Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2607.11382

A Psychometric and Practical Comparison of Standard Moodle-Based and STACK-Based Step-by-Step Tests in University Calculus

Semen Bodnarchuk·Kateryna Moskvychova·Igor Orlovskyi·Olha Pelekhata·Olena Tymoshenko
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

This paper compares two formats of online assessment in university Calculus: a standard Moodle-based step-by-step test and a STACK-based step-by-step test. Both tests assess integration by parts and divide the solution into consecutive response fields, but they differ in their validation mechanisms. The standard test relies on predefined scoring patterns, whereas the STACK-based test uses symbolic validation rules. The comparison is based on final manually verified scoring matrices from two student cohorts and follows a Classical Test Theory framework, including score distributions, reliability estimates, response-field-level indicators, and correlation-based measures. The results show high overall performance and ceiling effects in both formats. However, the STACK-based test required fewer manual corrections, showed higher internal consistency, and produced a more coherent relationship between solution steps and the total score.

Explore related subjects

math.HO

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Semen Bodnarchuk, Kateryna Moskvychova, Igor Orlovskyi, Olha Pelekhata, Olena Tymoshenko. 2026-07-13. A Psychometric and Practical Comparison of Standard Moodle-Based and STACK-Based Step-by-Step Tests in University Calculus. https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.11382

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Perspectives on the unit distance problem

This is a survey on an old open problem in combinatorics called the unit distance problem, and the field of mathematics around it, called incidence geometry. What do we know about the problem? Why is it difficult? How does it connect with other parts of math?

math.HO↗
arXiv2026

A Categorical Approach to Euclidean Ratios and Proportions

A categorial approach to the non-metric geometry in Books V and VI of Euclid's \textit{Elements} is presented. Specifically, we introduce a diagrammatic syntax that can be overlaid immediately on his diagrams, thus bridging intuitive presentation with fidelity to Euclid's arguments. This syntax makes complicated definitions like V.5, and indeed the arguments throughout books V and VI, including arguments about similar figures, intuitively clear. We show in an appendix that this syntax can be used to solve a puzzle regarding ancient mathematics. Finally, we offer evidence that this approach to Euclidean diagrams is rooted in the Aristotelian tradition itself, and that a similar syntax was utilized, in antiquity, for related questions of numeric and proportions. Thus the syntax is plausibly faithful to Euclid's own thought-world, and not an outside-imposition.

math.HO↗
arXiv2026

Some Early Results by Tutte Regarding the Cycle Double Cover Conjecture in 1948

OpenAI recently announced a proof of the Cycle Double Cover (CDC) Conjecture. Most media reports have characterized it as a 50-year-old open problem. In reality, according to a 1987 letter from Tutte to Fleischner, the Cycle Double Cover Problem has been open for at least 80 years. Two early results regarding the CDC conjecture were established in one of Tutte's 1949 publications.

math.HO↗