UTILIZATION OF SCHOOLOGY: ITS RELATIONSHIP TO SELF-ASSESSMENT OF FIRST YEAR BEED STUDENTS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v9i9.4468Keywords:
Schoology, self-assessment, online learning modality, LMSAbstract
Central to this research is the utilization of Schoology as a learning modality and its relationship to self-assessment. This study employed the descriptive-correlational research design to determine the nature and magnitude by which these variables are related to each other. It included as respondents thirty first-year Bachelor of Elementary Education students who were enrolled in Notre Dame of Midsayap College during the second semester of Academic Year 2021-2022. Findings of the study revealed that the respondents had always utilized the learning management system (LMS) for uploading and notification, and monitoring and evaluation, and had oftentimes utilized it for activities and submission. However, they had only occasionally utilized it for the timely submission of their tasks. Meanwhile, the respondents were very good in performing their reflection papers, taking multiple choice types of exams and engaging in class discussions. Nevertheless, they were merely fair in doing poem/song compositions. Results bared that there is a moderately strong direct relationship between utilization of Schoology and self-assessment, and that relationship is highly significant, signifying that the LMS via Schoology had promoted effective learning among the respondents.
Article visualizations:
References
Abidin, N. S. Z. (2022). Can the sample used for pilot testing be included in the final research sample? Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/post/Can-the-sample-used-for-pilot-testing-be-included-in-the-final-research-sample
Akram, A., Fu, C., Li, Y., Javed, M. Y., Lin, R., Jiang, Y., & Tang, Y. (2019). Predicting students’ academic procrastination in blended learning course using homework submission data. IEEE Access, Access, IEEE, 7, 102487–102498 https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2019.2930867
Atchley, W., Wingenbach, G., & Aners, C. (2013). Comparison of Course Completion and Student Performance through Online and Traditional Courses. International Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning, 14(4), 104-116. Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrod
Baharudin, H., Nasir, M. K. M., Yusoff, N. M. R. N., & Surat, S. (2018). Assessing Students’ Course Satisfaction with Online Arabic Language Hybrid Course. Advanced Science Letters, 24, 350-352. https://doi.org/10.1166/asl.2018.12005
Bell, S., (2010). Project-based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future. The Clearing House, 83: 39-43 Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ872047
Bobbit, L. M., Inks, S. A., Kemp, K. J. & Mayo, D. T. (2000). Integrating marketing courses to enhance team-based experiential learning. Journal of Marketing Education, 22(1), 15-24.
Brown, G. T., and Harris, L. R. (2013). “Student self-assessment,” in Sage Handbook of Research on Classroom Assessment, ed J. H. McMillan (Los Angeles, CA: Sage), 367–393. DOI: 10.4135/9781452218649.n21
Carey, P. (2013). Student as co-producer in a marketised higher education system: A case study of students’ experience of participation in curriculum design. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 50(3), 250–260. DOI: 10.1080/14703297.2013.796714
Costa, A. L. & Kallick, B. (2008). Learning and leading with habits of mind: 16 essential characteristics for success. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED509125
Deno, S. L. (2003). Developments in curriculum-based measurement. The Journal of Special Education, 37(3), 184–192.
Dumova, T. (2012). The usability of online quizzes: Evaluating student perceptions. In S. Kelsey, & K. St. Amant (Eds.), Computer-mediated communication: Issues and approaches in education (pp. 50–61). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Educational Technology Division, (2010). Ministry of Education Communications and Training Sector Smart Pesiaran Bukit Kiara 50604 Kuala Lumpur Malaysia. Retrieved from https://sekolah21.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/project-based-learning-handbook.pdf
Egbert, J. and Roe, M. (2022). E-learning theory. PressBook. Retrieved from https://opentext.wsu.edu/theoreticalmodelsforteachingandresearch/chapter/e-learning-theory/
Epstein, R. M., Siegel, D. J., and Silberman, J. (2010). Self-monitoring in clinical practice: a challenge for medical educators. J. Contin. Educ. Health Prof. 28, 5–13. DOI: 10.1002/chp.149 Retrieved from https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?author=J.+Dunlosky&author=K.+A.+Rawson+&publication_year=2012&title=Overconfidence+produces+underachievement%3A+inaccurate+self+evaluations+undermine+students%27+learning+and+retention&journal=Learn.+Instr.&volume=22&pages=271-280#d=gs_qabs&t=1654442180296&u=%23p%3Dmew64Wyy8HYJ
Falkner, N. J., & Falkner, K. E. (2012). A fast measure for identifying at-risk students in computer science. In Proceedings of the ninth annual international conference on international computing education research (pp. 55–62). ACM. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2361276.2361288
Francisco, C. D. C. & Barcelona, M. C. (2020). Effectiveness of an online classroom for flexible learning. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED607990.pdf
Gasaymeh, A. M., & Qablan, B. M. (2013). SMS as out-of-class, student-instructor interaction tool: A case study of Jordanian graduate students' perceptions and usage. International Education Studies, 6(8), 147-160.
He, H. (n.d.). E-learning theory. Theoretical models for teaching and research. Pressbooks. Retrieved from https://opentext.wsu.edu/theoreticalmodelsforteachingandresearch/chapter/e-learning-theory/
Heo, J. C. & Han, S. (2021). The mediating effect of literacy of LMS between self-evaluation online teaching effectiveness and self-directed learning readiness. Retrieve from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10639-021-10590-4
Kovalik, C. L., & Hosler, K. A. (2010). Text messaging and the community of inquiry in
online courses. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(2), 380- 387. Retrieved 28 Aug, 2016 from http://jolt.merlot.org/
Kumari T. A., Hemalatha C., Ali M. S., Naresh R. (2020). Survey on impact and learning of the online courses on the present era. Procedia Comput. Sci. 172, 82–91. 10.1016/j.procs.2020.05.167
Laerd Disseration. (2012). Purposive sampling. Retrieved from https://dissertation.laerd.com/purposive-sampling.php
Laprise, S. L. (2012). Afraid not: Student performance versus perception based on exam
question format. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/23247612
Lim, T., Fadzil M., & Mansor N. (2011). Mobile learning via SMS at Open University
Malaysia: Equitable, effective, and sustainable. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(2), 122-137.
Linn, R. L., & Gronlund, N. E. (2010). Measurement and assessment in teaching. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill
McDonald, B. P. & Boud, D. (2003). The impact of self-assessment on achievement: The effects of self-assessment training on performance in external examinations. DOI:10.1080/0969594032000121289
Macfadyen, L. P., & Dawson, S. (2010). Mining LMS data to develop an “early warning system” for educators: A proof of concept. Computers & Education, 54, 588-599.
Manurung, R., Ritchie G., Thompson, H. (20012). Using genetic algorithms to create meaningful poetic text. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220080332_Using_genetic_algorithms_to_create_meaningful_poetic_text
Manning, C. et al. (2011). Tech tools for teachers, by teachers: bridging teachers and
students. Retrieved on May 20, 2014 from http://journals.library.wisc.edu/index.php/wej/article/viewFile/379/444
Masyhudianti, U. K., Sutomo, N., & Suparno, S. (2018). The Effectiveness of Schoology to Teach Writing Viewed from Students' Creativity. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1250551
Mehrens, W. A., & Lehmann, I. J. (2016). Measurement and evaluation in education and psychology (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Nachouki, M. & Naaj, M. A. (2012). Evaluating student satisfaction with blended learning in a gender-segregated environment. Retrieved from http://www.jite.org/documents/Vol11/JITEv11p185-200AbouNaaj0979.pdf
Online Education. (2022). Cheating in online education: Myth vs. reality. Retrieved from https://www.onlineeducation.com/features/cheating-in-online-education
Panadero, E., Brown, G. L., and Strijbos, J. W. (2016). The future of student self-assessment: a review of known unknowns and potential directions. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 28, 803–830. DOI: 10.1007/s10648-015-93502 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191491X13000126
QuestionPro. (2022). Quantitative data collection: Best 5 methods. Retrieved from https://www.questionpro.com/blog/quantitative-data-collection-methods/
Rao, D. and Stupans, I. (2012). Exploring the potential of role-play in higher education: development of a typology and teacher guidelines. Innovations in Education and Tea. Retrieved from https://kipdf.com/exploring-the-potential-of-role-play-in-higher-education-development-of-a-typolo_5b17ec9a7f8b9a7c268b456f.html
Rinenggo, A. & Murdiono, M. (2020). Utilization of Schoology for the development of
PPKn teaching materials based on E-learning. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.200130.004
Rosa, J. A. (2012). Marketing education for the next four billion: Challenges and innovations. Journal of Marketing Education, 34(1), 44-54. Ching International, Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 427-436.
Rosalina, M. (2018). Analysis The use of Schoology E-Learning towards students’ learning motivation enhancement in STKIP Surya. Retrieved from https://jurnal.untidar.ac.id/index.php/ijose/article/view/614
Shakerian, P., Rezaei, O., Murnani, Z. T., and Moeinmanesh, H. (2016). Investigating the role of pop songs on vocabulary recall, attitude and retention of Iranian EFL learners: The case of gender. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 7(2): 121-128.
Sicat, A. S. (2015). Enhancing college students’ proficiency in business writing via Schoolog. Retrieved from https://www.ijern.com/journal/2015/January-2015/14.pdf
Skalicky, J. and Brown, N. (2009). “Peer learning framework: a community of practice model”, discussion paper, Centre for Advancement of Learning and Teaching, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS, November 9.
Smith, M., Wood, W., Adams, W., Wieman, C., Knight, J., Guild, N., & Su, T. (2013). Why peer discussion improves student performance on in-class concept questions. Science, 323(5910), 122-124. DOI: 10.1126/science.1165919
Sun, J. C.-Y. (2018). Influence of polling technologies on student engagement: An analysis of student motivation, academic performance, and brainwave data. Computers & Education, 72, 80–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.10.010
Toba, R., Noor, W. N., Sanu, L. O. (2019). The current issues of Indonesian EFL students’ writing skills: Ability, problem, and reason in writing comparison and contrast essay. DOI: 10.21093/di.v19i1.150
Tutor2u. (2022). Correlations. Retrieved from https://www.tutor2u.net/psychology/reference/correlations
Wall, A. (2014). Schoology in higher education: embracing the Facebook factor. Retrieved on May 21, 2014 from http://sloanconsortium.org/conference/2014/et4online/schoology-highereducation-embracing-facebook-factor
Wang, T. H. (2014). Developing an assessment-centered e-Learning system for improving student learning effectiveness. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.12.002
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
