P. Iannone
Students' preferences in undergraduate mathematics assessment
Iannone, P.; Simpson, A.
Abstract
Existing research into students' preferences for assessment methods has been developed from a restricted sample: in particular, the voice of students in the ‘hard-pure sciences’ has rarely been heard. We conducted a mixed method study to explore mathematics students' preferences of assessment methods. In contrast to the message from the general assessment literature, we found that mathematics students differentially prefer traditional assessment methods such as closed book examination; they perceive them to be fairer than innovative methods and they perceive traditional methods to be the best discriminators of mathematical ability. We also found that although students prefer to be assessed by traditional methods they are also concerned by the mix of methods they encounter during their degree, suggesting that more account needs to be taken about the students' views of this mix. We discuss the impact of the results on the way general findings about assessment preference should be interpreted.
Citation
Iannone, P., & Simpson, A. (2015). Students' preferences in undergraduate mathematics assessment. Studies in Higher Education, 40(6), 1046-1067. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2013.858683
Journal Article Type | Article |
---|---|
Online Publication Date | Mar 28, 2014 |
Publication Date | Jul 3, 2015 |
Deposit Date | Aug 28, 2015 |
Publicly Available Date | Sep 28, 2015 |
Journal | Studies in Higher Education |
Print ISSN | 0307-5079 |
Electronic ISSN | 1470-174X |
Publisher | Taylor and Francis Group |
Peer Reviewed | Peer Reviewed |
Volume | 40 |
Issue | 6 |
Pages | 1046-1067 |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2013.858683 |
Keywords | Students' preferences, Assessment of ability, Undergraduate mathematics, Mixed methods. |
Files
Accepted Journal Article
(951 Kb)
PDF
Copyright Statement
This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis Group in Studies in Higher Education on 28/03/2014, available online at: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/03075079.2013.858683.
You might also like
A recipe for disappointment: policy, effect size and the winner’s curse
(2022)
Journal Article
How we assess mathematics degrees: the summative assessment diet a decade on
(2021)
Journal Article
Benchmarking a misnomer: A note on “Interpreting effect sizes in education interventions”
(2021)
Journal Article
Downloadable Citations
About Durham Research Online (DRO)
Administrator e-mail: dro.admin@durham.ac.uk
This application uses the following open-source libraries:
SheetJS Community Edition
Apache License Version 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/)
PDF.js
Apache License Version 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/)
Font Awesome
SIL OFL 1.1 (http://scripts.sil.org/OFL)
MIT License (http://opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.html)
CC BY 3.0 ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)
Powered by Worktribe © 2024
Advanced Search