Advertisement

Students’ and Teachers’ Perceptions of the Usability and Usefulness of the First Viewbrics-Prototype: A Methodology and Online Tool to Formatively Assess Complex Generic Skills with Video-Enhanced Rubrics (VER) in Dutch Secondary Education

  • Ellen RusmanEmail author
  • Rob Nadolski
  • Kevin Ackermans
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 1014)

Abstract

Rubrics support students in learning complex generic (21st century) skills, as they provide textual descriptions of skills’ mastery levels with performance indicators for all constituent subskills. If students know their current and strived-for mastery level, they can better determine subsequent learning activities towards skills mastery. However, text-based rubrics have a limited capacity to support the formation of mental models of a complex skill. Video-enhanced rubrics (VER) with video modeling examples have the potential to improve and enrich mental model formation, feedback quality, and thus improve students’ performance.

In the Viewbrics-project we therefore developed, through design-based research, a methodology for the formative assessment of complex skills with Video-Enhanced Rubrics (VER), precipitated in an online tool. This paper describes the features of the first prototype of this online tool and the results of a stakeholder evaluation of its perceived usefulness and usability, by means of a questionnaire and card-sorting exercise, with 7 teachers and 21 students of two secondary schools.

The evaluation of this first prototype showed that both teachers and students evaluated the online tool and formative assessment methodology as handy, usable, helpful and feasible for learning complex skills, although some recommendations were made to further improve the design of the tool.

Keywords

Video Rubrics (Formative) assessment Complex skills Feedback Mental model Technology-enhanced assessment 21st century skills 

Notes

Acknowledgement

We would like to gratefully acknowledge the contribution of the Viewbrics-project, officially called ‘Formative assessment of complex skills with video-enhanced rubrics in secondary education’, a three-year research and development project funded by the Netherlands Initiative for Education Research (NRO), project number 405-15-550.

References

  1. 1.
    Voogt, J., Roblin, N.P.: A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st century competences: implications for national curriculum policies. J. Curric. Stud. 44, 299–321 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kirschner, P., Van Merriënboer, J.: Ten steps to complex learning a new approach to instruction and instructional design. In: Good, T.L. (ed.) 21st Century Education: A Reference Handbook, pp. 244–253. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Galligan, F., et al.: Advanced PE for Edexcel. Heinemann Educational Publishers, Oxford (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bowman, K.: Background paper for the AQF Council on generic skills, Canberra (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rusman, E., Martínez-Monés, A., Boon, J., Rodríguez-Triana, M.J., Villagrá-Sobrino, S.: Gauging teachers’ needs with regard to technology-enhanced formative assessment (TEFA) of 21st century skills in the classroom. In: Kalz, M., Ras, E. (eds.) CAA 2014. CCIS, vol. 439, pp. 1–14. Springer, Cham (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08657-6_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Thijs, A., Fisser, P., van der Hoeven, M.: 21E Eeuwse Vaardigheden in Het Curriculum Van Het Funderend Onderwijs. Slo, p. 128 (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Andrade, H., Du, Y.: Student perspectives on rubric-referenced assessment. Pract. Assess. Res. Eval. 10, 1–11 (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Panadero, E., Jonsson, A.: The use of scoring rubrics for formative assessment purposes revisited: a review. Educ. Res. Rev. 9, 129–144 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schildkamp, K., Heitink, M., Van Der Kleij, F., Hoogland, I., Dijkstra, A., Kippers, W.: Voorwaarden voor effectieve formatieve toetsing - een praktische review, Enschede (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Berry, O., Price, M., Rust, C., Donovan, B.O., Price, M., Rust, C.: Teaching in higher education know what i mean? Enhancing student understanding of assessment standards and criteria. Teach. High. Educ. 37–41 (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Westera, W.: On the changing nature of learning context: anticipating the virtual extensions of the world. Educ. Technol. Soc. 14, 201–212 (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    van Gog, T., Verveer, I., Verveer, L.: Learning from video modeling examples: Effects of seeing the human model’s face. Comput. Educ. 72, 323–327 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    De Grez, L., Valcke, M., Roozen, I.: The differential impact of observational learning and practice- based learning on the development of oral presentation skills in higher education. High. Educ. Res. Dev. 33, 256–271 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rohbanfard, H., Proteau, L.: Live vs video presentation techniques in the observational learning of motor skills. Trends Neurosci. Educ. 2, 27–32 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    van Gog, T., Rummel, N.: Example-based learning: integrating cognitive and social-cognitive research perspectives. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 22, 155–174 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Baecher, L., Kung, S.C., Jewkes, A.M., Rosalia, C.: The role of video for self-evaluation in early field experiences. Teach. Teach. Educ. 36, 189–197 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Plomp, T., Nieveen, N.: Educational design research: an introduction. In: Plomp, T., Nieveen, N. (eds.) Educational Design Research, pp. 10–51. Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development, Enschede (2013)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ackermans, K., Rusman, E., Brand-Gruwel, S., Specht, M.: The dilemmas of formulating theory-informed design guidelines for a video enhanced rubric. In: Ras, E., Guerrero Roldán, A.E. (eds.) TEA 2017. CCIS, vol. 829, pp. 123–136. Springer, Cham (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97807-9_10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Last, J., Simmons, S., Keene, C.: Card sorting-design research techniquesGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Welten InstituteOpen University of the NetherlandsHeerlenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations