Student performance on design problems correlates negligibly with traditional project grades, suggesting DPs capture distinct transfer-oriented HOT dimensions¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · design r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2029: tool and model accuracy changes quickly

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Spearman's correlation between project and DP grades was negligible across all three courses, ranging from −0.05 to 0.03. → Ahmad D. Suleiman 2026 q2 i? Learner profiling showed 28.2% of students were Implementers with high project grades but below-passing DP scores, while 55.1% were Masters. → Ahmad D. Suleiman 2026 (2)

Evidence¶

Ahmad D. Suleiman 2026¶

Ahmad D. Suleiman, Daqing Hou, and Maliha Noushin Raida. (2026). LLM-Generated Design Problems for Assessing Higher-Order Thinking in Project-Based Learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2607.11032. https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.11032 doi:10.48550/arxiv.2607.11032

q2 · i? · design · r2

Correlational analysis comparing Task A DP grades with project grades across three courses found correlations "ranging from−0.05to0 .03"; the authors interpret this as DPs capturing dimensions not reflected in artifact-based assessment.

"Spearman's 𝜌 between project and DP grades was negligible across all three courses (ranging from−0.05to0 .03). This lack of association suggests that DPs may capture dimensions of HOT in transfer contexts not reflected in traditional artifact-based assessment."

Ahmad D. Suleiman 2026 (2)¶

Ahmad D. Suleiman, Daqing Hou, and Maliha Noushin Raida. (2026). LLM-Generated Design Problems for Assessing Higher-Order Thinking in Project-Based Learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2607.11032. https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.11032

q2 · i? · design · r2

Learner profiling using a performance matrix (high project ≥95%, high design >50%) classified 55.1% as Masters and 28.2% as Implementers, suggesting strong deliverables do not always reflect individual transfer-oriented design mastery.

"While most students (55.1%) wereMasterswho performed well in both assessments, a substantial group (28.2%) wereImplementers: students with high project grades who scored below the passing threshold on the DP."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Student DP performance differed significantly across the three course deployments, with the paper-based DT3 exam scoring lowest, likely due to administration mode — related
• Instructors value design problems for assessing higher-order thinking in PjBL but cite creation effort and scalability as adoption barriers — related