Tutorials, on the other hand, present information to be learned and then provide guided practice. As computerized methods have developed and become more sophisticated, many researchers have experimented with a combination of the two approaches using guided exploratory learning and intelligent tutoring systems Gibbons and Rogers, ; Cox, ; Dijkstra et al.
These more complicated computer-based methodologies, however appealing, seemed more sophisticated than our project required. Having chosen an expository approach, the designers decided to use a tutorial methodology. Tutorials are characterized by the presentation of information, ques- tion and response, analysis of the response, appropriate feedback, remediation, and determination of how to proceed Soulier, ; Alessi and Trollip, ; Newby et al.
These elements can be grouped into two stages: presenting information and guiding the student. Information such as rules, concepts, or skills is presented either verbally or pictorially, by example or in animated form. The second stage, guiding the student, is interactive as it involves both the student and the instructor. In this interactive stage the student is asked a question and then inputs a response.
Based on the response, feedback is given. If incorrect, suggestions or hints for how to respond are given to the student. Although feedback is given, remediation is not part of the interaction cycle in drills as it is in tutorials.
Each of the twenty-four cycles consisted of explanation, demonstration, and practice. First, the skill or concept was explained by simple printed text. Next, animation was used to model the skill. After the animation, the examinee was directed to practice the skill. Hints were given if an examinee answered incor- rectly or did not respond at all. A scroll bar formed a column along the right-hand edge of the box. As was mentioned earlier, some skills were considered more important than others.
The decisions to include remediation represented a point of contrast with the standard ETS tutorials in which only one practice item was given, without feedback or help for an incorrect response. In the TOEFL tutorials, if an examinee answered incorrectly to the practice item considered Level 1 practice or if thirty seconds elapsed without a correct response, he or she would be given hints.
See Fig. The explanation would be repeated, though in simpler text, and the skill would again be animated. Then, the examinee would be given an easier practice item. Structure of instructional cycles with guided practice. In the instance of scrolling, all text was removed from the screen, and the examinee was directed to just click on the down arrow in the scroll bar see Fig. On the other hand, when an examinee got to a Level 3 or encountered a Level 1 or 2 item the second time, the same path was taken regardless of the response.
As the tutorial was designed, we planned to capture data on examinee performance and time on these leveled prac- tices as part of the computer familiarity study.
Performance data would help us subsequently determine at what point we might advise an examinee that his or her computer skills were inadequate to take the computerized TOEFL test.
Timing data would allow adjustment of the delay times for help messages as well as adjustment of the time allowed before judging a response as incorrect before using the tutorial in an operational setting. Developing a strategy for screen display While designing and developing these tutorials, consistency became a key word. We believed that internally consistent screen displays across the six tutorials would help all examinees to learn the critical tutorial content. Internal consistency included not only Fig.
The layout divided the screen into four main areas which can be seen in Fig. A small blue banner with white text was always placed in the upper left corner of the screen. Its purpose was to orient the examinee; in a word or phrase, the main point of that section of the tutorial was stated. This row was colored dark gray; the icons were colored a lighter gray with black letters and sym- bols. The remainder of the screen was colored light gray and was divided into two areas of unequal size. The left-hand side of the screen consisted of about two-thirds of the screen.
It was used to illustrate whatever skill was being taught; graphics and animation occurred in this space. The right-hand third of the screen resulted in a column where directions and explanations were presented to the examinee via text. During explanations, this column would be colored pink from top down to the bottom in order to key the student to watch, not act. Note the amount and relative complexity of the language that was used in the standard tutorial compared with the language in the TOEFL tutorial.
Summary of design features These instructional and software features, together with information gathered at the trialling of the standard tutorial, helped structure the design of the TOEFL tutorial: Fig. Provide interaction of those skills through guided practice; 3. Use graphics and animation to reduce the amount of text; 4. Use common words, and short sentences and phrases to simplify the English; and 5.
Specify a set of variables on which to capture data in order to assess examinee performance. In order to include graphics, animation, pictures, sound, and interaction with answer judging, we decided to program the tutorials in Authorware by Macromedia. Another advantage of Authorware was that it had built-in algorithms which captured data as part of the background i.
Formative assessment Formative assessment consisted of internal reviews and small scale piloting. The tutorials were internally reviewed at ETS for both content and cultural sensitivity. Three groups reviewed the tutorials as they were being developed. This group was shown prototype material for each tutorial; based on their comments, numerous cycles of revisions were made.
This group was shown each tutorial after revisions had been made; based on their comments, more revisions were made. Finally, the tutorials were reviewed by ETS editors, again followed by revisions. When your goal is university study, choose the test with scores that are widely accepted and preferred around the world. When you take the TOEFL iBT test, the only thing that matters is what you know, not where you test, what you look like or who scores your test. All scoring is handled by a centralized scoring network to ensure consistency, fairness and quality, and to offer a complete and accurate picture of your ability.
If you requested a paper copy of your score report before you took the test, it will be mailed 11—15 days after your test date, or sooner depending on how you took the test. Delivery times will vary based on local postal services. When your designated score recipients will receive your scores depends on how you took the test and what method of score delivery they use. With fast, convenient score reporting viewing capabilities at your fingertips anywhere there is web access, you can search, sort, filter and download all test taker data you need — all with an exceptional level of security.
Automatically download scores from the ETS server to a client server after a one-time setup by your IT or technology staff. Learn more about Automated Server-to-Server Feeds.
0コメント