Abstracts
Abstract
Digital assessment of mathematics is becoming widespread, but still comes with limitations and constraints. A central question is how to design digital tests that assess mathematical knowledge in a valid way. Based on literature on validity and on assessment with and through technology, we identify arguments for and opportunities of digital assessment of mathematics, as well as its main issues. Through three case descriptions, different ways to design digital tests are explored. As a conclusion, we make a plea for assessment environments which offer rich opportunities for students to “do” mathematics and for test designers to design rich items; automated scoring also needs further development, with respect to the scoring of intermediate steps in problem-solving strategies.
Keywords:
- digital assessment,
- mathematics,
- automated scoring,
- item design
Résumé
Si l’évaluation des mathématiques en format numérique est de plus en plus répandue, elle n’est pas sans limites ni contraintes. Une question importante à ce sujet concerne les manières de concevoir des tests numériques qui évaluent les connaissances en mathématiques de façon valide. En nous appuyant sur la littérature sur la validité et sur l’évaluation par l’entremise de la technologie, nous présentons des arguments en faveur de l’évaluation numérique en mathématiques, et nous discutons des occasions de l’employer et des problèmes principaux de ce type d’évaluation. Par l’entremise de trois descriptions de cas, nous explorons différentes façons de concevoir des tests numériques. Pour conclure, nous encourageons les environnements d’évaluation qui offrent aux élèves des occasions de « faire » des mathématiques et aux concepteurs de concevoir des items riches. Nous avançons aussi que la correction automatique nécessite de l’amélioration, notamment en ce qui a trait aux points accordés pour les étapes intermédiaires des stratégies de résolution de problèmes.
Mots-clés :
- évaluation numérique,
- mathématiques,
- correction automatique,
- conception d’items
Resumo
A avaliação das matemáticas em formato digital está cada vez mais difundida, mas, não obstante, apresenta limites e constrangimentos. Uma questão importante a este respeito tem a ver com os modos de conceber os testes digitais que avaliam o conhecimento em matemáticas de modo válido. A partir da literatura sobre a validade e a avaliação por meio da tecnologia, apresentamos argumentos a favor de uma avaliação digital em matemáticas e discutimos as oportunidades de usá-la e os principais problemas deste tipo de avaliação. Através de três descrições de casos, exploramos diferentes maneiras de conceber testes digitais. Para concluir, incentivamos os ambientes de avaliação que oferecem aos alunos oportunidades de “fazer”matemática e aos conceptores de conceber itens ricos. Sugerimos também que a correção automática requer melhorias, especialmente no que diz respeito aos pontos acordados para as etapas intermédias das estratégias de resolução de problemas.
Palavras chaves:
- avaliação digital,
- matemáticas,
- correção automática,
- conceção de itens
Appendices
References
- Brown, R. G. (2010). Does the introduction of the graphics calculator into system-wide examinations lead to change in the types of mathematical skills tested? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 73(2), 181-203. doi: 10.1007/s10649-009-9220-2
- Devlin, K. (2012). Introduction to mathematical thinking. Petaluma, CA: Devlin.
- Drijvers, P. (2009). Tools and tests: Technology in national final mathematics examinations. In C. Winslow (Ed.), Nordic research on mathematics education: Proceedings from NORMA08 (pp. 225-236). Rotterdam: Sense.
- Drijvers, P., Ball, L., Barzel, B., Heid, M. K., Cao, Y., & Maschietto, M. (2016). Uses of technology in lower secondary mathematics education: A concise topical survey. New York: Springer.
- Drijvers, P., Kodde-Buitenhuis, H., & Doorman, M. (submitted). Assessing mathematical thinking as part of curriculum reform in the Netherlands.
- Drijvers, P., Monaghan, J., Thomas, M., & Trouche, L. (2015). Use of technology in secondary mathematics: Final report for the International Baccalaureate. International Baccalaureate Organization. Retrieved from www.ibo.org/globalassets/publications/ib-research/technologyindpmathematicsfinalreport.pdf
- Drijvers, P., Straat, H., & Wools, S. (2016). Wiskunde valide getoetst? De digitale landelijke kennistoets wiskunde van de tweedegraads lerarenopleiding vergeleken met de instituutstentamens [Mathematics assessed in a valid way? The digital national knowledge test mathematics for pre-service teachers compared with institutional examinations]. Tijdschrift voor lerarenopleiders, 37(3), 27-38. Retrieved from www.ris.uu.nl/ws/files/23518131/DrijversStraatWools2016VELON.pdf
- Drijvers, P. & van Reeuwijk, M. (2015). Automatische beoordeling van wiskunde: Rapportage expertmeeting [Automated scoring of mathematics: Report expert meeting]. Arnhem/Utrecht: Cito/College voor Toetsen en Examens.
- Grugeon-Allys, B., Chenevotot-Quentin, F., Pilet, J., & Prévit, D. (2018). Online automated assessment and student learning: The PÉPITE project in elementary algebra. In L. Ball, P. Drijvers, S. Ladel, H.-S. Siller, M. Tabach, & C. Vale (Eds.), Uses of technology in K-12 mathematics education: Tools, topics and trends (pp. 245-266). New York: Springer.
- Heeren, B. & Jeuring, J. (2014). Feedback services for stepwise exercises. Science of Computer Programming, 88, 110-129. doi: 10.1016/j.scico.2014.02.021
- Kane, M. T. (2013). Validating the interpretations and uses of test scores. Journal of Educational Measurement, 50(1), 1-73. doi: 10.1111/jedm.12000
- Kovacs, Z., Recio, T., & Vélez, M. P. (2017). GeoGebra automated reasoning tools: A tutorial. Retrieved from http://mintlinz.pbworks.com/f/Kovacs-20160113.pdf
- Noss, R. & Hoyles, C. (1996). Windows on mathematical meanings. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
- Partnership for 21st Century Learning [P21] (2015). P21 Framework Definitions. Washington, DC: P21. Retrieved from www.p21.org/our-work/p21-framework
- Sangwin, C. J. (2013). Computer aided assessment of mathematics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
- Sangwin, C. J. & Köcher, N. (2016). Automation of mathematics examinations. Computers & Education, 94, 215-227. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.014
- Stacey, K. & Wiliam, D. (2013). Technology and assessment in mathematics. In M. A. Clements, A. Bishop, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & F. Leung (Eds.), Third International Handbook of Mathematics Education (pp. 721-751). New York: Springer.
- Tacoma, S., Drijvers, P., & Boon, P. (2017, February). Using student models to generate feedback in a university course on statistical sampling. In T. Dooley & G. Gueudet (Eds.), Proceedings of the tenth congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 844-851). Dublin, Ireland. Retrieved from www.ris.uu.nl/ws/files/41181049/CERME10_Proceedings_2017.pdf
- Tacoma, S., Drijvers, P., Boon, P., Jeuring, J., & Sosnovsky, S. (submitted). Student models in statistics education and their interplay with task design.
- Threlfall, J., Pool, P., Homer, M., & Swinnerton, B. (2007). Implicit aspects of paper and pencil mathematics assessment that come to light through the use of the computer. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 66(3), 335-348. Retrieved from www.learntechlib.org/p/101712
- Trouche, L. & Drijvers, P. (2010). Handheld technology: Flashback into the future. ZDM: International Journal on Mathematics Education, 42(7), 676-681. doi: 10. 1007/s11858-010-0269-2
- VanLehn, K. (2008). Intelligent tutoring systems for continuous, embedded assessment. In C. Dwyer (Ed.), The future of assessment: Shaping teaching and learning (pp. 113-138). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
- VanLehn, K. (2011). The relative effectiveness of human tutoring, intelligent tutoring systems, and other tutoring systems. Educational Psychologist, 46(4), 197-221. Retrieved from www.public.asu.edu/~kvanlehn/Stringent/PDF/EffectivenessOfTutoring_Vanlehn.pdf
- Wools, S. (2015). All about validity:An evaluation system for the quality of educational assessment (Doctoral dissertation). Enschede, Netherlands: Twente Univeristy.
- Wools, S., Eggen, T., & Sanders, P. (2010). Evaluation of validity and validation by means of the argument-based approach. CADMO, 8, 63-82. Retrieved from www.researchgate.net/publication/273328765_Evaluation_of_Validity_and_Validation_by_Means_of_the_Argument-based_Approach