Creating Active and Meaningful Learning through a Renewable Assignment: A Case Study in a Human Growth Development Psychology Course

Introduction

Assignments, such as projects, papers, and presentations, are often designed to allow students to review and apply material they have learned in a course to better understand the content covered in the assignment (Cooper 2001). Oftentimes, however, the assignment is limited to the length and scope of the course, meaning the work students do on them does not carry over into future terms or directly benefit others. These types of assignments are called disposable assignments because students and instructors dispose of them at the end of the assignment or course (Wiley 2013).

Inspired by Wiley (2013), we—one professor of Human Growth Development (Grissett) and one instructional designer (Sheu)—teamed up to design, create, and implement a renewable assignment using open educational resources, allowing students to share their work for the benefit of others (Wiley 2013). Renewable assignments are inspired by open pedagogy, which are teaching practices using open educational resources that allow students to become a direct part of the teaching practice, including creating material (e.g., exam questions) for classroom use (Wiley 2013). In the present paper, we examine one type of renewable assignment, a multiple-choice question creation and review (QCR) assignment, where students create and review peers’ exam questions for an open textbook, and explore how students responded to this type of assignment. The research questions for this study are: 1) What are the students’ experiences with completing the QCR assignment? Are they generally positive or negative?; and 2) What is the instructor’s view about the QCR assignment? The findings in this research report are presented as formative feedback from the students’ and instructor’s perspectives and we reflect on how they will inform our future instruction.

Literature Review

Student engagement is key to any deep learning, and without feeling a sense of connection to an assignment, students may focus narrowly on the grade and limit themselves to shallow learning (Barkley and Major 2020). This results in potentially wasted time and effort on behalf of the student as, though they may meet the assignment requirements, they dispose of their work altogether at the end of the semester. Further, students can feel this kind of work is disconnected from themselves and from contexts outside of the classroom setting, which may lead many to feel unmotivated to do their best on the assignment and only do well enough to earn the grade they desire (Paudel 2012). This lack of connection to self and a larger goal can also lead students to feel distressed (Cooper 1994), as their time, effort, and energy have limited use (Seraphin et al. 2018).

While these disposable assignments have their merit—they allow students to explore concepts, flesh out ideas, and hone essential skills including oral and written communication, working in a team, and critical thinking—they at times fall short in allowing students to develop a deeper sense of purpose in their work by allowing them to contribute their time and effort to a larger goal (Wiley 2013).

An alternative type of assignment, known as renewable assignments (Wiley and Hilton 2018), allows students to work with others toward a common purpose. Renewable assignments allow students’ work to be used by other students, faculty, professionals, and the community beyond the classroom (Delgado et al. 2022). Some examples of renewable assignments include the creation of ancillary materials for an open textbook (such as slide decks, study guides, lecture notes, and quiz question banks), undertaking wiki projects, and contributing content to open textbooks for others to use.

The products generated through renewable assignments can have inherent value for the discipline and global community, and studies show that students and instructors alike see their particular benefits (Maimoona and Dabbagh 2019). Seraphin and colleagues (2018, 84) proclaim that renewable or “non-disposable assignments” yield an increase in “student excitement, engagement, productivity, and achievement.” There is also evidence that renewable assignments are connected to higher student performance (Wiley et al. 2017).

Wiley and Hilton (2018) describe a spectrum of non-disposable assignments, with disposable assignments simply being submitted to the instructor and renewable assignments allowing the student(s) to openly license and share their work globally with others. In between these two types of assignments are what Wiley and Hilton call “authentic assignments” because the artifact “extends beyond the students’ own learning, such as the creation of content tutorials for future classes” (Katz and Van Allen 2020). The project described in this paper is more in line with an “authentic assignment,” though we use the term “renewable assignment” to remain consistent with the original project’s description and to highlight its key renewable characteristics (DOER Fellows Renewable Assignments 2017).

In the present paper, we describe one type of renewable assignment—a multiple-choice question creation and review (QCR) assignment—that we implemented in an introductory-level psychology course. Our project was like one conducted by Jhangiani (2017), where students in a psychology course created multiple-choice questions to contribute to a test bank; however, with our own QCR assignment, students were also required to review and give feedback on their peers’ questions using an online rubric provided by the instructor.

Course Overview

The QCR assignment was implemented in a lower-level, general education developmental psychology course taught by one of the authors (Grissett) in spring of 2019 at a four-year regional state university in the southeastern United States. The class met in person two times a week in the morning for an hour and fifteen minutes each meeting. Throughout the course, the instructor used a combination of teaching techniques, including lectures (which were guided by slide presentations), assigned readings, and class-based activities, such as in-class short-writing assignments (e.g., reflections) and class-based discussions. The instructor used the open textbook Lifespan Development: A Psychological Perspective (2nd Ed.) by Lally and Valentine-French (2017).

Course Assignments

All students first completed a traditional paper assignment based on the reading. For the next assignment, students completed the question-creation and review (QCR) assignment. After students completed both a reflection paper assignment and a QCR assignment, they were then given a choice between the two for the next three assignments. Students completed brief surveys at three points in the semester to reflect and give feedback on their experiences with the QCR assignment and paper assignment.

Question creation and review assignment

For the QCR assignment, students created a set of three multiple-choice questions about material in the textbook and reviewed questions created by their peers in the course using a rubric. For the question-generation portion of the assignment, students received a brief in-class training from the instructor about how to create effective multiple-choice questions (instructions were drawn from Jhangiani’s guide for creating multiple-choice questions). Students were then assigned a portion of the textbook for which to create the multiple-choice questions. Students created and submitted their questions through a dropbox in the course learning management system. Then, students provided feedback on a randomly assigned peer’s set of questions. Using an online rubric, students reviewed the questions and rated them on a scale of 1–5 based on relevance to the material, level of difficulty, clarity, appropriateness of question choices, and whether the question should be used on an upcoming exam. Students were asked to provide comments about the questions, including areas of improvement.

Technology

As described earlier, the QCR assignment involved multiple steps: for the first part, students created questions based on given readings and submitted their questions by entering them into an online form. On the second part of the assignment, students reviewed questions created by a randomly assigned peer, based on an online rubric.

In previous semesters, we used Word documents and email to complete the QCR assignment; however, we wanted to enhance the student learning experiences and make the multiple-step assignment a more streamlined process, so we utilized various computer applications or platforms, including Google Forms, Qualtrics (an online platform to create dynamic online forms or surveys), and GeorgiaVIEW (learning management system used by public institutions of higher education in Georgia). We used these tools in an effort to improve students’ participation rates by making the process more streamlined (i.e., using online forms for submission and review processes versus Word documents submitted to a Dropbox), to reduce the overall time and effort for students in organizing and submitting their work, to allow students to complete their work on any electronic device, to randomly assign questions to students for peer review, and to help the instructor save paper and time grading assignments. Having the assignment online also allowed the survey to be more easily used in other courses and to allow us to share it more easily with other instructors.

Study

Participants

Forty-one students from several majors were enrolled in the course. Because the course is part of the psychology major curriculum, many students were psychology majors. Specific student demographic data (e.g., race and gender) were not collected.

Results

All students were required to complete the paper assignment for Assignment 1. For Assignment 2, all students were required to complete the question-creation and review (QCR) assignment. For Assignments 3–5, students had a choice between the paper assignment and the QCR assignment. The number of students who completed each type of assignment is provided in Table 1. Grades were not included in this analysis because there were not enough students who completed the paper versions of Assignments 3–5 to draw a comparison: one particular student completed the paper assignment for every assignment for which the option was available, and only one or two other students did likewise for each of Assignments 3–5.

Most students (up to 93%) selected the QCR when given the choice. When asked why they selected the QCR assignment, students overwhelmingly provided positive feedback, such as “Doing the questions and feedback helps imprint the information into my brain and helps remember information easier,” (Student 14) and, “I chose this assignment because I have trouble getting engaged in the textbook. This assignment encouraged and allowed me to interact with the text more” (Student 31). Another commented, “It allowed me to be a little more creative and was definitive. It also forced me to read the book, something I should do but don’t” (Student 19). Some students provided a more neutral evaluation of the assignment, whereas few articulated a negative perspective (e.g., “Didn’t enjoy the assignments, format was complicated, felt unnecessary” [Student 24]).

Instructor’s Perspective on the QCR Assignment

As an instructor, I (Grissett) felt my students enjoyed the QCR assignment and were more likely to read the textbook to review the terms than when they write paper assignments. Though papers certainly have their merit, the process of students going to the chapter and creating questions from the material allowed students to engage with it in a new way. As one student noted, “They were fun and a good way to study” (Student 1). Another noted that they were “very interesting, [it was the] first time I ever did something like that” (Student 26). Overall, I think that the assignment helped students engage with and subsequently learn the material, specifically because it forced students to visit the text to create the questions—something that students may not do otherwise.

This is not to say that the assignment was not without its challenges or drawbacks. Students at first appeared to rush through it; however, when I provided them with feedback about their questions and peer comments, I noticed that students’ work on the next assignment was of higher quality, and specifically more questions appeared to be at a higher level of Bloom’s taxonomy of learning complexity (e.g., requiring student application of concepts instead of simple recall). For the negative student comment above regarding the “complicated” format, it is unclear what the student is referring to, though it is possible they are talking about the multiple steps required to complete the assignment.

Impact of Technology

The use of technology has had an impact on students’ experiences. In a previous semester, there were multiple steps making up each task in this two-phase assignment, that is creating questions and reviewing others’ work. We received feedback from students in previous semesters about inconveniences about the procedures (e.g., completing reviews on a Word document using the bubble feature and sending the documents back and forth). This semester, we did not receive any complaints regarding assignment procedures or logistics of completing the assignment. We also had fewer students asking questions or having problems completing the assignment.

Using technology also helped save the instructor time in collecting and comparing students’ work. Although it might take a little time to create the forms and online rubric, they can be re-used for future teaching. The data collected by Qualtrics and Google Forms can also provide material and means for quick analysis, allowing the instructor to get a quick glance on how students are doing.

Discussion

The purpose of this paper was to provide formative reflection on a question-creation and review (QCR) assignment that keeps the students at the center of assignment creation, design, and implementation. As an instructor and instructional designer, we chose the QCR assignment to increase student engagement, to help encourage students to look at the material under a fresh light, and to provide an opportunity to do something “new” that they had likely not done before. We emphasized in both the written and oral delivery of the assignment’s instructions that the questions would be used to create an exam test bank and that some questions would be used on the upcoming exam. Students understood that their work would not end with the grade but instead would impact the exams for current and future students. Further, it would force students to engage directly with the material on the upcoming exam, building an exam review strategy into course assignments, as well.

We also wanted to challenge students, so that they could not rely on the same skills traditionally used on more typical assignments (e.g., papers). Though not all renewable assignments are the same, as they draw on different skill types and levels of engagement for each assignment (e.g., wiki projects, textbook writing), the purpose is still the same: motivating students to engage with the course material more deeply by creating something for use beyond the class. We wanted to aim for the level of challenge that yields the best learning results, so that students work hard but not so hard that they feel overwhelmed by the task.

The QCR assignment was feasible for students and therefore may have decreased unnecessary stress of learning. An indicator that students felt confident was that the vast majority (93%) completed the QCR assignment. Students also expressed that the process of creating the exam questions was “fun” and “less stressful” than other assignments. Although we did not measure the students' emotion or stress level directly, based on the instructor’s observations and feedback from students, students were pleased with the QCR assignment, and the process appeared to invoke less stress than other approaches. This is important because students learn and retrieve information better when they have a moderate amount of stress, rather than too much or too little (Yerkes and Dodson 1908).

Future Directions

We plan to use this assignment in the future, but with some changes. First, we would ask students to create more than three questions. Between five to seven questions would be more effective and would be a more equivalent time demand to a paper assignment. Second, we would have students create a multiple-choice question in class, exchange it with a peer for feedback, and incorporate that feedback into their question before completing the homework assignment. That way, students could get responses from both the instructor and a peer before jumping into the homework assignment itself, allowing them to apply lessons learned from a first attempt. Finally, we would ask students at the start of the assignment to create questions that were higher on Bloom’s taxonomy, such as applied questions, so that students could draw higher-order connections to the material.

Conclusion

Renewable assignments are a form of active learning that engage students to learn in meaningful ways and allow them to understand and connect with the purpose of an assignment. In the case of creating questions for an exam bank, we designed it in a way that is not only renewable and sustainable but also helpful in learning the material through active retrieval practice and establishing multiple points of exposure to the content. The goal is for students to enjoy the learning experience and feel that their work is contributing to something larger, rather than just work toward the grade. These goals directly align to those of open pedagogy—to put students at the center of the learning process, to engage them with experiential learning (“learning by doing”), and to make contributions to a larger community (e.g., other students and educators). These are educational goals that should be integrated into all course-based learning but, in the context of open pedagogy, are really made possible because of open educational resources. In conclusion, OER serve as the lynchpin in open pedagogy and for providing engaged, student-centered, service-based learning, and they should lie at the core of providing renewable, impactful assignments to all students in the college classroom.

About the Authors

Judy Orton Grissett is an Associate Professor of Psychology and the Director of Experiential Learning at Georgia Southwestern State University. She received her Masters and PhD in Educational Psychology from Georgia State University. Her research focuses primarily on pedagogical practices, including those surrounding open pedagogy, as well as high-impact practices in and out of the classroom. Dr. Orton Grissett has taught courses in developmental psychology, cultural psychology, research methods, and health psychology. She has won several teaching awards, including the university’s Professor of the Year award in 2016 and the Faculty Excellence and Commitment to Teaching award in 2019.

Dr. Feng-Ru Sheu is an Associate Professor and Instructional Design Librarian at the University Libraries in Kent State University (KSU). She received her PhD in Instructional System Technology, a Specialist degree in Information Science, and a Masters in Library Science from Indiana University. Her primary research interests include the application of learning theories, instructional approaches , and innovative technology in online, in-person, and blended learning environments. She also advocates for open education through her research on the effectiveness of open pedagogy and the impact of Open Educational Resources (OER), which can be used freely and make higher education more accessible and affordable.