Rapid Feedback Assessment Methods: Can We Improve Engagement and Preparation for Exams in Large-enrollment Courses?

Scratch-off immediate feedback assessment technique (IF-AT) forms and classroom response systems (clickers) can increase student engagement and interaction and help students prepare for exams by indicating the type and level of questions they will encounter. We used the IF-AT throughout the semester in three sections of a lower-division biology class; in two, students worked on IF-AT questions in small permanent groups, and in one, students alternated between IF-AT and clickers each week. At the end of the semester, students answered surveys about instant feedback techniques. Students appreciated prompt feedback on their understanding of course material, enjoyed the group interaction and opportunities to learn from each other, and continued to have positive perceptions of instant feedback activities and to take them seriously throughout the semester. While appreciating the versatility of clicker questions, we find that the ease of use, low cost, effectiveness, and improved classroom climate of the IF-AT method are particularly commendable.     

Deviant Peer Factors During Early Adolescence: Cause or Consequence of Physical Aggression?

This study investigated reciprocal relations between adolescents' physical aggression and their perceptions of peers' deviant behaviors and attitudes. Analyses were conducted on four waves of data from 2,290 adolescents (ages 10–16) from three urban middle schools. Autoregression models revealed reciprocal relations between peer factors (i.e., friends' problem behavior, peer pressure for fighting, friends' support for fighting) and adolescents' reporting of their aggressive behavior. Bidirectional relations were also found between peer pressure for fighting and adolescents' frequency of physical aggression based on teacher ratings. Findings were consistent across sex, grade, and time. Findings suggest that multiple dimensions of peers' behaviors uniquely play a role in the development of adolescents' aggression and have important implications for interventions to reduce problem behaviors.     

A strategy for detection of inconsistency in evaluation of essay type answers

The quality of evaluation of essay type answer books involving multiple evaluators for courses with large number of enrollments is likely to be affected due to heterogeneity in experience, expertise and maturity of evaluators. In this paper, we present a strategy to detect anomalies in evaluation of essay type answers by multiple evaluators based on the relationship between marks/grades awarded and symbolic markers, opinionated words recorded in answer books during evaluation. Our strategy is based on the results of our survey with evaluators, analysis of large number of essay type evaluated answer books and our own experiences regarding grievances of students regarding marks/grades. Results of both survey and analysis of evaluated answer books identified underline, tick and cross as frequently used markers compared to circle and question mark. Further, both opinionated words and symbolic markers identified through the survey are used by evaluators to express either positive or negative sentiments. They have differential usage pattern of these symbols as single evaluator and as one amongst multiple evaluators. Tick and cross have well define purposes and have strong correlation with marks awarded. However, the underline marker is being used for dual purpose of expressing both correctness and incorrectness of answers. Our strategy of inconsistency detection first identifies outliers based on the relationship between marks/grades awarded and number of symbols and/or opinionated words used in evaluation. Subsequently, marks and number of symbolic markers of outliers are compared with peer non-outlier answer books having same marks but different number of markers used. Such outlier answer books are termed as anomalous. We discovered 36 anomalies out of total 425 evaluated answer books. We have developed a prototype tool to facilitate online evaluation of answer book and to proactively alert evaluators of possible anomalies.