IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/aecrev/v106y2016i5p373-77.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of Challenge Quizzes on Student Knowledge

Author

Listed:
  • KimMarie McGoldrick
  • Peter W. Schuhmann

Abstract

We evaluate the efficacy of a blended formative/summative assessment tool developed to support mastery learning by students without placing undue burden on instructors. Our innovation provides students with an opportunity to take a more difficult "challenge" quiz to demonstrate their command of the material and improve their grade on regular in-class quizzes. The structure of these quizzes motivates students to modify study behaviors (formative component) and take responsibility for knowledge acquisition (summative component). This mastery-based testing approach serves to bring the student's objective of a quality grade in line with the instructor's objective of quality learning.

Suggested Citation

  • KimMarie McGoldrick & Peter W. Schuhmann, 2016. "The Impact of Challenge Quizzes on Student Knowledge," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(5), pages 373-377, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:aea:aecrev:v:106:y:2016:i:5:p:373-77
    Note: DOI: 10.1257/aer.p20161056
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.p20161056
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.aeaweb.org/aer/ds/10605/P2016_1056_ds.zip
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.aeaweb.org/articles/attachments?retrieve=-0oikoZhWb1ispHWiWoZinNdPDow_AMF
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to AEA members and institutional subscribers.
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Becker, William E, Jr, 1982. "The Educational Process and Student Achievement Given Uncertainty in Measurement," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(1), pages 229-236, March.
    2. KimMarie McGoldrick & Peter W. Schuhmann, 2013. "Challenge quizzes: A unique tool for motivation and assessment," New Zealand Economic Papers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(3), pages 257-275, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Piopiunik, Marc & Schwerdt, Guido & Woessmann, Ludger, 2013. "Central school exit exams and labor-market outcomes," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 93-108.
    2. Stinebrickner Ralph & Stinebrickner Todd R., 2008. "The Causal Effect of Studying on Academic Performance," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-55, June.
    3. Hans Bonesrønning & Leiv Opstad, 2012. "How Much is Students' College Performance Affected by Quantity of Study?," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 11(2), pages 46-63.
    4. Carmen Lamagna & Sheikh Selim, 2005. "Heterogeneous Students, Impartial Teaching and Optimal Allocation of Teaching Methods," General Economics and Teaching 0503011, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Michael Ostrovsky & Michael Schwarz, 2010. "Information Disclosure and Unraveling in Matching Markets," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(2), pages 34-63, May.
    6. Allgood, Sam, 2001. "Grade targets and teaching innovations," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 485-493, October.
    7. Becker, William E. & Powers, John R., 2001. "Student performance, attrition, and class size given missing student data," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 377-388, August.
    8. Schwerdt, Guido & Woessmann, Ludger, 2017. "The information value of central school exams," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 65-79.
    9. Chadi, Adrian & de Pinto, Marco & Schultze, Gabriel, 2019. "Young, gifted and lazy? The role of ability and labor market prospects in student effort decisions," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 66-79.
    10. Tisha L. N. Emerson & Beck A. Taylor, 2004. "Comparing Student Achievement across Experimental and Lecture‐Oriented Sections of a Principles of Microeconomics Course," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 70(3), pages 672-693, January.
    11. Ross Guest, 2001. "The Instructor's Optimal Mix of Teaching Methods," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(3), pages 313-326.
    12. Philip Babcock, 2010. "Real Costs Of Nominal Grade Inflation? New Evidence From Student Course Evaluations," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 48(4), pages 983-996, October.
    13. Ninos P. Malek & Joshua C. Hall & Collin Hodges, 2014. "A Review and Analysis of the Effectiveness of Alternative Teaching Methods on Student Learning in Economics," Working Papers 14-27, Department of Economics, West Virginia University.
    14. Kady Marie-Danielle Body & Liliane Bonnal & Jean-Fran篩s Giret, 2014. "Does student employment really impact academic achievement? The case of France," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(25), pages 3061-3073, September.
    15. Babcock, Phillip, 2009. "Real Costs of Nominal Grade Inflation? New Evidence from Student Course Evaluations," University of California at Santa Barbara, Economics Working Paper Series qt4823c3jx, Department of Economics, UC Santa Barbara.
    16. Gomis-Porqueras, Pedro & Rodrigues-Neto, José A., 2018. "Teaching technologies, attendance, learning and the optimal level of access to online materials," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 329-342.
    17. Pedro Gomis-Porqueras & Juergen Meinecke & Jose A. Rodrigues-Neto, 2011. "New Technologies in Higher Education: Lower Attendance and Worse Learning Outcomes?," Agenda - A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics, vol. 18(1), pages 69-84.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • A22 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics - - - Undergraduate
    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aea:aecrev:v:106:y:2016:i:5:p:373-77. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Michael P. Albert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aeaaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.