10.01.2017 Views

Forging new pathways of research and innovation in open and distance learning

RW_2016_Oldenburg_Proceedings

RW_2016_Oldenburg_Proceedings

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Integration <strong>of</strong> Learn<strong>in</strong>g Analytics <strong>in</strong> Blended Learn<strong>in</strong>g Course at a University <strong>of</strong> Technology<br />

Kristie Naidoo, Richard Naidoo<br />

this class <strong>of</strong> errors is loss <strong>of</strong> hold on reason<strong>in</strong>g (Donaldson, 1963). A correct frame maybe<br />

retrieved but a sub-frame responsible for calculations maybe underdeveloped.<br />

The third type <strong>of</strong> error is the arbitrary error. Arbitrary errors are those <strong>in</strong> which the subject<br />

behaves arbitrarily <strong>and</strong> fails to take account <strong>of</strong> the constra<strong>in</strong>ts laid down <strong>in</strong> what was given.<br />

These are errors which have as their outst<strong>and</strong><strong>in</strong>g common feature a lack <strong>of</strong> loyalty to the<br />

given. Sometimes the subject appears to be constra<strong>in</strong>ed by knowledge <strong>of</strong> what is “true” by<br />

some considerations drawn from “real-life” experience. Sometimes there is no constra<strong>in</strong>t <strong>of</strong><br />

any k<strong>in</strong>d. The subject simply decided “it is so” (Donaldson, 1963). Incorrect <strong>in</strong>puts maybe<br />

assigned to the retrieved frame. “Arbitrary” errors are caused by mapp<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>correct <strong>in</strong>puts to<br />

the retrieved frame (surface structures).<br />

Methodology<br />

Qualitative <strong>and</strong> quantitative methods were used.<br />

The Questions <strong>and</strong> the Scor<strong>in</strong>g Procedure<br />

Scrut<strong>in</strong>y <strong>of</strong> the students’ protocols suggested was based on the <strong>of</strong>ficial mark<strong>in</strong>g memor<strong>and</strong>um.<br />

A score <strong>of</strong> 0 was given for no response or for an <strong>in</strong>correct attempt.<br />

The grad<strong>in</strong>g procedure for the items also took <strong>in</strong>to consideration the follow<strong>in</strong>g:<br />

• equivalent answers or methods were accepted;<br />

• correct answers were give full credit;<br />

• underst<strong>and</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> a method was the ma<strong>in</strong> criterion used rather than penaliz<strong>in</strong>g for<br />

carelessness.<br />

Question (a) was based on this item test<strong>in</strong>g reciprocal functions <strong>and</strong> quotients. Students had<br />

to simplify the LHS to prove the identity.<br />

Prove the identity<br />

cos xs<strong>in</strong> xsec<br />

x<br />

s<strong>in</strong> 2x<br />

tan x cot x cos ec x =<br />

Cod<strong>in</strong>g scheme: 1 mark for writ<strong>in</strong>g sec x as<br />

1<br />

cos x <strong>and</strong> tan x as 1<br />

cot x <strong>and</strong> cos ec x as 1<br />

s<strong>in</strong> x<br />

Question (b) was also based on the pro<strong>of</strong> <strong>of</strong> a basic trigonometric identity. It also required<br />

quotients <strong>and</strong> reciprocal functions.<br />

Use a sketch to prove 1+ tan x=<br />

sec<br />

2 2<br />

x<br />

Cod<strong>in</strong>g scheme: 1 mark for draw<strong>in</strong>g the correct sketch. 1 mark for simplify<strong>in</strong>g the LHS <strong>and</strong> 1<br />

mark for show<strong>in</strong>g equivalence.<br />

274 Reach<strong>in</strong>g from the roots – 9 th EDEN Research Workshop Proceed<strong>in</strong>gs, 2016, Oldenburg<br />

ISBN 978-615-5511-12-7

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!