Seven-dimensional outcome comparison framework for analyzing implicit learning outcomes in summative assessments¶
Research Method · All research methods
Evidence · 6 claims (6 for) · 1 study (1 associational),q2· 0 of 1 report an effect size · 6 claims rest on one study
Description¶
The article develops and applies a comparison framework that identifies characteristics of summative assessments in seven dimensions: cognitive process, transferability, depth of analysis, interdependence, novelty, scaffolding and communication. It is used to compare implicit learning outcomes between Engineering and Engineering Technology programs by scoring final-exam questions. The authors state it was "adapted from taxonomies and outcome principles from the literature" and that "the framework we have developed is intended to allow that comparison" of course rigor.
Accounts¶
- Seven-dimensional outcome comparison framework for analyzing implicit learning outcomes in summative assessments: The article develops and applies a comparison framework that identifies characteristics of summative assessments in seven dimensions: cognitive process, transferability, depth of analysis, interdependence, novelty, scaffolding and communication. It is used to compare implicit learning outcomes between Engineering and Engineering Technology programs by scoring final-exam questions. The authors state it was "adapted from taxonomies and outcome principles from the literature" and that "the framework we have developed is intended to allow that comparison" of course rigor. (Zakani et al. (2019))
Claims¶
- Engineering physics exam questions demand more approach selection or synthesis while Technology questions often prescribe a specific approach [+W]
- Collected exam questions required no cognitive processes above apply and no originality in analysis or high-level interdependence [+W]
- The framework shows high scoring consistency, with 79% agreement and 81% inter-rater reliability on physics questions [+W]
- No significant differences between Engineering and Technology exam questions in novelty and level of communication [+W]
- Technology programs examine discipline-related physics topics at higher cognitive levels within a disciplinary context [+W]
- Variation among Engineering programs is as large as variation between Engineering and Technology programs [+W]
Related Research Methods¶
-
Key Sources¶
- Zakani, S., Kaupp, J., Turner, R. D., & Frank, B. (2019). Analyzing implicit science and math outcomes in engineering and technology programs. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2019.1.7994
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
research-method |
id |
seven-dimensional-outcome-comparison-framework-for-analyzing-implicit-learning-outcomes-in |
title |
Seven-dimensional outcome comparison framework for analyzing implicit learning outcomes in summative assessments |
description |
The article develops and applies a comparison framework that identifies characteristics of summative assessments in seven dimensions: cognitive process, transferability, depth of analysis, interdependence, novelty, scaffolding and communication. |
status |
review |
moved_from |
theory/seven-dimensional-outcome-comparison-framework |
generated |
by process:sweep-kinds on 2026-10-10 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — zakani-2019 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.