In a constructivist portfolio-assessment course, deep approaches decreased, surface approaches increased, and preferences for student participation and permanent evaluation decreased significantly¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2008 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Students in a constructivist-designed course with portfolio assessment decreased deep approaches and increased surface approaches, and their preferences for student participation in examination and for permanent evaluation decreased significantly. → Loyens 2008

Evidence¶

Loyens 2008¶

Loyens, S. M. M., & Gijbels, D. (2008). Understanding the effects of constructivist learning environments: introducing a multi-directional approach. Instructional Science, 36, 351–357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-008-9059-4

q2 · i? · review · r2

The editors' summary of the Baeten, Dochy, and Struyven study of experiences with portfolio assessment in a constructivist course, students' approaches to learning, and assessment preferences. No effect size is printed in this summary.

"the findings indicate that students’ preferences for student participation in examination and for permanent evaluation decreased significantly. Further, the researchers found that students decreased their deep approaches to learning and increased their surface approaches"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• A constructivist course increased perceived deep-level assessment demands but students still reported more frequent use of surface approaches to learning — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• Portfolio-based learning environments did not change assessment preferences or deepen learning, and increased surface approaches in first-year students — related
• In a constructivist learning environment, students' perceptions of assessment shifted toward deeper demands but their actual learning approaches did not, and surface approaches increased — related
• Students who perceive assessment demands as assessing deep, higher-level cognitive processing employ deep approaches, while those perceiving rote-recall demands employ surface approaches — reports the opposite
• Students who perceive teaching as good, and perceive clear goals, supportiveness and relevant courses, are more inclined towards a deep approach — reports the opposite
• Student-centred learning environments show mixed effects on students' approaches to learning, with several studies reporting increased surface or decreased deep approaches — a broader claim this one bears on