learning - Academic Conferences Limited

Martin Cápay et al.
The test in the experimental as well as in the control group was realised six times. In all cases the
task was to work with Karnaugh map, the difference was in the basic function that was stated to work
with. During particular testing, all the students in research groups got the same task - the difference
was in the form of the task elaboration (electronic test vs. printed test.
To verify the stated hypotheses, we decided to exchange the form of testing after the third test, i.e.
the control group elaborated the test electronically and experimental group used printed form. This
way we ensured the same conditions at elaborating the problem task and each of the groups had
three attempts to elaborate the test in particular form.
Table 2: The data of the experimental and the control group before the exchange
Experimental group
(used interactive materials during their study)
Average
evaluation
Control group
(used non-interactive materials during their study)
Average
evaluation
(mark A-FX)
Test
Time
Test
Time
no. Form of testing limit (mark A-FX) no. Form of testing limit
1 electronic 15 B 1 printed 15 E
2 electronic 12 B 2 printed 15 D
3 electronic 9 A 3 printed 15 D
4 printed 15 E 4 electronic 15 A
5 printed 15 E 5 electronic 12 B
6 printed 15 E 6 electronic 9 A
In the first and the second test, the experimental group gained B mark as the average evaluation, in
the last electronically elaborated test the average mark was A, in spite of the fact that the time limit
was decreased after each test. On the other hand, the control group had the same time limit in all
three tests (15 minutes) and their average evaluation was E in the first test and two times D in the
following tests.
After we exchanged the form of testing in experimental and control group, we found out that the
results of the students were similar to those before the exchange from the point of view of the form of
testing, i.e. the experimental group that now elaborated the printed test gained mark E at average (the
same result was in the control group in the first three tests), in spite of the fact that previously they
elaborated the test electronically and their evaluation was significantly better. Similarly, in the control
group that now elaborated the test in electronic form the average evaluation was two times A mark
and once B mark which is comparable to the results of the experimental group in the first three tests,
in spite of the fact that the time limit was decreased after each test.
Based on the three realisations of testing in two different forms (electronic and printed) we have to
conclude that there is a statistically significant difference in the evaluation of the given task between
the experimental and the control group (Table 2). Therefore, hypothesis H1 has to be dismissed. On
the other hand, we observed significantly better results when using electronic form of testing in both
the experimental and the control group. That means the hypothesis H1 was confirmed. Furthermore,
we can say that the success in the task elaboration and the following evaluation result is not
dependent on the form of previous study of the learners.
5. Conclusion
Several years ago, we found out the perception of electronic testing is more positive than the
perception of traditional “paper” form. At that time, our courses, as well as the tests, were
characterised by static form to quite a wide extent. In the study materials, there were no animations
nor interactivity, the testing was carried out only within the basic possibilities of the used system. This
fact was obvious not only to the teachers but to the students as well. It was expressed in the final
questionnaires they filled in at the end of each term. After some time, the interactive animations were
implemented in several courses. The illustrative value of the study materials was increased and the
testing of particular topics was more clear and transparent. Consequently, we were able to verify the
didactic effectiveness of designed and created tests.
We found out that the implementation of interactive animations and interactive problem tasks really
facilitates the development of intellectual and cognitive abilities. At the same time, based on the
results of the experiment, we can see that the usage of interactive problem tasks is effective from the
point of view of time necessary for the elaboration of the task, as well as the successful task solving.
89