Presented by Veronica Michaelsen and Stephanie Sarandos
Vertical- Medical
Computer-based testing (CBT) offers a variety of advantages over paper-based testing including improved security and ease of longitudinal tracking of student performance over all phases of the curriculum. However, CBT, like any other innovation, should be implemented thoughtfully. Any successful implementation strategy must account for student acceptance and provide sufficient practice that the extraneous cognitive load is minimized.
While extraneous cognitive load should decrease with use, it has also been shown that student opinion toward CBT improves with exposure. Following use of CBT, students perceive the system to be easier to use and they express more confidence in the technology. Still, there is an increased level of anxiety whenever a new technology is introduced. Students’ first experience to CBT should be deliberately designed to address common concerns. Practice quizzes can improve student acceptance of and option toward computer based testing but even these should be developed thoughtfully.
In this session, we will briefly describe our approach to the issue of student acceptance and how we utilized student concerns from a pilot to inform our full-scale implementation. Participants will have the opportunity to discuss their strategies and plans with the goal of developing a consensus around the subject of student orientation to maximize acceptance of CBT.
At the end of the session, participants will be able to:
1) Participants will become aware of the types of cognitive load that can impact student performance during CBT.
2) Participants will become familiar with the literature on student acceptance of educational technologies.
3) Participants will have the opportunity to share concerns about and strategies for student acceptance of CBT.
4) Participants will take part in building a consensus around best practices for student orientation to CBT.
2. 2ExamSoft Assessment Conference | #ASSESS2015
Student Acceptance
Students have a strong preference for writing on
exams
Students worry about technology failures
Students acclimate rapidly to CBT
Use improves acceptance
Ease of Use is key factor in determining intent to use
3. 3ExamSoft Assessment Conference | #ASSESS2015
23% Opt out
Hochlehnert et. al. 2011
Students have a strong preference for writing on exams
5. 5ExamSoft Assessment Conference | #ASSESS2015
Students acclimate rapidly to CBT
Sheader, 2006
Increased preference with exposure
6. 6ExamSoft Assessment Conference | #ASSESS2015
Use improves acceptance
Deutsch, 2012
Students endorse use after a single exposure
7. 7ExamSoft Assessment Conference | #ASSESS2015
Ease of Use is key factor in determining intent to use
Wijerathne, 2013
70% thought CBT was more efficient
Sheader, 2006
48% thought CBT was faster
37% thought there was no difference
8. 8ExamSoft Assessment Conference | #ASSESS2015
Cognitive Load Theory
Working Memory - limited
Long-Term Memory - unlimited
11. 11ExamSoft Assessment Conference | #ASSESS2015
Mock Quiz
Distributed at installation
Dual purpose:
Familiarize students with platform
Collect Evaluation data
Sent to 188; downloaded by 102; completed by
98
12. 12ExamSoft Assessment Conference | #ASSESS2015
Pilot Quiz
10 Question Exam Review
In class
Familiar session format
Sent to 188; downloaded by 151; completed by
120
Post-Assessment Evaluation
Distributed via Qualtrics on the same day
13. 13ExamSoft Assessment Conference | #ASSESS2015
Pilot Quiz
0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00%
Technology glitch
Writing on Exam
Crossing out Options
Acclimation
Preference
Exam Navigation
Software Installation
iPad-specific considerations
Eye Strain
Scrolling
Question/Direction-specific
Waiting to Start
18. 18ExamSoft Assessment Conference | #ASSESS2015
Conclusions
It is possible to pre-emptively address some
student concerns
Students remain sensitive to technology failures
Students perceive CBT as faster with use
Students acclimate rapidly to CBT
As students grow more comfortable, they prefer
CBT
Notas del editor
WRITING:
Hochlehnert 2011, BMC Med Ed; (n=98 yr5 @ Heidelberg Medical)
nearly a quarter of students choose PBT>CBT for this reason
TECHNOLOGY:
Deutsch et. al. 2012; (n=383, yr 4 @ Leipzig Medical)
Optional use – 65% participation
technology concerns remain after implementation
Hochlehnert 2011, BMC Med Ed; (n=98 yr5 @ Heidelberg Medical)
Nearly 10% chose PBT>CBT for this reason
SPEED
Can Med Ed Journal 2013 (n=160 yr4 Med @ SriLanka)
70% thought CBT was more efficient use of time (Image Based)
Sheader et. al. 2006 (n=300 @ Physiology Lab)
48% thought CBT was faster; 37% thought no difference
ACCLIMATION
Sheader et. al. 2006 (n=300 @ Physiology Lab)
Increased preference with exposure
USE
Deutsch et. al. 2012; (n=383, yr 4 @ Leipzig Medical)
Students endorse use after single exposure
More specific = Easier to address
Hochlehnert 2011, BMC Med Ed; (n=98 yr5 @ Heidelberg Medical)
nearly a quarter of students choose PBT>CBT for this reason
Deutsch et. al. 2012; technology concerns remain after implementation
More students worry about failure than experience it
Hochlehnert 2011, BMC Med Ed; (n=98 yr5 @ Heidelberg Medical)
Nearly 10% chose PBT>CBT for this reason
Deutsch et. al. 2012; (n=383, yr 4 @ Leipzig Medical)
Students endorse use after single exposure
SPEED (proxy for ease of use)
Can Med Ed Journal 2013 (n=160 yr4 Med @ SriLanka)
70% thought CBT was more efficient use of time (Image Based)
Sheader et. al. 2006 (n=300 @ Physiology Lab)
48% thought CBT was faster; 37% thought no difference
Working Memory 5 +/- 2
LTM – unlimited, schemas
Types of load are additive
Intrinsic = immutable, tied to content
Germane = related to learning and processing (good)
Extraneous = need to limit
Working Memory 5 +/- 2
LTM – unlimited, schemas
Types of load are additive
Intrinsic = immutable, tied to content
Germane = related to learning and processing (good)
Extraneous = need to limit
Working Memory 5 +/- 2
LTM – unlimited, schemas
Types of load are additive
Intrinsic = immutable, tied to content
Germane = related to learning and processing (good)
Extraneous = need to limit
Distributed at Installation:
2 weeks prior to pilot
Asked to download, install and take Mock Quiz
Short (5Q, mean 3 min, range 1-10 min)
Purpose:
Familiarize with platform, question types
Verify numbers
Evaluation
Which operating system does your primary computing device run?
For the upcoming assessment, I will: (bring my laptop/iPad to class; use a lab computer in RH201; not attend)
Compared to taking a quiz on paper, computer-based testing is: (a lot faster… A lot slower)
My greatest concern about computer-based testing is:
Completed by 52% of the class (96% of those who downloaded it)
Exam Review
Cardiovascular Physiology
Quiz then faculty led review session
45 minutes allotted, mean 23 min (range 7-43 min)
Numbers
MANY students had not downloaded (min 120-98=22)
Delay of 15 min to get everyone logged in/registered
64% Complete (79% of those who downloaded)
Issues:
Delay to install & register one time issue
Students downloading and not attending (sharing password) Remote deletion
Students requesting scratch paper whiteboards
Evaluation Questions
CHANGE: “The most challenging aspect of taking the quiz using this software was:”
SAME: asked about speed compared to paper
NEW: Asked if they enjoyed using the computer
Several areas can be easily addressed:
Writing on exam notes
Crossing out options NEED TRAINING
Acclimation NEED EXPERIENCE
Navigation NEED EXPERIENCE
Waiting to start decay over time
Preference USMLE, exposure
More specific concerns
Compare Speed
2017/2018
Pre p<0.001
T1 p=0.046
2018
T3-T4 p=0.013
How much more comfortable are you now.
p=0.018
p=0.001
How Strongly do you prefer SofTest? (Very strongly avoid to Very Strongly prefer)
T1-T2 p=0.025
T3-T4 p=0.008