| dc.description.abstract | E-assessment can help learners diagnose their own problems with instant feedback during their
learning process. Among various E-assessment mechanisms, two-tier tests are effective
learning tools. This is because two-tiers can not only be used to assess learners’ learning
effectiveness, but also can be employed to diagnose whether learners really know answers or
such answers results from guessing. Although two-tier tests have the aforementioned
advantages, there are still some shortcomings. For example, it cannot make learners have a deep
impression. Therefore, learners cannot maintain long-term memory.
In order to solve these problems, this research proposes a three-tier test, which not only inherits
the answers and reasons from the two-tier test, but also provides review questions to help
learners achieve drill and practice. By doing so, the aforementioned problem can be sorted out.
However, the three-tier test still belongs to an assessment mechanism. Therefore, learners may
get frustrated and lack learning motivation during the assessment. Due to these disadvantages,
this study incorporates game-based learning into the three-tier test. This is because game-based
learning can not only provide joyful experience, but also increase learning motivation. Thus, an
entertaining three-tier test (ET3) was developed in Study One. On the other hand,
personalization can improve learners’ engagement and learning effectiveness. Due to these
positive influences, a personalized entertaining three-tier test (PET3), which combined
personalization and ET3, was developed in Study Two.
Like most E-assessment, either the ET3 or PET3 face diverse learners. This is because
individual differences exist between each learner. Among various individual differences, prior
knowledge is essential because it can reflect cognitive abilities that learners possess before
v
acquiring new knowledge. Owing to such essence, two empirical studies, i.e., Study One and
Study Two, were conducted to investigate the effects of prior knowledge in the context of the
ET3 and the PET3, including test performance, task performance, learning behavior and gaming
behavior.
Study One examined how learners learned English grammar via the ET3 while Study Two
investigated how learners learned English grammar via the PET3. Results from Study One and
those from Study Two shared some similarities: (1) High Prior Knowledge Learners (HPKL)
performed better than Low Prior Knowledge Learners (LPKL) in test performance; (2) their
post-test scores were higher than the pre-test scores, regardless of HPKL or LPKL; (3) HPKL
and LPKL obtained similar gain scores. (4);both HPKL and LPKL were keen to use various
scaffolding hints; and (5) HPKL must be a winner in the last round while LPKL could be a loser
in the last round.
There were also differences between Study One and Study Two. HPKL performed better than
LPKL in Study One, in terms of main questions and reasons of the main questions. On the
contrary, the results from Study Two showed that HPKL was better than LPKL in the reasons
of the main questions but no differences were found for the main questions. In addition, the
results from Study One showed that LPKL performed better than HPKL in review questions
and reasons of the review questions. However, the results from Study Two showed that LPKL
performed better than HPKL in review questions but no differences were found for the reasons
of the review questions. On the other hand, HPKL and LPKL used different strategies for Study
One and Study Two. More specifically, the strategies used for Study One were related to their
answer statuses, i.e., correct answers or wrong answers. On the other hand, the strategies used
for Study Two were associated with learners’ prior knowledge and the types of the questions
vi
(e.g., review questions or reasons of review questions). Furthermore, the results from Study
Two showed that HPKL performed better than LPKL in the advanced questions. Moreover, both
HPKL and LPKL appreciated the semi-control approach provided by the PET3.
In summary, these two empirical studies contribute to developing a deep understanding of the
effects of prior knowledge on the use of three-tier tests. Meanwhile, they also provide guidance
on how to incorporate personalization and game-based learning into three-tier tests. The
ultimate goal of such contributions is that the needs and preferences of diverse learners can be
accommodated when they interact with e-assessment. | en_US |