Search

Background: The sudden growth in online instruction due to COVID‐19 restrictions has given renewed urgency to questions about remote learning that have remained unresolved. Web‐based assessment software provides instructors an array of options for varying testing parameters, but the pedagogical impacts of some of these variations has yet to be examined. Objectives: The current study examines whether question order affects student performance on online college math assessments. Drawing on the literature of testing and math anxiety, we hypothesized that difficult questions near the beginning of an assessment would have a destructive effect on student confidence, which would in turn have a deleterious effect on their performance. Methods: We employed an observational 'big data' methodology, analysing 23,468 final exams completed by students in 10 different courses over eight semesters at a Math Emporium in a large technical university in the eastern United States. Students were freshmen and sophomores enrolled in non‐engineering math courses. We regressed the final score on the difficulty level of the first and second questions, controlling for several other factors. Results and Conclusions: We found that several factors—day of the week, amount of time before the deadline, number of minutes spent on the exam—have more of an impact on score than question order. This pattern was consistent across sexes. Takeaways: Our findings contradict some previous studies, which have found that difficult early questions degrade student performance, and that this affect is more pronounced in females. This work enriches our understanding of how students respond to online assessment. Lay Description: What is already known about this topic: Previous studies have had mixed results about the effect of question difficulty ordering on student performance.Furthermore, few studies have examined this issue for computer assessments. What this paper adds: We employ a novel methodology with a uniquely large data set.Our findings indicate that difficulty ordering has no effect on student performance. Implications for practice: Math instructors can use the random ordering feature of computer assessment generating tools because question order does not affect performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Providing students with worked out problem solutions is a beneficial instructional technique in STEM disciplines, and studying examples that have been worked out incorrectly may be especially helpful for reducing misconceptions in students with low prior content knowledge. However, past results are inconclusive and the effects of incorrect worked examples alone or in combination with correct examples remains unclear. Objectives: We aim to address whether studying incorrect examples alone or in combination with correct examples can support the reduction of students' fraction misconceptions, operationalized as errors made with high confidence. Methods: After incorrectly solving a sampling problem, 130 students in 4th through 11th grade in the U.S. were randomly assigned to a condition in an online problem set focused on fraction equivalence. Students studied either single‐type worked examples (i.e., correct or incorrect; n = 49) or combination‐type worked examples (correct and incorrect; n = 41) or engaged in a problem‐solving control (n = 50). Results: Studying a combination of correct and incorrect worked examples was as effective as the problem‐solving control with feedback at improving fraction equivalence knowledge and reducing the rate of high‐confidence errors. Students in both the combination condition and the problem‐solving with feedback condition outperformed those who studied either correct or incorrect worked examples alone. Conclusions: Results support the inclusion of a combination of correct and incorrect worked examples when teaching students with low prior content knowledge. Studying a combination of example types within an online tutor helps to reduce misconceptions about fractions, a topic students commonly struggle with. A problem‐solving task with corrective feedback worked equally well. Lay Description: What is already known about this topic: Studying worked examples of mathematical solutions improves student learning.Incorrect examples, either alone or in combination with correct examples, are particularly effective for improving learning for students with low prior knowledge in the target content.Comparing correct and incorrect examples is also effective at improving problem‐solving but this effect may be specific to those with high prior knowledge.Still unknown are the impacts of these different combinations of examples on misconceptions in particular. What this paper adds: We show that studying a combination of correct and incorrect examples reduces math misconceptions.Problem‐solving with corrective feedback within an online tutor also has this effect. Implications for practice and/or policy: Using a combination of example types will help reduce students' misconceptions about fractions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]