Integration of Mobile AR Technology in Performance Assessment.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction Based on the popular educational philosophy of allowing students to develop diverse capabilities and achieve active knowledge building, performance assessment (PA) should be considered a vital link in teaching. In addition to assigning a final score to students, the purpose of assessment is to develop a highly in-depth understanding regarding the process that students undergo during learning and provide feedback to assist in student growth. Toptas (2011) indicated that an effective evaluation of the students who answered the questions in a particular period of time will be insufficient. If we want to correct this weakness, the performances of the students must be measured with the observation of the process as well. O'Neil and Osif (1993), and VanTassel- Baska (2014) indicated that assessment plays a vital role in teaching and that the process of assessment consists of goal setting, data collection, organisation, and result analysis. The results can be used to enhance teaching and report the actual progress of students. Turgut and Baykul (2012) point out that the process can be measured alongside the results of learning outputs by measuring the performances. In addition, it is asserted that the measurement of students' performance gives them the opportunity to effectively learn the concepts, complex events, and their structures. Nevertheless, a major problem encountered by the education community is determining the appropriateness of educational evaluation. PA has been recognised as one of the most effective methods for assessing this type of high-level thinking because this approach emphasises the application and demonstration of abilities in problem- solving situations and the complexity of problem-solving processes (Wiggins, 1993; VanTassel-Baska, 2014). Previous studies (Bay, Kucukoglu, Kaya, Gundogdu, Kose, Ozan, & Tasgin 2010; Jiang, Smith, & Nichols, 1997) have indicated that the primary limitations and disadvantages of the PA approach include the lack of comparison, limited reliability, unsatisfactory economic performance, and low validity. However, the majority of these factors can be attributed to the subjective consciousness of the assessors and errors in the measured situations. By contrast, augmented reality (AR) technology can be employed to display, in real situations, real- time information that is necessary for assessing or learning. From the perspective of cognitive psychology, this approach can be applied to reduce the errors resulting from the process of PA and to minimise the time and economic costs that teachers must bear when observing student behaviour. Therefore, we examined the meaning, relevant studies, and limitations of PA before investigating the effects that incorporating AR technology exert on improving PA systems. Subsequently, we applied an AR-based PA system to a cooking course to explore the effects of the application. The results of this study can serve as a reference for implementing PA in teaching. Performance Assessment (PA) Performance Assessment (PA) requires students to apply the knowledge and skills they have learned to perform hands-on practice rather than simply revalidating and recollecting the experience of learning (VanTassel-Baska, 2014). This assessment method satisfies the needs of the current trend of constructivist learning and teaching (Chang, 2002). PA motivates students to integrate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions required in the subject, and the results of the assessment can reflect students' problem-solving abilities in real life and the interest and needs of the students. Performance assessments, which can be conducted to evaluate high-level cognitive abilities and the dispositions and skills of students, are more comprehensive compared with conventional paper-based tests. When evaluating a student for periodic checks or a promotion, there has to be a list of measurable performance criteria that can be applied consistently to all members of a particular class. …
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,012 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,009 | 0,005 |
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».