Classquest helps teachers identify topics needing reteaching from quizzes
From Source-Based Quizzes to Reteaching Decisions: A Practitioner Guide to ClassQuest
Computers and Society
Summary
When students take quizzes, teachers want to know what topics need to be explained again. The authors created ClassQuest, a tool that links quiz questions, student answers, and reports to help teachers decide when and what to reteach. They tested it in a Year 10 classroom, showing that teachers found it useful and that the system accurately tracks student responses and retries. While the tool helps guide teaching decisions, the authors did not claim it improves learning directly. This work helps improve how teachers get feedback from quizzes to support teaching.
What this means in practice
- •For education technology developers: Create classroom software that links quiz data to teachers' decisions about reteaching topics based on validated student responses and retries.
- •For learning analytics teams: Use detailed reports that accurately track quiz response states and identify when additional teaching attempts are missing or needed.
Authors
Zihao Sun
Abstract
A source-based quiz can help a computing teacher identify material to explain again, but its report must preserve the limits of the evidence behind that decision. We present ClassQuest, a prototype connecting teacher-reviewed question drafts, private student responses, topic reports and targeted retries. A Year 10 classroom account of an earlier prototype supplies 20 usefulness ratings from 24 invitees, with a mean of 8.0 and median of 9 on a ten-point scale. A Boolean-logic episode documents how immediate feedback, a teacher explanation and a fresh question were combined. We separate this account from a completed technical audit and reusable teaching guide. An exhaustive single-item audit found no count mismatches across 5,456 constructed response configurations, while diagnostic cases exposed a retry increase caused entirely by changing participation and a progression suggestion based on one learner's three answers. A further case shows that an unoffered retry can be labelled missing. A separate reporting companion distinguishes opportunity to respond, pending review and matched retry cohorts. Its completion-sensitivity check matched an independent oracle in 46,375 constructed states across roster sizes 1-30, identifying when unknown responses can change a reporting band. Our contributions are a source-linked formative workflow, executable examples of interpretation failures, and reporting and teaching materials for examining those failures. Neither the questionnaire nor the audit establishes improved learning; the findings identify reporting requirements and practical directions for formative teaching.