learning - Academic Conferences Limited

Martin Cápay et al.
of Likert scales. We compared electronic testing to traditional (“paper”) testing using a scale with
seven point scale between the options stated as antonyms, e.g. we used the scale objective vs.
subjective. The question was: Do you think that traditional testing is
objective 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 subjective
effective 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ineffective etc.
We used nine scales (Figure 1, Figure 2). If the respondent marked number 4, it meant that he/she
regards the particular statement neutrally. On the other hand, marking any other option from given
scale, denoted respondent’s inclination to certain term (on the left or on the right side of the scale).
The results may be compared to the balance pans - one of the terms tips the scales according to the
value it was given by the respondent while the pans are balanced if the respondent does not prefer
any of the terms (antonym responses to the statement).
2.2 Research outcomes
One of the findings of our survey was that the students did not clearly prefer computer testing and
evaluation to teacher’s assessment.
We asked them about the perception of two terms, electronic testing (Figure 1) and “traditional”
(paper) testing (Figure 2).
Figure 1: Comparison of responses in particular phases. Students’ and teachers’ perception of the
term “electronic” testing
The research showed that the attitude of students is to large extent influenced by the level of their
previous experience with e-testing. In spite of the fact that testing is in all mentioned groups perceived
as modern, effective and interesting, it is not completely accepted by all the students, nor is it
considered to be objective. Students who were tested only traditionally (answering the questions on a
paper) claimed they would like to have the opportunity to be tested electronically. Those who
experienced both traditional and electronic testing partly preferred the traditional way of testing.
Finally, the students tested only using electronic tests expressed mostly positive attitude toward this
testing method (Figure 1 and Figure 2).
Based on the responses to other questions in the questionnaire in which 5-choice Lickert scales were
used, we found out that students’ perception of this type of testing depends on whether classification
is the objective of the testing or not. The students preferred combined form of testing where the
teacher still plays the essential role. In some cases they also required to check the automatically
evaluated tests – in these cases the teacher went through the test again with the student and checked
the answers.
84