Journals / IOJET / 2021 / Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 3

A REVIEW OF DIGITAL FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT TOOLS: FEATURES AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS

Journal
IOJET
Pages
1459–1485
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results indicated that all closed-ended items were common to all the tools examined and they were automatically scored, while only a few of them offered underdeveloped methods of grading open-ended items.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The Internet and the software stores for mobile devices come with a huge number of digital tools for any task, and those intended for digital formative assessment (DFA) have burgeoned exponentially in the last decade.
📊
Key Findings & Data:After identifying the most frequently recommended, reviewed and researched formative assessment tools, the researchers inspected 14 tools in terms of various issues, ranging from platforms and devices used, item-types offered by the software, features related with monitoring student performance and providing feedback (through student/instructor dashboards), grading, scoring of open-response items and collaborative responses.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results indicated that all closed-ended items were common to all the tools examined and they were automatically scored, while only a few of them offered underdeveloped methods of grading open-ended items.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The Internet and the software stores for mobile devices come with a huge number of digital tools for any task, and those intended for digital formative assessment (DFA) have burgeoned exponentially in the last decade. These tools vary in terms of their functionality, pedagogical quality, cost, operating systems and so forth. Teachers and learners need guidance on how to choose the most effective digital formative software to make the most out of it. This study provides an in-depth critical review of the features of most popular formative assessment tools available on the Internet. It aims to unearth what current DFA tools can do and what further developments are needed for more effective use. The tools for analysis were sampled using frequency of mentions in educational technology websites and blogs and two scholarly databases (Web of Science and Scopus). After identifying the most frequently recommended, reviewed and researched formative assessment tools, the researchers inspected 14 tools in terms of various issues, ranging from platforms and devices used, item-types offered by the software, features related with monitoring student performance and providing feedback (through student/instructor dashboards), grading, scoring of open-response items and collaborative responses. The results indicated that all closed-ended items were common to all the tools examined and they were automatically scored, while only a few of them offered underdeveloped methods of grading open-ended items. All the tools provided learner analytics with diverse forms of data and different mechanisms for feedback, yet the most common form of data were immediate answers and numerical scores. It was also clear that popularity did not necessarily mean offering more functionalities and better tools. Based on the status of the tools, avenues for further research are discussed.

🔖

Cite This Article

Çekiç, A., Bakla, A. (2022). A REVIEW OF DIGITAL FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT TOOLS: FEATURES AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS. IOJET, Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 3, 1459–1485. https://ajindex.com/articles/541214

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Abedi, J. (2010). Research and recommendations for formative assessment with English language learners. In H. L. Andrade, & G. J. Cizek (Eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 181–197).
  2. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis. Akpınar, Y. (2008). Validation of a learning object review instrument: Relationship between ratings of learning objects and actual learning outcomes. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 4, 291–302. https://doi.org/10.28945/380
  3. Anders, D. O., Lindberg, J. O., & Ulf, S. (2011). Shared video media and blogging online; Educational technologies for enhancing formative e- assessment? Campus-Wide Information Systems, 28(1), 41-55. https://doi.org/10.1108/10650741111097287
  4. Anwar, S. (2019). Formative assessment tool for active learning. European Journal of Biomedical, 6(1), 480-485. Author 2. (2019).
  5. Bailey, A. L. (2017). Theoretical and developmental issues to consider in the assessment of young learners’ English language proficiency. M. K. Wolf & Y. G. Butler (Eds.), English language proficiency assessments for young learners (pp. 25–40).
  6. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315674391-2
  7. Bailey, A. L., & Heritage, M. (2008). Formative assessment for literacy, grades K-6: Building reading and academic language skills across the curriculum: Corwin Press.
  8. Beatty, I., & Gerace, W. (2009). Technology-enhanced formative assessment: A research-based pedagogy for teaching science with classroom response technology. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(2), 146–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9140-4
  9. Berridge, G. G., Penney, S., & Wells, J. A. (2012). eFACT: Formative Assessment of Classroom Teaching for Online Classes. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 13(2), 119-130.
  10. Bhagat, K. K., & Spector, J. M. (2017). Formative assessment in complex problem-solving domains: The emerging role of assessment technologies. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 20(4), 312-317.
  11. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: principles, policy & practice, 5(1), 7-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
  12. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5-31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5
  13. Blanco, M., & Ginovart, M. (2012). On How Moodle Quizzes Can Contribute to the Formative e- Assessment of First-Year Engineering Students in Mathematics