Research in Engineering Education Symposium 2011 - rees2009

Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM) Página 461 de 957
depends on the competences that could be evaluated, and account for 30% of the final
mark.
The objective on-line tests were performed simultaneously for each group in a computer
classroom using the test section of Moodle with a maximum time of 30 to 40 minutes. The
number of items varied from 12 to 20 for each test (Table 2), mainly of multiple choice
type with negative score for incorrect answers to correct the random effect. Also, match
type items, or numeric ones, that were not penalized for incorrect answers were included.
These objective on-line tests accounted for 32.5 to 45% of the final score.
Table 2: Number and type of items of each subject used in objective on-line tests.
Finally, the writing tests included from one to three questions in which students had to
develop a subject and/or analyze and discuss data. They accounted for 20 to 32.5% of the
final score.
On the other hand, the writing skills and the capacity of analysis and synthesis of 33
students who follow continuous assessment were evaluated by means of a specific writing
test where they have to write a letter and analyze two practical cases. Both competences
were evaluated using two different rubrics with 3 and 4 categories, respectively and 3
levels of competence (Villa and Poblet, 2007). Afterwards, values obtained for writing
ability and analysis and synthesis capacity were related to the marks obtained by the
students by means of correlation and regression analysis. These ability values were
classified in three groups and an analysis of variance was performed using the SAS
program (SAS, 1990).
Results and Discussion
Effect of writing skill abilities and analysis and synthesis capacity on the scores
The effect of students’ classification according to their writing skills ability and analysis
and synthesis capacity on the marks obtained during the year is shown in Table 3. No
statistical differences were observed among the marks obtained by students of different
writing skill abilities in any of the task evaluated, probably because the writing skills of the
students were relatively high (7.59 out of 10, as average) and with low variation (15%
coefficient of variation). The capacity of analysis and synthesis of the students was similar
but presented more variation (20%) among students than the writing skills ability.
Analysis and synthesis capacity had a significant effect (P