PlayPosit Evaluation

Overview: We collaborated with the Department of Physiology, the College of Nursing, and the MSU Libraries, to design and conduct an evaluation for a pilot use of PlayPosit.

Outcomes: The results from the PlayPosit evaluation project helped our collaborating departments to create and conduct several professional development workshops and consultations with participating faculty and prospective users of PlayPosit. 

Jun, in collaboration with Chris Shaltry at the Department of Physiology, Andy Greger at the College of Nursing, and Jessica Sender at the MSU Libraries, designed and conducted an evaluation for a pilot use of PlayPosit, an interactive web-based video platform that allows educators to provide formative assessment both inside and outside the classroom. In Fall 2021, PlayPosit was incorporated into five courses across three different subject areas (physiology, statistics, and nursing). This evaluation project is centered on the following key questions: 

  • Does the use of this tool influence student engagement? How?
  • In what ways does the use of PlayPosit influence student motivation?
  • In what ways does the use of PlayPosit enrich learning experiences in the classroom?

Students’ perceptions and experiences of PlayPosit were examined through an anonymous survey containing both quantitative measures and open-ended questions. A total of 807 complete responses were returned. 

Quantitative measures (5-point Likert type scale, ranging from 1 = Disagree to  5 = Agree):
  • Q1. Having PlayPosit in the course videos enriched my learning experience in this course.
  • Q2. PlayPosit in-video assessments are valuable in relation to my learning goals.
  • Q3. The in-video assessments made the video content more engaging.
  • Q4. I felt more motivated in the learning process through taking the in-video assessments.
  • Q5. The in-video assessments helped with my understanding of relevant course content or concepts.
  • Q6. I prefer PlayPosit questions over D2L quizzes to check my understanding of course content.
  • Q7. I was able to better control the pace of my learning when going through interactive PlayPosit videos in this course.
  • Q8. The instructor should keep using PlayPosit in this course.
Quantitative data by course area:
  • Two physiology courses (N1 = 370)
  • Two nursing courses (N2 = 58)
  • One statistics course (N3 = 379)
Main findings across different course areas:

Students’ perceptions and experiences of PlayPosit were largely positive, particularly for those in the physiology courses (N1 = 370) and the statistics course (N3 = 379). However, students from the nursing courses (N2 = 58) reported mixed views on the effectiveness of the tool. Note that the low response rate from the nursing students indicated that this sample (N2 = 58) was not representative of the desired population. Thus, the results from the specific sample of nursing students should be interpreted with caution.

Regarding the qualitative feedback from students, the majority of the students provided lots of positive comments on their experiences with PlayPosit. For example, a student commented: “Being that this was my first time ever using PlayPosit for a class, I actually think it is something that should stick around because not only is it interactive, but you also get a better understanding of concepts.” In terms of the perceived challenges reported by some students (in the nursing courses), the main concern was that PlayPosit might be most useful for supplemental instruction, rather than for replacing the primary instruction on complex issues. For example, a student commented: “I think PlayPosit can be useful for extra small assignments to test understanding, but not for introducing new course material; especially in a complex course like this one. I learn better (by) being lectured in person where I can ask real-time questions. The problem I have with the in-video assessments is that they don’t always address the same questions I have throughout the video, let alone do I have the chance to have my questions reviewed/clarified before I have to answer the in-video questions. My learning has been really hindered by (the) use of PlayPosit for this course and I would really like to be lectured in person.” 

“Excellent, thank you for your contribution, Jun! Your group’s guidance on next steps is greatly appreciated.”

Feedback from a collaborator of the project

Future plans: Building on the design and process of this evaluation project, we will continue to support further needs on collecting evaluation data on the use of PlayPosit in relevant courses. We will also continue to collaborate with the relevant departments to offer technological support and/or pedagogical suggestions for faculty and students to effectively use PlayPosit.

Publications:  Based on the 807 student responses collected from anonymous surveys containing both quantitative measures and open-ended questions, a presentation summarizing the preliminary results of this work is available

MSU 2021 PlayPosit Training Sessions 

Author/Personnel: by Jun Fu; Scott Schopieray, Jessica Sender, Stephen Thomas

Partners: Chris Shaltry (Department of Physiology), Andy Greger (College of Nursing)

Jun Fu

Dr. Jun Fu joined the EDLI Team from Oklahoma State University, where she earned a PhD in Educational Psychology and served as an adjunct faculty member at the School of Educational Foundations, Leadership and Aviation. Dr. Fu specializes in program evaluation, research and assessment for the EDLI team.