Embedded assessment throughout the problem-based learning – a path to authentic learning experiences
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55630/mem.2024.53.109-116Keywords:
problem-based learning, embedded assessment, authentic assessment, binomial distribution, normal distribution, hypothesesAbstract
This article examines the benefits and challenges associated with Problem-Based Learning (PBL) as a teaching and assessment tool, a constructivist approach that promotes a more pragmatic and student-centered mode of assessment. A tangible illustration of the proposed assessment tool is presented. The study aims to analyze different aspects of mathematical competence in line with the European Commission Framework for Lifelong Learning, such as critical thinking, practical application in authentic problems, and more effective knowledge acquisition. Data were collected through direct classroom observations, open-ended questionnaires, surveys, and personal interviews. The methodology was applied to a sample of 60 students from American College of Sofia (ACS) who participated in project work instead of conventional testing. The results of the study revealed that assessing students’ progress through problem-based tasks not only enhances the development of students’ mathematical competencies compared to traditional methods, but also fosters lifelong learning skills.
However, this approach requires a more significant time commitment compared to tra- ditional testing.
References
L. Anderson, D. Krathwohl. A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing. A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Longman, 2001.
J. Biggs, C. Tang, G. Kennedy. Teaching for quality learning at university. SRHE and Open University Press, 2022. ISBN 13:978-0-33-524275-7.
Ph. Blumberg. Assessing Students During the Problem-Based Learning (PBL) process.
Medical Science Educator, 15, no.2 (2006).
M. Chapell et al. Test anxiety and academic performance in undergraduate and graduate students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, no. 2 (2005), 268–274, https://doi.org/ 10.1037/0022-0663.97.2.268.
M. Flores et al. Perceptions of effectiveness, fairness and feedback of assessment methods: A study in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 40, no. 9 (2014), 1523–1534, https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.881348.
E. Hadjikolev et al. Conceptual model of a virtual project management center. Scientific Research of the Union of Scientists in Bulgaria – Plovdiv, series B. Natural Sciences and Humanities, Vol. XVI, 2013, ISSN 1311-9192
J. Hattie. Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement, 2009. London: Routledge.
T. Hattingh et al. Student learning behaviours around assessments. Australasian Journal
of Engineering Education, 24, no. 1 (2019), 14–24, https://doi.org/10.1080/22054952. 2019.1570641.
P. Kirschner et al. Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41, no. 2 (2006), 75–86, https://doi.org/10.1207/ s15326985ep4102_1.
J. Mergendoller et al. The effectiveness of problem-based instruction: A comparative study of instructional methods and student characteristics. Interdisciplinary Journal of
Problem-Based Learning, 1, no. 2 (2006), https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1026.
P. Nestorova et al., The test – (un)reliable way of checking knowledge. Scientific works of UFT, 59, (2012) “Food, science, engineering and technologies”, 962–965, ISSN 1314-7102.
M. Owens et al. Anxiety and depression in academic performance: An exploration of the mediating factors of worry and working memory. School Psychology International, 33, no. 4 (2012), 433–449, https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034311427433.
Ph. Petrov. Prevention of Cheating in Paper-And-Pencil Tests for the Organizational and Technological Conditions of the Bulgarian Schools with the Help of Web-Based Test Generator Software. Journal “Mathematics, Computer Science and Education”, 1, no. 1, (2018).
M. Prince, R. Felder. Inductive teaching and learning methods: Definitions, compar- isons, and Research Bases. Journal of Engineering Education, 95, no. 2 (2006), 123–138, https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2006.tb00884.x.
K. Simons, P. Ertmer. Scaffolding disciplined inquiry in problem-based learning environ- ments. The International Journal of Learning: Annual Review, 12, no. 6 (2006), 297–306, https://doi.org/10.18848/1447-9494/cgp/v12i06/47900.
J. Thomas. A review of research on project-based learning. 2000, California, Autodesk Foundation. [17] J. Wilkinson. Staff and student perceptions of plagiarism and cheating. Int. J. Teach. Learn. High. Educ. 20 (2009), 98–105. [18] D. William. What Is Assessment for Learning? Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37, no. 1, (2011), 3–14.
