The User Acceptance Test (UAT) for Learning Evaluation using CBT (Computer Based Test) for Students
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32678/ell.v4i1.11273Keywords:
Computer Based Test (CBT), Learning Evaluation, User Acceptance Test (UAT).Abstract
The Implementation of Computer Based Test (CBT) in Learning Evaluation is increasingly being used in universities. To determine the level of student acceptance of the CBT system, a User Acceptance Test (UAT) is required. This study aims to evaluate student acceptance of the CBT system in learning evaluation using a UAT questionnaire. Data was collected from students of the Faculty Islamic Studies and Education Serang Raya University. The questionnaire was delivered in the form of google form. The results of the study show that students generally accept the CBT system well. The dimensions of ease of use and usefulness have the highest average values, followed by the dimensions of reliability and security. The feedback dimension shows that students have some suggestions for improving the CBT system. These findings indicate that the CBT system has the potential to be an effective tool in learning evaluation, but further improvement and development is needed to increase user satisfaction.
Downloads
References
REFERENCES
Al-Dabbous, S. K., & Al-Obeidat, M. A. (2010). The impact of computer-based testing on students' achievement and attitudes in an introductory computer science course. Journal of Educational Technology & Systems, 38(4), 447-462.
Al-Shorbaji, H. M., & Al-Hawari, M. M. (2012). An evaluation of computer-based testing in higher education: A case study of computer science courses. International Journal of Learning and Teaching in Higher Education,
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.
Chen, M. J., & Hsu, C. Y. (2020). An investigation of the impact of teacher feedback in promoting autonomous learning in EFL writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33(1-2), 161-190.
Dixson, M. D. (2015). Creating effective student engagement in online courses: What do students find engaging?. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 15(2), 1-13.
Gülbahar, Y., & Madran, R. O. (2019). Technology integration in teaching and learning: A systematic review of research studies published in Turkey. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67(2), 303-338.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2014). Multivariate data analysis (Vol. 7). Pearson.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Simplicity_theory assesed on 3 july 2024
Mulder, R. A., Pearce, J., & Baik, C. (2021). Student engagement in assessment design: A systematic literature review. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(2), 257-277.
Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability engineering. Academic Press.
Richardson, W., & Mancabelli, R. (2011). The power of pull: How small moves, smartly made, can set big things in motion. Basic Books.
Sharma, R. C., & Chander, S. (2008). Computer based test (CBT) vs. paper based test (PBT): A comparative study on the effectiveness of assessment in engineering education. International Journal of Engineering Education, 24(4), 482-488.
Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2016). Research methods for business: A skill building approach. John Wiley & Sons.
Sugio, H., & Yusuf, S. (2019). Metodologi Penelitian Kuantitatif. Alfabeta.
Sudjana, N. (2015). Metode statistika. Tarsito.
Usher, E. L., Pajares, F., & Salido, A. J. (2019). Sources of self-efficacy in science and mathematics: A domain-specific approach. Educational Psychology Review, 31(2), 329-364.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Ratu Dea Mada Badriyah, Eva Fachriyah
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
