Using unstructured questions to enhance critical thinking in an asynchronous, online, introductory financial accounting course
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Stakeholders are concerned that accounting graduates cannot consistently demonstrate critical thinking (CT) skills. Assessments such as unstructured questions have been used successfully in both face-to-face and online senior courses in an effort to enhance CT skill development, but little is known about the impact of such interventions in online junior courses. This study invited students enrolled in an asynchronous, continuous-enrollment, online offering of an introductory accounting course to participate in a control and experimental group. An intervention aimed at enhancing a student’s CT skill development was introduced to students in the experimental group. The intervention engaged students in a web-based, active learning method that required them to respond to unstructured questions to which peers provided and assessed reciprocal feedback. Although peer assessments were not included as part of a student’s course grade, students received a maximum of 5% based on their rate of participation with the intervention. Two sources of data were collected: 1) survey responses from the experimental group regarding students’ experience with the intervention, and 2) differences in the midterm and final exam results between the control and experimental groups. An analysis of the survey data collected from the experimental participants indicated that their perception regarding the impact of the intervention on their learning was generally favourable despite concerns raised about the reciprocal feedback process. However, the validity of the respondents’ feedback was put into question because of the significant non-response rate. Based on an analysis of the midterm and final exam grades, the null hypothesis that no statistically significant difference existed between the midterm and final examination results of the control and experimental groups was accepted. This conclusion does not mean, however, that CT cannot be measured, nor does it mean that the intervention did not enhance CT skill development. It is more likely that the results from this study mean that grades were not a sufficient indicator of CT. This interpretation raises the question of what, then, would be an effective measure of CT? The results demonstrate that continued research is required to determine what strategy(s) might be effective in measuring CT.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».