Search arXiv⌕ 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

Explore connections, maps & timelines

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

Come for the vibe, stay for the math

This article describes our experiences in mathematical outreach over the past decade. We talk about specific activities, but also general principles that we've learned along the way.

math.HO↗
arXiv2026

Graduate Mathematics in the Age of AI: Forming Mathematicians for Original, Independent, and Responsible Inquiry

Artificial intelligence can increasingly produce plausible, sophisticated mathematical material faster than a developing graduate student can understand or verify it. A sophisticated result or paper draft therefore becomes weaker evidence of the student's own mathematical development. This creates a formation gap between output and personal capacity, and a trust gap between a convincing argument and warranted acceptance. The formation gap can persist even when the student understands the output: understanding a supplied argument does not by itself establish the capacity to initiate and direct inquiry. These gaps are not the whole story. AI can also help students explore examples, compare approaches, enter unfamiliar areas, and undertake ambitious research. The task is to design an apprenticeship that realizes these possibilities while developing substantive mathematical command. The central purpose of a mathematics PhD is to form mathematicians capable of original, independent, and responsible inquiry, including inquiry conducted with AI. This document develops that objective through four connected capacities: competence, judgment, independence, and responsibility. It distinguishes a work's contribution to mathematics from the evidence it provides of a student's formation; explains how a known answer can initiate rather than end creative inquiry; and proposes changes in learning activities, assessment, doctoral originality, advising, and institutional support. Purposeful independent work and ambitious AI-assisted research are complementary parts of the model. Its recommendations include proportionate contribution statements, recognition of advising costs, and staged pilots evaluating both mathematical ability and effective human--AI collaboration. The aim is not to preserve an inherited sequence of training, but to improve mathematical formation as mathematical practice changes.

math.HO↗