Encouraging and Evaluating Class Participation (original) (raw)
Related papers
Students' Classroom Participation: Reflection on Classroom Observation
2023
This research aimed to investigate students' classroom participation in four Common Core classes. The study collected data from students using a survey instrument designed to assess various aspects of participation, including frequency and quality of contributions, engagement with group activities, and interactions with peers and instructors. The survey was distributed to all students in the selected classes, and participation was voluntary. The collected data was analyzed using statistical software, with descriptive and inferential statistics being used to summarize and test for differences in participation levels across classes and demographic groups. The study's findings provide insights into student participation and may inform strategies to improve student engagement and learning outcomes. Overall, the study emphasizes the importance of understanding and enhancing student participation in classroom settings to promote effective learning experiences.
Class participation and feedback: a bet on the winning horse?
In an educational environment focused on student learning, class participation and feedback are key to improving students’ performance. Class participation grading methods are often unclear and subjective, so providing feedback on class participation grades is challenging for lecturers. The Work-In-Class Assessment Tool (WICAT) we designed enables instructors not only to grade class participation clearly and objectively but also to provide students with weekly feedback on this class participation grades. This paper aims to analyze the effect of WICAT class participation grades and weekly feedback on students' final exam performance. We conducted an experiment with 699 accounting students over the 2016-2019 period. Our results show that students whose class participation grade was obtained through WICAT performed better on the final exam. Furthermore, our results suggest that a student assessed by WICAT was 2.28 times less likely to fail the final exam. However, the weekly feedba...
Whose responsibility is it? Encouraging student engagement in the learning process
Music Education Research, 2012
This article presents the results of an action research project that focused on giving students more sense of control and responsibility over their own learning by engaging them more fully in assessment and helping them to understand the principles underpinning assessment criteria. The course is a second-year music module with approximately 85 students. I formed the class into groups to grade model answers and compiled a list of what they believed the assessment criteria should be based on this experience. I then used this list to compile a selfassessment criteria sheet, which the students filled out themselves and attached with each subsequent assessment. When I completed my analysis of data from the first cycle of action research, I implemented the learning from that cycle into a second and third cycle of action. This involved re-evaluating my initial plans in light of my findings; building on what was successful and changing what was not, and refocusing my research. The findings were significant, as their assessment results improved dramatically. Involving students throughout the assessment process, from initially setting the criteria right through to self-assessing their work, improved their grades, reduced student passivity and increased their selfconfidence.
Rethinking Classroom Participation
Teaching Innovation Projects, 2012
Within the classroom, feelings of alienation can adversely affect students' ability to speak, and thus serve to reproduce social inequities. This is especially the case with some first year students who may not have had many opportunities to speak, as well as students from different cultures where talking in class may not be the norm. To help mitigate power imbalances, it is necessary to develop a diversity of teaching practices and approaches to learning to ensure that each student feels that her class participation counts. In this workshop, I want to consider ways in which it is possible to encourage participation by incorporating verbalization and vocalization techniques into the classroom.
A student participation assessment scheme for effective teaching and learning
In this paper a systematic and well-defined student participation assessment scheme for college courses is proposed. The scheme supports the involvement of students in a variety of areas of participation within and outside the classroom with the aim of improving their learning. The scheme addresses mostly the challenges related to the practicality of the structure and design of the assessment. It also addresses the subjectivity of grading student participations. Areas of participation are widened to allow the faculty more accurate information about the conduct of each individual student towards more objective assessment. In addition, it provides the faculty with the flexibility to select areas that best fit the learning outcomes, nature of the course, availability of time and resources, and class atmosphere. The proposed scheme is initiated and developed using feedback from the teaching staff of Nizwa College of Technology, (NCT) through a survey and open discussion. The results indicate that over two thirds of the surveyed staff show agreement with the concept of assessing participation and find the scheme design clear and systematic, while 82% of them perceive the scheme as effective in improving the motivation and learning of students.
Black box of student evaluation: Course participation
Social Science Research Network, 2012
Course participation is definitely at the "subjective" end of the subjective-to-objective scale of possible assessment methods. It may be surprising, therefore, that so subjective a measure is almost universally a part of negotiation teachers' assessment methods. Ebner and Efron conclude, however, that just because a method is widely used does not mean it is used effectively. Indeed they find, in surveying colleagues, a startling vagueness at the heart of current use. Picking apart their own prior practice, they discover that they themselves have used course participation in grading in ways that do not survive close examination. From these discoveries they proceed to analyze problems that seem inherent in the method, some of which appear daunting. They modestly conclude that to define "best practices" would be premature. As a step toward greater intellectual rigor and future development, however, Ebner and Efron propose five questions which any teacher interested in rethinking the use of course participation might profitably ask.
Journal of Contemporary Medical Education
Introduction: Participation of students in learning determines their scholastic achievements. The current teaching systems do not assess student participation in learning rather than provide the grades based on knowledge recall. Objective: The objective of this study was to develop and evaluate a teaching strategy that can provide a standardized measure of student engagement in the learning process. Materials and methods: A quasiexperimental study undertaken in Rehman Medical College, Peshawar, KP, Pakistan (March-May 2018), involved 96 medical students (16 groups) of third professional MBBS present in small group format session on medical research. The participation assurance test administered after the lesson involved (i) written individual participation assurance test (iPAT) for individual performance, (ii) written team participation assurance test (tPAT) for team performance, (iii) perception-based peer evaluation pPAT for rating team members, and (iv) observer-based PAT (oPAT) by the facilitator for intra-and intergroup dynamics. Scores in numerical and Likert's scales were analyzed by SPSS 22.0 for the descriptive and comparative analysis and correlations, keeping p ≤ 0.05 significant. Results: Mean iPAT was 54.66 ± 12.80 compared to mean tPAT 75.96 ± 19.85(p ≤ 0.001), mean pPAT was 20.83 ± 5.14 compared to mean oPAT of 16.50 ± 4.99 (p ≤ 0.001), and mean closed group oPAT was 4.19 ± 1.90 compared to open group oPAT of 12.31 ± 3.40 (p ≤ 0.001). A significant correlation was obtained for iPAT and tPAT (r = 0.564, p = 0.023). The groups achieving ≥60 iPAT marks showed the significant correlations of iPAT with tPAT (r = 0.869, p = 0.024) and closed group oPAT (r = −0.882, p = 0.017); the groups scoring below 60 in iPAT showed the significant correlations of iPAT with tPAT (r = 0.749, p = 0.013), open group oPAT (r = 0.636, p = 0.048), and total oPAT (r = 0.635, p = 0.048). Conclusion: The PAT was effective in assessing individual and team-based student participation and supports the adoption of the open group teaching strategy as more effective for student participation in learning.