Development of an offline computer-based assessment tool in statistics and probability utilizing MS PowerPoint and MS Excel
Cherry Mae B. Cabrera & Jupeth T. Pentang
Abstract
This capstone project aimed to develop an offline computer-based assessment (CBA) tool that uses a computer instead of a traditional paper test in evaluating student learning. This addresses the difficulties faced by teachers in administering quarterly assessments. Incorporating technology into student assessment can increase student interest because of the immediate feedback generated automatically and can help teachers improve their work performance. This capstone project employed a developmental approach and utilized a modified ADDIE (Analysis, Design, and Development) model to design the tool using Microsoft PowerPoint and Excel. Ten experts in mathematics, ICT, and assessment validated the face and content validity of the developed CBA tool. Based on the panel’s evaluation, the developed offline CBA tool in Statistics and Probability has passed all the assigned criteria, such as functionality, usability, efficiency, technicality, and accessibility. Overall, the developed CBA tool is suitable for use to address assessment-related issues.
Keywords
ADDIE model, assessment in learning, ICT integration, Microsoft office applications
Author information & Contribution
Cherry Mae B. Cabrera. Teacher II, Muñoz National High School - Main, Science City of Muñoz, Nueva Ecija, Philippines. Graduate student, Wesleyan University - Philippines, Cabanatuan City, Nueva Ecija, Philippines
Jupeth T. Pentang. Corresponding author. Assistant Professor III, Western Philippines University, Puerto Princesa City, Philippines. Graduate School Facilitator, Wesleyan University - Philippines, Cabanatuan City, Nueva Ecija, Philippines. Email: jupethpentang123@gmail.com
Disclosure statement
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
AI Declaration
Notes
Acknowledgement
References
Abdulrahman, M. D., Faruk, N., Oloyede, A. A., Surajudeen-Bakinde, N. T., Olawoyin, L. A., Mejabi, O. V., Imam-Fulani, Y. O., Fahm, A. O., & Azeez, A. L. (2020). Multimedia tools in the teaching and learning processes: A systematic review. Heliyon, 6(11). https://www.cell.com/heliyon/pdf/S2405-8440(20)32155-1.pdf
Akdemir, O. & Oguz, A. (2008). Computer-based testing: An alternative for the assessment of Turkish undergraduate students. Computers & Education, 51(3), 1198-1204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.11.007
Alabi, A., Samuel, K. & Sabitu, A. (2023). Effectiveness of computer based and paper pencil tests on the achievement of senior secondary school chemistry students in Kano Metropolis. AJSTME, 9(2), 97-102.
AlAdl, A. (2020). Using electronic tests versus pen and paper tests: The experience of Delta University. Journal of the Faculty of Education – Mansoura University, 2(110), 31-45. https://maed.journals.ekb.eg/article_147690_d5d445b1d47b48bd4ac64748e5d38ae.pdf
Alek, A., Marzuki, A. G., Farkhan, M., Surahman, D., Daryanto, D., & Febrianto, S. (2020). Computer based testing in senior high school on national examination. Indonesian Journal of Learning Education and Counseling, 2(2), 204-210. https://doi.org/10.31960/ijolec.v2i2.340
Ancho, I., & Bongco, R. (2019). Exploring Filipino teachers’ professional workload. Journal of Research, Policy & Practice of Teachers and Teacher Education, 9(2), 19-29. https://doi.org/10.37134/jrpptte.vol9.no2.2.2019
Asio, J.R., Gadia, E.D., Abarintos, E.C., Paguio, D.P. & Balce, M. (2021). Internet connection and learning device availability of college students: basis for institutionalizing flexible learning in the new normal. Studies in Humanities and Education, 2(1): 56 – 69. DOI : 10.48185/she.v2i1.224
Barrot, J.S., Llenares, I.I. & del Rosario, L.S. (2021). Students’ online learning challenges during the pandemic and how they cope with them: The case of the Philippines. Educ Inf Technol 26, 7321–7338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10589-x
Bayazit, A. & Aşkar, P. (2012). Performance and duration differences between online and paper–pencil tests. Asia Pacific Educ. Rev. 13, 219–226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-011-9190-9
Bloom, T. J., Rich, W. D., Olson, S. M., & Adams, M. L. (2018). Perceptions and performance using computer-based testing: One institution’s experience. Currents in pharmacy teaching & learning, 10(2), 235–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2017.10.015
Blundell, C. N. (2021). Teacher use of digital technologies for school-based assessment: A scoping review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 28(3), 279-300. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2021.1929828
Brady, J., & Wilson, E. (2021). Teacher well-being in England: Teacher responses to school-level initiatives. Cambridge Journal of Education, 51(1), 45–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2020.1775789
Burgmanis, G., Mikite, M., France, I., & Namsone, D. (2023). Development of computer-based diagnostic assessment system: Case study of equivalence of paper-and-pencil and computer-based testing. Society. Integration. Education. Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference, 1, 613-622. https://doi.org/10.17770/sie2023vol1.7096
Campbell, P. (2014). Modifying ADDIE: Incorporating new technologies in library instruction. Public Services Quarterly, 10(2), 138-149. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228959.2014.904214
Campbell, S., Greenwood, M., Prior, S., Shearer, T., Walkem, K., Young, S., Bywaters, D., & Walker, K. (2020). Purposive sampling: Complex or simple? Research case examples. Journal of Research in Nursing, 25(8), 652-661. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987120927206
Ceka, B., & O’Geen, A. (2019). Evaluating student performance on computer-based versus handwritten exams: Evidence from a field experiment in the classroom. PS: Political Science & Politics, 52(4), 757-762. doi:10.1017/S104909651900091X
Cha, H., Park, T., & Seo, J. (2020). What should be considered when developing ICT-integrated classroom models for a developing country? Sustainability, 12(7), Article 2967. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072967
Csapó, B., Ainley, J., Bennett, R.E., Latour, T., Law, N. (2012). Technological Issues for Computer-Based Assessment. In: Griffin, P., McGaw, B., Care, E. (eds) Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2324-5_4
Danniels, E., Pyle, A. & DeLuca, C. (2020). The role of technology in supporting classroom assessment in play-based kindergarten. Teaching and Teacher Education, 88, 102966. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.102966
Darr, C. (2014). Computer-administered vs paper-and-pencil tests: Is there a difference? Set: Research Information for Teachers, (3), 61-64. https://doi.org/10.18296/set.0322
Das, K. (2019). The role and impact of ICT in improving the quality of education: An overview. International Journal of Innovative Studies in Sociology and Humanities, 4(6), 97-103. https://ijissh.org/storage/Volume4/Issue6/IJISSH-040611.pdf
Debuse, J.C.W. & Lawley, M. (2016). Benefits and drawbacks of computer-based assessment and feedback systems: Student and educator perspectives. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(2), 294-301. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12232
Dembitzer, L., Zelikpvitz, S., & Kettler, R. (2017). Designing computer-based assessments: multidisciplinary findings and student perspectives. International Journal of Educational Technology, 4(3), 20-31.
DiCarlo, C.F., Deris, A.R. & Deris, T.P. (2023). mLearning Versus Paper and Pencil Practice for Telling Time: Impact for Attention and Accuracy. J Behav Educ, 32(1), 127–145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-021-09442-5
Efendi, R., Lesmana, L. S., Putra, F., Yandani, E., & Wulandari, R. A. (2021, February). Design and Implementation of Computer Based Test (CBT) in vocational education. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1764(1), 012068. IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1764/1/012068
Elmahdi, I., Al-Hattami, A. & Fawzi, H. (2018). Using technology for formative assessment to improve students’ learning TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 17(2), 182-188.
Gocotano, T.E., Jerodiaz, M.L., Banggay, J.P., Nasibog, H. & Go, M.B. (2021). Higher education students’ challenges on flexible online learning implementation in the rural areas: A Philippine case. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 20(7), 262-290. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.20.7.15
Gonzales, R.D. & Callueng, C.M. (2014). Classroom assessment practices of Filipino teachers: Measurement and impact of professional development. In: Magno, C. & Gaerlan, M. (eds.). Essential of Counseling Education. Asian Psychological Services and Assessment. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.1950.3685
Grapin, N., & Sayac, N. (2022). From paper-pencil to tablet-based assessment: A comparative study at the end of primary school. Twelfth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education. https://hal.science/hal-03753427
Hundani, M., & Toquero, C. M. (2021). Teaching-related paperwork: examining linkage to occupational stress of public school teachers in primary education. ASEAN Journal of Basic and Higher Education, 5, 13-25. https://www.paressu.org/online/index.php/aseanjbh/article/view/286
Jomuad, P. D., Antiquina, L. M. M., Cericos, E. U., Bacus, J. A., Vallejo, J. H., Dionio, B. B., Bazar, J. S., Cocolan, J.V., & Clarin, A. S. (2021). Teachers’ workload in relation to burnout and work performance. International journal of educational policy research and review. https://doi.org/10.15739/IJEPRR.21.007
Joy, O. T. E. (2023). Impact of Computer-Based Tests on the Quality of Education in Nigeria. International Journal of Information Technology & Computer Engineering, 3(03), 6-14. https://doi.org/10.55529/ijitc.36.1.7
Jurāne-Brēmane, A. (2023). Digital Assessment in Technology-Enriched Education: Thematic Review. Education Sciences. 13(5): 522. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13050522
Kaipa, R. M. (2021). Multiple choice questions and essay questions in curriculum. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 13(1), 16-32. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JARHE-01-2020-0011/full/html
Kumar, A. P., Nayak, A., Shenoy, M., & Goyal, S. (2023). A novel approach to generate distractors for multiple choice questions. Expert Systems with Applications, 225, Article 120022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2023.120022
Laurie, R., Bridglall, B. L., & Arseneault, P. (2015). Investigating the effect of computer-administered versus traditional paper and pencil assessments on student writing achievement. SAGE Open, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015584616
Lawshe, C. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity 1. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563-575. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x
Lesly, N. (2021). Implementing a computer-based test (CBT) as final assessment and its relevance to the teaching and learning process (A case of students and teachers in SMA Negeri 1 Soe). Wiralodra English Journal, 5(2), 15-27. https://wej.unwir.ac.id/index.php/wej/article/view/132
Looney, J. W. (2009). Assessment and innovation in education. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 24, OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/222814543073
Lynn, M. R. (1986). Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research, 35(6), 382-386. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-198611000-00017
Maqableh, M., Masa’deh, R. & Mohammed, A. (2015) The acceptance and use of computer based assessment in higher education. Journal of Software Engineering and Applications, 8, 557-574. doi: 10.4236/jsea.2015.810053.
Mirsharapovna, S. Z., Shadjalilovna, S. M., Kakhramonovich, A. A., & Malikovna, K. R. N. (2022). Pros and cons of computer technologies in education. Texas Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, 14, 26-29. https://zienjournals.com/index.php/tjm/article/view/2658
Moon, J. L. (2013). Comparability of online and paper/pencil mathematics performance measures [Doctoral Dissertation, University of Nebraska]. Lincoln ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. https://www.proquest.com/openview/f7029531aa38d9a6ba29f5688270f741/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750
Neumann, M.M., Anthony, J.L., Erazo, N.A. and Neumann, D.L. (2019). Assessment and technology: Mapping future directions in the early childhood classroom. Front. Educ. 4:116. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00116
Nikou, S.A. & Economides, A.A. (2019). A comparative study between a computer-based and a mobile-based assessment: Usability and user experience. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 16(4), 381-391. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-01-2019-0003
Nye, C.D. (2022). Technology-based assessments: Novel approaches to testing in organizational, psychological, and educational settings. International Journal of Testing, 22:3-4, 213-215, https://doi.org/10.1080/15305058.2022.2143173
Obilor, E. I. (2023). Convenience and purposive sampling techniques: Are they the same. International Journal of Innovative Social & Science Education Research, 11(1), 1-7. https://seahipaj.org/journals-ci/mar-2023/IJISSER/full/IJISSER-M-1-2023.pdf
Pentang, J. T. (2021). Technological dimensions of globalization across organizations: Inferences for instruction and research. International Educational Scientific Research Journal, 7(7), 28-32. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3896459
Pentang, J. T. (2023, May 10). Quantitative research instrumentation for educators. Lecture Series on Research Process and Publication, Wesleyan University – Philippines. http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.21153.28004
Perryman, J., & Calvert, G. (2020). What motivates people to teach, and why do they leave? Accountability, performativity and teacher retention. British Journal of Educational Studies, 68(1), 3-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2019.1589417
Richey, R., & Klein, J. (2005). Developmental research methods: Creating knowledge from instructional design and development practice. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 16, 23-38. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02961473
Ripana, U. (2022). Computer based test in modern era for students at Mitradharma Senior High School. Glosains: Jurnal Sains Global Indonesia, 3(1), 27-32. https://doi.org/10.59784/glosains.v3i1.50
Sarmiento, C. P., Morales, M. E., Elipane, L. E., & Palomar, B. C. (2020). Assessment practices in Philippine higher STEAM education. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 17(5). https://doi.org/10.53761/1.17.5.18
Serdyukov, P. (2017). Innovation in education: what works, what doesn’t, and what to do about it? Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 10(1), 4-33. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-10-2016-0007
Shudong Wang, Hong Jiao, Young, M. J., Brooks, T., & Olson, J. (2008). Comparability of computer-based and paper-and-pencil testing in K–12 reading assessments: A meta-analysis of testing mode effects. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68(1), 5-24. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164407305592
Shute, V. J., & Rahimi, S. (2017). Review of computer‐based assessment for learning in elementary and secondary education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12172
Sibberns, H. (2020). Technology and Assessment. In: Wagemaker, H. (eds) Reliability and Validity of International Large-Scale Assessment. IEA Research for Education, vol 10. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-53081-5_10
Sirianni, J. M., Ng, Y. J., & Vishwanath, A. (2017). Adopting computer-based assessments: The role of perceived value in classroom technology acceptance. Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 7(4), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.29333/ojcmt/2607
Smolinsky, L., Marx, B. D., Olafsson, G., & Ma, Y. A. (2020). Computer-based and paper-and-pencil tests: A study in calculus for STEM majors. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58(7), 1256-1278. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120930235
Sullivan, P. D. (2020). An examination of the use of computer-based formative assessments. Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 2116. https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/etd/2116
Terzis, V. & Economides, A.A. (2011). The acceptance and use of computer based assessment. Computers & Education, 56(4), 1032-1044. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.11.017
Terzis, V. & Economides, A.A. (2011). The acceptance and use of computer based assessment. Computers & Education, 56(4), 1032-1044. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.11.017
Thurlow, M., Lazarus, S. S., Albus, D., & Hodgson, J. (2010). Computer-based testing: Practices and considerations (Synthesis Report 78). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
Tilden, V. P., Nelson, C. A., & May, B. A. (1990). Use of qualitative methods to enhance content validity. Nursing Research, 39(3), 172-175. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-199005000-00015
Tomasik, M.J., Berger, S. & Moser, U. (2018). On the development of a computer-based tool for formative student assessment: Epistemological, methodological, and practical issues. Front. Psychol. 9:2245. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02245
von der Embse, N., Ryan, S. V., Gibbs, T., & Mankin, A. (2019). Teacher stress interventions: A systematic review. Psychology in the Schools, 56(8), 1328-1343. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22279
Wagner, I., Loesche, P. & Bißantz, S. (2022). Low-stakes performance testing in Germany by the VERA assessment: analysis of the mode effects between computer-based testing and paper-pencil testing. Eur J Psychol Educ, 37, 531–549 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-021-00532-6
Wang, T.H., Kao, C.H. & Chen, H.C. (2021). Factors associated with the equivalence of the scores of computer-based test and paper-and-pencil test: Presentation type, item difficulty and administration order. Sustainability, 13(17), Article 9548. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13179548
Zacharis, N.Z. (2010). Innovative assessment for learning enhancement: issues and practices. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 3(1), 61-70. https://doi.org/10.19030/cier.v3i1.162
Zheng, M., & Bender, D. (2019). Evaluating outcomes of computer-based classroom testing: Student acceptance and impact on learning and exam performance. Medical teacher, 41(1), 75–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2018.1441984
Cite this article:
Cabrera, C.M.B. & Pentang, J.T. (2023). Development of an offline computer-based assessment tool in statistics and probability utilizing MS PowerPoint and MS Excel. International Journal of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics, 3 (4), 73-100. https://doi.org/10.53378/353034
License:
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) International License.
Find this article in:
Related articles:
Most read articles
- Social media usage and the academic performance of Filipino junior high school students
- Exploring the factors influencing commuters’ satisfaction and the use of public utility buses in Quezon City, Philippines
- A narrative exploration of romantic experiences and ideal relationship standards among Filipino Gen Z
- Students’ exposure to social media and their radical involvement on the societal issues in the Philippines
- ChatGPT integration significantly boosts personalized learning outcomes: A Philippine study
- Tiktok made me book it: The impact of Tiktok on tourism destination selection of generation Z and millennials in Manila
- Senior high school students’ awareness and literacy on computer software applications
- Self-perception of ABM students towards their academic, social and emotional college preparedness
- Enhancing financial literacy among Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program beneficiaries
- Emotional intelligence and leadership efficacy of university student leaders