Cited by 147Online and Blended LearningOnline Learning and AnalyticsStudent Assessment and Feedback

Examining the designs of computer-based assessment and its impact on student engagement, satisfaction, and pass rates

Nguyen, Quan, Rienties, Bart, Toetenel, Lisette, Ferguson, Rebecca, Whitelock, Denise·2017·Computers in Human Behavior

Abstract

Many researchers who study the impact of computer-based assessment (CBA) focus on the affordances or complexities of CBA approaches in comparison to traditional assessment methods. This study examines how CBA approaches were configured within and between modules, and the impact of assessment design on students' engagement, satisfaction, and pass rates. The analysis was conducted using a combination of longitudinal visualisations, correlational analysis, and fixed-effect models on 74 undergraduate modules and their 72,377 students. Our findings indicate that educators designed very different assessment strategies, which significantly influenced student engagement as measured by time spent in the virtual learning environment (VLE). Weekly analyses indicated that assessment activities were balanced with other learning activities , which suggests that educators tended to aim for a consistent workload when designing assessment strategies. Since most of the assessments were computer-based, students spent more time on the VLE during assessment weeks. By controlling for heterogeneity within and between modules, learning design could explain up to 69% of the variability in students' time spent on the VLE. Furthermore, assessment activities were significantly related to pass rates, but no clear relation with satisfaction was found. Our findings highlight the importance of CBA and learning design to how students learn online.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.028

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Engagement, satisfaction, and pass rates of students in the learning environment are not just greatly influenced by learning design but are especially manipulated by how instructors stabilize their learning design activities in the course modules on weekly basis.

    “Findings indicated that engagement, satisfaction, and pass rates of students in the learning environment are not just greatly influenced by learning design but are especially manipulated by how instructors stabilize their learning design activities in the course modules on weekly basis.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 48 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nguyen, Q., Rienties, B., Toetenel, L., Ferguson, R., & Whitelock, D.
Affiliations
The Open University (GB)
Corresponding author
Rienties, Bart
Venue
Computers in Human Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-11
Volume
76
Pages
703-714
ISSN
0747-5632 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2595316996
Cited by
147
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 4
FWCI
59.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Computers in Human Behavior (publishedVersion)
  • Open Research Online - ORO (The Open University) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
Leverhulme Trust Research
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
Keywords
computer-based testing, assessment design, student engagement, student satisfaction, pass rates, virtual learning environments, learning design, online learning, workload balance, assessment activities

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review