 1978 .

[11]  J. Biggs Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment , 1996 .

[12]  Christine Howe,et al.  Chance favours only the prepared mind: Incubation and the delayed effects of peer collaboration. , 2005, British journal of psychology.

[13]  D. Nicol E‐assessment by design: using multiple‐choice tests to good effect , 2007 .

[14]  Martin R. Fellenz Using assessment to support higher level learning: the multiple choice item development assignment , 2004 .

[15]  Darwin P. Hunt,et al.  Effects of human self-assessment responding on learning. , 1982 .

[16]  David A. Banks,et al.  Audience Response Systems in Higher Education: Applications and Cases. , 2006 .

[17]  Yanfeng Tian,et al.  Divorce, gender role, and higher education expansion , 1996 .

[18]  Quintin Cutts,et al.  Electronically enhanced classroom interaction , 2002 .