Quiz-R-Us – Re-Conceptualizing Quizzes to Enrich Blended Learning in Occupational Therapy Study Lines

  • Emanuela Marchetti
  • Andrea Valente
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10925)


In the latest years, the Danish school system has experienced an increase in digitization and experimentation with blended learning, in which traditional face-to-face instruction is combined with web-based online learning. Online quizzes have become a popular tool for students’ self and peer assessment in the education of occupational therapy, in which blended learning is becoming more commonly adopted. The use and creation of online quizzes is seen as a concrete case to explore how to enrich the practice of blended learning in the occupational therapy education, challenging the traditional notion of quizzes. This study was a cooperation between the Lillebaelt Academy’s Web Development education, and the Occupational Therapy education from the University College Lillebaelt, both in the area of Odense, Southern Denmark. Our study suggests that the use of quizzes poses complex questions in relation to the participation of teachers and students in creating quizzes and managing assessment. Hence teachers see quizzes as an opportunity for reducing their burden in assessment, but both teachers and students said that quizzes can be “dry” or “boring” and their best experiences with quizzes involved playful learning settings. Based on these findings, the Web Development students developed a series of hi-fi prototypes addressing two main issues: the need for making online quizzes more playful, and the need to support the workflow that takes place in the authoring and use of quizzes. This paper presents our findings, weaknesses of our study, and the relations between blended and playful learning.


Blended learning Gamification Playful learning Quiz Assessment 


  1. 1.
    Barnard-Ashton, P., Rothberg, A., McInerney, P.: The integration of blended learning into an occupational therapy curriculum: a qualitative reflection. BMC Med. Educ. 17(135), 1–13 (2017)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bates, A.W.: Teaching in the Digital Age. Guidelines for Designing Teaching and Learning. Tony Bates and Associates Ltd., Vancouver (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boskic, N., Hu, S.: Gamification in higher education: how we changed roles. In: Monkvold, R., Kolås, L. (eds.) Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Games Based Learning, pp. 741–748. Academic Conferences International Limited (2015)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Broadbent, J.: Comparing online and blended learner’s self-regulated learning strategies and academic performance. Internet Higher Educ. 33, 24–32 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cheong, C., Cheong, F., Filippou, J.: Quick quiz: a gamified approach for enhancing learning. In Proceedings of Pacific Asian Conference on Information Systems, pp. 1–14. AIS (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cohen, D., Sasson, I.: Online quizzes in a virtual learning environment as a tool for formative assessment. J. Technol. Sci. Educ. 6(3), 188–208 (2016)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dabner, D., Stewart, S., Zempol, E.: Graphic Design School. The Principle and Practice of Graphic Design. Wiley, Hoboken (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dankbaar, M.: Serious games and blended learning; effects on performance and motivation in medical education. Perspect. Med. Educ. 6, 58–60 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dudzinski, M., Greenhill, D., Kayyali, R., Nabhani, S., Philip, N., Caton, H., Ishtiaq, S., Gatsinzi, F.: The design and evaluation of a multiplayer serious game for pharmacy students. In: de Carvalho, C.V., Escudeiro, P. (eds.) The Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Games Based Learning, pp. 140–148. Academic Conferences International Limited (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Freasier, B., Collins, G., Newitt, P.: A web-based interactive homework quiz and tutorial package to motivate undergraduate chemistry students and improve learning. J. Chem. Educ. 80(11), 1344–1347 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Garrison, D.R., Kanuka, H.: Blended learning: uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. Internet Higher Educ. 7(2), 95–105 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gothelf, J., Seiden, J.: Lean UX. Applying Lean Principles to Improve User Experience. O’Reilly, Sebastopol (2013)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Graham, C.R.: Blended learning systems: definition, current trends, and future directions. In: Bonk, C.J., Graham, C.R. (eds.) Handbook of Blended Learning: Global Perspectives, Local Designs, pp. 3–21. Pfeiffer Publishing (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Haghshenas, M., Khademi, M., Kabir, H.: E-learning and authoring tools: at a glance. Int. J. Res. Rev. Appl. Sci. 10(2), 259–263 (2012)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hamshire, C., Whitton, N., Whitton, P.: Staying the course-a game to facilitate students’ transitions to higher education. In: Felicia, P. (ed.) The Proceedings of the 6th European Conference on Games Based Learning, pp. 627–631. Academic Conferences International Limited (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hutchful, D., Matur, A., Cutrell, E., Joshi, A.: Cloze: an authoring tool for teachers with low computer proficiency. In: Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies and Development, p. 21. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Krajka, J.: Making web-based quizzes in an instant. Teach. Engl. Technol. 3(1), 51–56 (2003)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Marchetti, E., Valente, A.: It takes three: re-contextualizing game-based learning, among teachers, developers and learners. In: Connoly, T., Boyle, L. (eds.) Proceedings of The 10th European Conference on Games Based Learning, pp. 399–406. Academic Conferences and Publishing International (2016)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Preece, J., Sharp, H., Rogers, Y.: Interaction Design. Beyond Human Computer Interaction. New York, USA (2015)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Romero, C., Ventura, S., De Bra, P.: Using mobile and web-based computerized tests to evaluate university students. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 17(4), 435–447 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schön, D., Kopf, S., Effelsberg, W.: A lightweight mobile quiz application with support for multimedia content. In: The International Conference of e-Learning and e-Technologies in Education, pp. 134–139. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    White, R.J., Hammer, C.A.: Quiz-o-matic: a free web-based tool for construction of self-scoring on-line quizzes. Behav. Res. Methods 32(2), 250–253 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
  24. 24.
    Yamada, M., Goda, Y., Matsuda, T., Saito, Y., Kato, H., Miyagawa, H.: How does self-regulated learning relate to active procrastination and other learning behaviors? J. Comput. Higher Educ. 28(3), 326–343 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yuuichi, S., Toshihiro, K., Seisuke, Y., Hiroshi, N.: Web-based rapid authoring tool for LMS quiz creation. In: The 7th International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training, pp. 617–620. IEEE (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Media Studies, Department for the Study of CultureUniversity of Southern Denmark (SDU)OdenseDenmark
  2. 2.Maersk Mc-Kinney Moller Institute, Embodied Systems for Robotics and LearningUniversity of Southern Denmark (SDU)OdenseDenmark

Personalised recommendations