This article presents a research study addressing the development, implementation, evaluation, and use of Interactive Modules for Online Training (MITO) of mathematics in higher education. This work was carried out in the context of the MITO project, which combined several features of the learning and management system Moodle, the computer-aided assessment for mathematics STACK, the mathematical software GeoGebra, several packages from the type-setting program LaTeX, and tutorial videos. A total of 1,962 students participated in this study. Two groups of students taking a calculus course were selected for a deeper analysis. With regard to usability and functionality, the results indicate that MITO scored well in almost all aspects, which is fundamental for their introduction into formal university courses. The analysis of the data reveals that the use of MITO educational contents by students mainly occurs about 1 week and a half prior to the evaluations. Moreover, there is a strong correlation between the results of online assessments on MITO in a continuous assessment model and the final grade on the course.
Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., & Bloom, B. S. (Eds.) (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (Abridged ed.). New York, NY: Longman.
2.
Andrade-AréchigaM.LópezG.López-MorteoG. (2012) Assessing effectiveness of learning units under the teaching unit model in an undergraduate mathematics course. Computers & Education59(2): 594–606.
3.
AngusS. D.WatsonJ. (2009) Does regular online testing enhance student learning in the numerical sciences? Robust evidence from a large dataset. British Journal of Educational Technology40(2): 255–272.
4.
BakiA.GüveliE. (2008) Evaluation of a web based mathematics teaching material on the subject of functions. Computers & Education51(2): 854–863.
5.
BiggsJ. (2003) Teaching for Quality Learning at University, 2nd ed. Buckingham, England: The Society for Research into Higher Education/Open University Press.
6.
BoxG. P.HunterJ. S.HunterW. G. (2005) Statistics for experimenters: Design, innovation, and discovery, 2nd ed. New Jersey, NJ: John Wiley & sons.
7.
ChenY. (2012) A study of learning effects on e-learning with interactive thematic video. Journal of Educational Computing Research47(3): 279–292.
8.
ChrysafiadiK.VirvouM. (2013) Student modeling approaches: A literature review for the last decade. Expert Systems with Applications40(11): 4715–4729.
9.
CroftA. C.DansonM.DawsonB. R.WardJ. P. (2001) Experiences of using computer assisted assessment in engineering mathematics. Computers & Education37: 53–66.
GibbsG.SimpsonC. (2004) Conditions under which assessment supports student’s learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education1: 3–22.
12.
GNU General Public License (2004) Free software foundation, Boston, MA: Author.
13.
GuskeyT. R. (2007) Closing achievement gaps: Revisiting Benjamin S. Bloom’s learning for mastery. Journal of Advanced Academics19: 8–31.
14.
HuismanR.ReedijkH. E. (2012) The impact of individual online tests in addition to group assignments on student learning. Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Communication Technologies in Education1: 654–667.
15.
HarjulaM. (2008) Mathematics exercise system with automatic assessment (MSc), Finland, Sweden: Helsinki University of Technology.
KaputJ.HegedusS. (2007) Technology becoming infrastructural in mathematics education. In: LeshR.HamiltonE.KaputJ. (eds) Proceedings of the foundations for the future in mathematics and science, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 173–192.
18.
KimS.ChangM. (2010) Does computer use promote the mathematical proficiency of ELL students?Journal of Educational Computing Research42(3): 285–305.
19.
LazakidouG.RetalisS. (2010) Using computer supported collaborative learning strategies for helping students acquire self-regulated problem-solving skills in mathematics. Computers & Education54(1): 3–13.
20.
MaxwellK.AngehrnA. A. (2010) Lessons learned from deploying a video-based Web 2.0 platform in an executive education context. Communications in Computer and Information Science73: 195–201.
21.
MayerR. E. (2003) Elements of a science of e-learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research29(3): 297–313.
22.
NesbitJ.BelferK. (2005) Collaborative evaluation of learning objects. In: McGrealR. (eds) Online education using learning objects, London, England: Routledge/Falmer, pp. 138–153.
23.
NCTM (2000) Principles and standards for school mathematics, Reston, VA: NCTM.
24.
Oetiker, T., Partl, H., Hyna, I., & Schlegl, E. (2011). The not so short introduction to LATEX 2ɛ [version 5.01]. Retrieved from https://tobi.oetiker.ch/lshort/lshort.pdf.
25.
PiskurichG. M. (2006) Rapid instructional design: Learning ID fast and right, 2nd ed. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
26.
Rasila, A., Havola, L., Majander, H., & Malinen, J. (2010). Automatic assessment in engineering mathematics: Evaluation of the impact. In Reflektori 2010: Symposium of engineering education. Teaching and Learning Development Unit, Finland.
27.
ReedH.DrijversP.KirschnerP. (2010) Effects of attitudes and behaviors on learning mathematics with computer tools. Computers & Education55(1): 1–15.
28.
RiveraZ.OchoaR.PerezB. (2013) Improving student results in a statics course using a computer-based training and assessment system. IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference1: 1898–1904.
29.
RothV.IvanchenkoV.RecordN. (2008) Evaluating student response to WeBWorK, a web-based homework delivery and grading system. Computers & Education50: 1462–1482.
30.
RuokokoskiJ. (2009) Automatic assessment in university-level mathematics (MSc), Finland, Sweden: Helsinki University of Technology.
31.
SangwinC. J. (2003) Assessing mathematics automatically using computer algebra and the Internet. Teaching Mathematics and its Applications23(1): 1–14.
32.
SangwinC. J. (2007) Assessing elementary algebra with STACK. International Journal for Mathematical Education in Science and Technology38(8): 987–1002.
Sangwin, C. J. (2012). Computer aided assessment of mathematics using STACK. Proceedings of ICME 12. Paper presented at the 12th International Congress on Mathematical Education (ICME12), Seoul, Korea. Retrieved from University of Birmingham website: http://web.mat.bham.ac.uk/C.J.Sangwin/Publications/RL_Sangwin.docx.
35.
SangwinC. J. (2013) Computer aided assessment of mathematics, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
36.
SteenhuisH.GrinderB.BruijnE. J. (2009) The use(lessness) of online quizzes for achieving student learning. International Journal of Information and Operations Management Education3(2): 119–148.
37.
VarsavskyC. (2004) Can online weekly quizzes contribute to learning in mathematics? In: ChuS. C.YangW. C.AlwisT. D.AngK. C. (eds) Proceedings of the 9th Asian Technology Conference in Mathematics, Singapore: ATCM Inc, pp. 161–168.
38.
VeigaA.AmaralA. (2009) Survey on the implementation of the Bologna process in Portugal. Higher Education57: 57–69.
39.
Voss, H. (2011). PSTricks graphics for TeX and LaTeX (1st ed.). Cambridge, England: UIT.
40.
WellsJ.BarryR.SpenceA. (2012) Using video tutorials as a carrot-and-stick approach to learning. IEEE Transactions on Education55: 453–458.
Zhang, L., VanLehn, K., Girard, S., Burleson, W., Chavez-Echeagaray, M., Gonzalez-Sanchez, J., & Hidalgo-Pontet, Y. (2014). Evaluation of a meta-tutor for constructing models of dynamic systems. Computers & Education, 75, 196–217.
