Computer Aided Assessment MUST be more than multiple-choice tests for it to be academically credible?

作者: P. Davies

DOI:

关键词:

摘要: Computer Aided Assessment (CAA) is being proposed as the means of providing formative testing to ever-increasing numbers students involved in higher education. A large proportion this based around use of objective multiple-choice tests. These tend make process of select one out three possible answers, or improve reliability process, one four! Obviously there are alternatives above, however, a lecturer initially will method that easiest for them. With complexity, multifunctionality and hence steep learning curve setting up these systems, many lecturers dumping them before their benefits can be achieved. Question banks available, normally require an initial financial outlay. The questions offered often general, and may not directly map areas covered in particular module. No matter what system utilised objective tests, the criticism by CAA sceptics "we developing employable and transferable skills". Students on leaving higher education rarely expected to produce answers employers skills, but be expected produce reports, presentations, etc. The question springs mind is ... our job educators, clones, develop nurture broader skills? formative multiple choice tests also causing problem that students "prepared" sit final examinations. still take the format select from five questions then write essays each the selected limited time period. Having part of formative/summative assessment throughout course module, again brings us back consuming having mark provide formative feedback. This paper introduces audience Computerised Plagiarism system (Davies 2000), provides on-line assessing the essays peers, providing has been successfully used at levels one, two undergraduate programme in the field computer studies University Glamorgan. It been for continual level combination / peer assessment two, self, peer reflective self-assessment level three. networked tool produced major positive both for the staff. Its acceptance only provided efficient for formative summative assessment, aided students' essay writing skills. From lecturer's point view, those who past have been sceptical more general objective testing, become much receptive introduction innovative assessment methods making CAA.

参考文章(12)
H. Hunt, D. Whittington, Approaches to the computerized assessment of free text responses Loughborough University. ,(1999)
J.R. Christie, Automated essay marking - for style and content © Loughborough University. ,(1999)
Leith Sly, Practice Tests as Formative Assessment Improve Student Performance on Computer‐managed Learning Assessments Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. ,vol. 24, pp. 339- 343 ,(1999) , 10.1080/0260293990240307
Colleen McKenna, Joanna Bull, Quality assurance of computer‐assisted assessment: practical and strategic issues Quality Assurance in Education. ,vol. 8, pp. 24- 32 ,(2000) , 10.1108/09684880010312659
Richard F. Burton, Quantifying the Effects of Chance in Multiple Choice and True/False Tests: Question selection and guessing of answers Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. ,vol. 26, pp. 41- 50 ,(2001) , 10.1080/02602930020022273
Mike Thelwall, A unique style of computer‐assisted assessment Research in Learning Technology. ,vol. 6, pp. 49- 57 ,(1998) , 10.3402/RLT.V6I2.11006
David Boud, Ruth Cohen, Jane Sampson, Peer Learning and Assessment Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. ,vol. 24, pp. 413- 426 ,(1999) , 10.1080/0260293990240405
Phil Davies, Computerized Peer Assessment Innovations in Education and Training International. ,vol. 37, pp. 346- 355 ,(2000) , 10.1080/135580000750052955
Graham Mowl, Rachel Pain, Using Self and Peer Assessment to Improve Students’ Essay Writing: a Case Study from Geography Innovations in Education and Training International. ,vol. 32, pp. 324- 335 ,(1995) , 10.1080/1355800950320404