Assertion‐reason multiple‐choice testing as a tool for deep learning: a qualitative analysis

This paper reflects on the ongoing debate surrounding the usefulness (or otherwise) of multiple‐choice questions (MCQ) as an assessment instrument. The context is a graduate school of business in Australia where an experiment was conducted to investigate the use of assertion‐reason questions (ARQ), a sophisticated form of MCQ that aims to encourage higher‐order thinking on the part of the student. It builds on the work of Connelly (2004 Connelly, L. B. 2004. “Assertion‐reason assessment in formative and summative tests: results from two graduate case studies”. In Educational innovation in economics and business VIII: pedagogy, technology and innovation, Edited by: Ottewill, R., Borredon, E., Falque, L., Macfarlane, B. and Wall, A. 359–378. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.  [Google Scholar]) which produced a quantitative analysis of the use of ARQ testing in two economics course units in a flexibly‐delivered Master of Business Administration (MBA) program. Connelly's main findings were that ARQ tests were good substitutes for the more conventional type of multiple‐choice/short‐answer type questions and, perhaps more significantly, ARQ test performance was a good predictor of student performance in essays—the assessment instrument most widely favoured as an indicator of deeper learning. The main focus of this paper is the validity of the second of these findings, analysis of questionnaire data casting some doubt over whether student performance in ARQ tests can, indeed, be looked upon as a sound indicator of deeper learning—student reactions and opinions suggesting instead that performance might have more to do with one's proficiency in the English language.     

Scaffolding group explanation and feedback with handheld technology: impact on students’ mathematics learning

Based on strong research literatures, we conjectured that social processing of feedback by cooperating in a small group setting—with social incentives to ask questions, give explanations and discuss disagreements—would increase learning. We compared group and individual feedback, using two technologies: (1) Technology-mediated, Peer-Assisted Learning (TechPALS), which uses wireless handheld technology to structure feedback in small groups as they solve fractions problems and (2) a popular desktop product, which provides feedback to individual students as they solve fractions problems individually. Three elementary schools participated in a randomized controlled experiment conducted in the 2007–2008 school year. Students in the TechPALS condition learned more than did the control group students, with effect sizes ranging from d = 0.14 to d = 0.44. Analysis of observational data confirmed that students in the TechPALS condition participated socially in questioning, explaining, and discussing disagreements, whereas students in the individual condition did not. We conclude that an integration of technology, cooperative activity designs and broader educational practices can lead to impact on students’ mathematics learning.     

Replication and Pedagogy in the History of Psychology VI: Egon Brunswik on Perception and Explicit Reasoning

Egon Brunswik (1903–1955) first made an interesting distinction between perception and explicit reasoning, arguing that perception included quick estimates of an object’s size, nearly always resulting in good approximations in uncertain environments, whereas explicit reasoning, while better at achieving exact estimates, could often fail by wide margins. An experiment conducted by Brunswik to investigate these ideas was never published and the only available information is a figure of the results presented in a posthumous book in 1956. We replicated and extended his study to gain insight into the procedures Brunswik used in obtaining his results. Explicit reasoning resulted in fewer errors, yet more extreme ones than perception. Brunswik’s graphical analysis of the results led to different conclusions, however, than did a modern statistically-based analysis.

CHARACTERISTICS OF INTERVENTION RESEARCH IN SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY JOURNALS: 2010–2014

The purpose of this study was to provide an updated content analysis of articles published in major journals of school psychology spanning the years 2010–2014, with an emphasis on intervention research (including intervention and participant characteristics). Six journals—School Psychology Review, School Psychology Quarterly, Journal of School Psychology, Psychology in the Schools, School Psychology International, and Journal of Applied School Psychology—were selected for the analysis. Over the 5‐year period, 1,196 articles were published in the selected journals. A total of 65.8% of the articles were empirical articles; intervention studies with school‐age samples comprised 11.1% of all articles. Within the intervention studies, single subject represented the most frequently used research design (40.6%). Further, 58.6% of the intervention studies did not provide sufficient information to discern participants’ disability status. Although the proportion of empirically based articles has increased in recent years, that of intervention articles has remained low.     

On the Meanings of Self‐Regulation: Digital Humanities in Service of Conceptual Clarity

Self‐regulation is of interest both to psychologists and to teachers. But what the word means is unclear. To define it precisely, two studies examined the American Psychological Association's system of controlled vocabulary—specifically, the 447 associated terms it presents—and used techniques from the Digital Humanities to identify 88 closely related concepts and six broad conceptual clusters. The resulting analyses show how similar ideas are interrelated: self‐control, self‐management, self‐observation, learning, social behavior, and the personality constructs related to self‐monitoring. A full‐color network map locates these concepts and clusters relative to each other. It also highlights some of the interests of different audiences, which can be described heuristically using two axes that have been labeled abstract versus practical and self‐oriented versus other‐oriented.