Journal of Digital Convergence (디지털융복합연구)

The Society of Digital Policy and Management (한국디지털정책학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Associations among Perceptional Typology with Computer Based Assessment, Computer Efficacy, Personality, and Academic Achievement

컴퓨터기반평가(Computer Based Assessment: CBA) 인지유형과 컴퓨터 효능감, 성격, 학업성취와의 관계

  • Kim, Jin-Young (Division of General Studies, Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology)
  • 김진영 (울산과학기술원, 기초과정부)
  • Received : 2019.01.21
  • Accepted : 2019.04.20
  • Published : 2019.04.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purposes of the present study were finding out educational implications and enhancing the efficient use of computer-based assessments (CBA) in class designes. This paper examined associations of CBA perceptional typology, academic achievement, personality, and computer efficacy. Participants were fifty senior students who took more than 50% of CBA classes in a university that introduces online learning-based system (LMS) with CBA. As a result, there were significant differences between CBA types and GPA and between CBA types and personality. In other words, the CBA adjustment type showed the highest GPA score and CBA dissatisfaction/paper test preference type showed the lowest GPA. Similarly, in terms of personality, CBA adjustment typology was significantly higher conscientiousness than other types. CBA dissatisfaction type had the lowest score of conscientiousness. In addition, the higher the level of conscientiousness, agreeableness and neuroticism, the higher the GPA score. This study is meaningful in that it is the first attempt to seek links CBA type with academic achievement and personality.

본 연구는 컴퓨터기반 평가(CBA)의 효율적 사용 제고와 수업설계를 위하여 학생들의 CBA 인지유형과 학업성취도, 성격 5대 유형, 컴퓨터 효능감과의 관련성을 알아보았다. 이를 위해 온라인학습기반 시스템(LMS)을 바탕으로 CBA를 도입하고 있는 한 대학에서 CBA 수업을 50%이상 수강한 4학년 학생 50명을 대상으로 설문조사를 실시하였다. 그 결과, CBA 인지유형별로 학업성취도 (4년 평균학점)와 5대 성격 유형 간에는 유의미한 차이가 있는 것으로 나타났다. 즉, CBA 적응추구 유형의 학업성취도(GPA)가 가장 높았고 CBA 불만형/지필선호형의 평균평점이 가장 낮았다. 이와 비슷하게 성격 측면에서 CBA 적응추구형이 CBA 불만형보다 성실성 점수가 유의미하게 높았다. 또, 성실성, 친화성, 신경성이 높을수록 평균학점이 높게 나타났다. 본 연구는 CBA인지유형과 학업성취도, 성격 등의 연관성에 관한 최초의 시도라는 연구 의미가 있다.

Keywords

Table 1. Correlations among variables (Personality, gender, computer efficacy, and GPA)

DJTJBT_2019_v17n4_13_t0001.png 이미지

Table 2. ANOVA analyses of CBA typology

DJTJBT_2019_v17n4_13_t0002.png 이미지

Table 3. Post-hoc analysis of GPA

DJTJBT_2019_v17n4_13_t0003.png 이미지

Table 4. Post-hoc analysis of Conscientiousness

DJTJBT_2019_v17n4_13_t0004.png 이미지

References

  1. K. Emmanouilidou, V. Derri, N. Aggelousis & O. Vassiliadou. (2012). Development and evaluation of a questionnaire to assess physical educators' knowledge of student assessment. The Physical Educator, 69, 105-118.
  2. K. A. Waddell, S. McChlery & A. O. Asekomeh. (2012). The impact on student performance of altering the assessment criteria around formative computer based assessments, Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 17(2), 223-245. https://doi.org/10.1080/13596748.2012.673902
  3. P. Marriott & A. Lau. (2008). The use of online summative assessment in an undergraduate financial accounting course. Journal of Accounting Education, 26(2), 73-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccedu.2008.02.001
  4. L. McDowell & K. Sambell. (1999). The experience of innovative assessment: Students perspectives. In Assessment matters in higher education: Choosing and using diverse approaches (Eds S. Brown, & A. Glasner) UK: McGraw-Hill Education.
  5. W. Hole-Elders, P. Bloemendaal, N. Bos, M. Quaak, R. Sijstermans & P. Jong. (2008). Twelve tips for computer-based assessment in medical education. Medical Teacher, 30, 673-678. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590802279595
  6. O. J. Kim. (2018). The effects of music lesson applying the blended learning-based STEAM education on the musical knowledge and STEAM literacy of pre-service kindergarten teachers. Journal of the Korea Convergence Society, 9(2), 217-227. https://doi.org/10.15207/JKCS.2018.9.2.217
  7. J. Bull & C. McKenna. (2000). Computer-assisted assessment centre (TLTP3) update. In 4th International CAA Conference, Loughborough, UK: Loughborough University.
  8. D. Boud. (2000). Sustainable assessment: Rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in Continuing Education, 22(2), 151-167. https://doi.org/10.1080/713695728
  9. G. Sim, P. Holifield & M. Brown. (2004). Implementation of computer assisted assessment: Lessons from the literature, Research in Learning Technology, 12(3), 215-229. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v12i3.11255
  10. A. A. Economides. (2009). Conative feedback in Computer Based Assessment. Computers in the Schools, 26(3), 207-223. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380560903095188
  11. Y. Choi & D. Seo. (2018). Developing a prototype of learning epistemic frame using computer based learning system : Learning analytics. Journal of the Korea Convergence Society, 9(3), 23-29. https://doi.org/10.15207/JKCS.2018.9.3.023
  12. S. Zakrzewski & J. Bull. (1999). The mass implementation and evaluation of computer based assessments. Assessments and Evaluation in Higher Education, 23(2), 141-152. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293980230203
  13. G. Conole & W. Warburton. (2005). A review of computer-assisted assessment. ALT-J, Research in Learning Technology, 13(1), 17-31. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v13i1.10970
  14. C. McKenna. (2001). Academic approaches and attitudes towards CAA: A qualitative study in Danson, M. & Eabry, C. (eds.) Fifth International Computer Assisted Assessment (CAA) Conference Proceedings, Loughborough University, UK.
  15. M. Yorke. (2003). Formative assessment in higher education: Moves towards theory and the enhancement of pedagogic practice. Higher Education 45(4), 477-501. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023967026413
  16. J. P. Magliano & A. C. Graesser. (2012). Computer-based assessment of student-constructed responses. Behavior Research Methods, 44(3), 608-621. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-012-0211-3
  17. W. Harlen & R. Deakin-Crick. (2002). A Systematic review of the impact of summative assessment and tests on students' motivation for learning. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, University of London Institute of Education.
  18. J. Kim. (2015). A Study of Perceptional Typologies on Computer Based Assessment (CBA): Instructor and Student Perspectives. Educational Technology & Society, 18(2), 80-96.
  19. R. N. Landers & J. W. Lounsbury. (2006). An investigation of Big Five and narrow personality traits in relation to Internet usage. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 283-293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2004.06.001
  20. R. Harrington & D. A. Lofferedo. (2010). MBTI personality type and other factors that relate to preference for online versus face-to-face instruction. Internet and Higher Education, 13, 89-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.11.006
  21. O. E. Hatlevik, I. Throndsen, M. Loi & G. B. Gudmundsdottir. (2018). Students' ICT self-efficacy and computer and information literacy: Determinants and relationships. Computers & Education, 118, 107-119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.11.011
  22. V. Terzis, C. N. Moridis, A. A. Economides & G. Rebolledo-Mendez. (2013). Computer Based Assessment Acceptance: A Cross-cultural Study in Greece and Mexico. Educational Technology & Society, 16(3), 411-424.
  23. O. P. John & S. Srivastava. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In LA Pervin, O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research (pp.102-138), New York: Guilford Press.