Universitat Jaume I (SPAIN)
About this paper:
Appears in: EDULEARN15 Proceedings
Publication year: 2015
Pages: 3278-3287
ISBN: 978-84-606-8243-1
ISSN: 2340-1117
Conference name: 7th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies
Dates: 6-8 July, 2015
Location: Barcelona, Spain
The aim of this project is to evaluate how a methodology of on learning process assessment can be implemented. This methodology focuses on assessment tools based on the learning process rather than on final results/outcomes. This assessment should involve students in a reflexive and continuous learning process which will provide an effective and timely feedback in groups with a high number of students.

We will analyze the outcomes of a pilot study conducted during the school year 2013/14 in a first-year course called Finance Maths (codes AE-1003, EC-1003 and FC1003). This is a common course shared in the grades of Economy, Business Management and Finance and Accounting from the University Jaume I. The course consists of 19 workshop groups, 39 laboratory groups. The pilot study includes four workshop groups and five laboratories.

A part of the final mark of the course(12%) is obtained by solving three applied/practical cases, submitted through the on-line platform (moodle) and reviewed by the corresponding teachers. The students participating in the pilot study submitted their activities and, afterwards, they self-corrected their answers, using the same marking criteria as their professors. The criteria were designed to provide an objective correction process and also to avoid that a punctual error in one of the items does not void the answers provided in other sections of the activity. The student had to decide, for each one of the items reviewed, if his/her answer was right or wrong. If it was wrong, the student was asked to write a comment explaining in details his/her mistake.

With this procedure the following goals were accomplished:
To self-asses, students needed to check the answer key. This means that they reviewed their answers in a short term after they hand it in.

Students received an individualized feedback almost immediately. The key point here was to ask students to introduce a precise comment on those items they made a mistake. This is not a direct feedback from the teacher, but an indirect feedback obtained from the comparison between the answer key of the applied/practical case and the solution that they had handed-in.

The time spent between submission and professor’s feedback did not get reduced. The student might continue having a late in time mark from his/her activity. However, this fact becomes of secondary relevance, as the main goal is that the students reflects thoughtfully about all the items required in the activity, specially on those in which their answer were wrong.

This Project analyzes the participation degree of students in the pilot study and, using a chi-squared test, it compares the outcomes of participant students with those from the rest of the students of the course. It mainly focuses on the fact of passing or failing the course in first and second call. The positive findings suggest that it is advisable to extend this pilot study to all the students taking this course.