| Journal
Articles and Conference Papers |
| |
|
| |
Bell, B., & Cowie, B. (2001). The characteristics of formative assessment in science education. Science Education, 85, 536–553. |
| |
|
Small research to analyse different characteristic of formative assessments. Starts with description of the different definitions of formative assessments. |
| |
|
| |
Bennett,
R.E. (2002). Inexorable and Inevitable: The Continuing Story of Technology
and Assessment. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 1
(1). Available from http://www.jtla.org. |
| |
|
Situation in 2002, Very general. |
| |
|
| |
Black,
P., & Wiliam D. (2005). Lessons from Around the World: How Policies,
Politics and Cultures Constrain and Afford Assessment Practices. The
Curriculum Journal, 16 (2), 249-261. |
| |
|
General comparison of the role assessment in educational system in UK, US, France & Germany and the consequences for teaching and the role of the teacher. |
| |
|
| |
Black,
P. (2000). Research and the Development of Educational Assessment.
Oxford Review of Education, 26 (3-4). |
| |
|
Highlights the limitations of the use of assessments and research on it makes references to Black & Wiliam 1998. Advises more directed research and emphases on teaching rather than preparing for. |
| |
|
| |
Black,
P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the Black Box: Raising Standards
Through Classroom Assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80 (2), 139-144. |
| |
|
Critical approach about formative and summative assessment. Written from a teacher’s perspective. Useful comments how to improve teaching and using assessments. |
| |
|
| |
Bleske-Rechek, A., Zeug, N., & Webb, R.M. (2007). Discrepant performance on multiple-choice and short answer assessments and the relation of performance to general scholastic aptitude. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(2), 89-105. |
| |
|
Study between the relationships closed ended and open ended assessments and general progress. Conclusion in favoured for close ended MCQ questions. |
| |
|
| |
Boston,
C. (2002). The Concept of Formative Assessment. Practical Assessment,
Research & Evaluation, 8 (9). Retrieved August 17, 2007 from http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=8&n=9.
|
| |
|
Summarise the benefits of formative assessments from Black & William 1998, and offers some additional teaching activities and links. |
| |
|
| |
Boyle,
J. T., & Nicol, D. J. (2003). Using classroom communication systems
to support interaction and discussion in large class settings. Association
for Learning Technology Journal (ALT-J), 11 (3), 43-57. |
| |
|
| |
Buchanan,
T. (2000). The Efficacy of a World-Wide Web Mediated Formative Assessement.
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 16, 193-200. |
| |
|
Benefits of MCQ Formative testing for students. |
| |
|
| |
Bugbee, Jr. A.C., & Bernt, F.M. (1990). Testing by computer: Findings in six years of use 1982-1988. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 23(1). |
| |
|
Older article about early state of online assessment, interesting to see the differences in time. |
| |
|
| |
Burke,
W. M. (2000). Journeying Beyond Models and Typologies: A Constructivist
View of Classroom Assessment for Learning. Paper presented at at the
Annual Conference of the British Educational Research Conference,
Cardiff. |
| |
|
| |
Clariana, R. B., and Wallace, P. E. (2002). Paper-based versus computer-based assessment: key factors associated with the test mode effect. British Journal of Educational Technology 33 (5), 593–602. |
| |
|
| |
Cooper,
S., Hanmer, D., & Cerbin, B. (2006). Problem-Solving Modules in
Large Introductory Biology Lectures Enhance Student Understanding.
The American Biology Teacher, 68 (9), 524-529. |
| |
|
| |
Cowie,
B. (2005). Pupil Commentary on Assessment for Learning. The Curriculum
Journal, 16 (2), 137-151. |
| |
|
| |
Crisp, G. & Palmer, E. (2007). Engaging Academics with a Simplified Analysis of their Multiple-Choice Question (MCQ) Assessment Results. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 4(2), 88-106. http://jutlp.uow.edu.au/2007_v04_i02/pdf/crisp.pdf |
| |
|
Useful short explanation of Item Analysis |
| |
|
| |
Cue,
N. (1998). A universal learning tool for classrooms? Paper presented
at the First Quality in Teaching and Learning Conference, Hong Kong.
|
| |
|
Pros of EVS in Hong Kong such as timely feedback and reinforcement, and easy to use, they promote it campus wide in the future. |
| |
|
| |
Cutts, Q.I. & Kennedy, G.E. (2005). Connecting Learning Environments Using Electronic Voting Systems, Australiasian Computing Education Conference 2005, Newcastle, Australia. Conferences in Research and Practice in Information Technology, 42. Available from: http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~quintin/papers/CRPITV42Cutts.pdf |
| |
|
Research on EVS, critical approach with explanations for poor responses. |
| |
|
| |
Desrochers, M.N., Pusateri jr M.J., Fink, H.C. (2007). Game assessment: fun as well as effective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(5), 527-539. |
| |
|
Positive effect of game and group setup in assessment. Some interesting benefits of game setup on social skills and outcome. |
| |
|
| |
Dibattista,
D., Mitterer, J.O., & Gosse, L. (2004). Acceptance by undergraduates
of the immediate feedback assessment technique for multiple-choice
testing. Teaching in Higher Education, 9 (1), 17–28. |
| |
|
Use of P&P technique IFAT technique offers students an answer-until-correct format and partial points for mistakes. Accepted positively. Has similarities to the Wang, K. H., Wang, T. H., Wang, W. L., & Huang, S. C. (2006) WATA assessment structure. Feedback only in marks. |
| |
|
| |
Dixon,
H., & Williams, R. (2001). Teachers' Understanding of Formative
Assessment. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the British
Educational Research Association, Leeds, UK. |
| |
|
| |
Draper, S.W., & Brown, M.I. (2004). Increasing interactivity in lectures using an Electronic voting System. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 20,81 – 94. Available from: http://www.psy.gla.ac.uk/~steve/ilig/papers/draperbrown.pdf |
| |
|
More research and experience as Draper, S. W., Cargill, J., & Cutts, Q. (2002) article. But same setup. |
| |
|
| |
Draper,
S. W., Cargill, J., & Cutts, Q. (2002). Electronically enhanced
classroom interaction. Australian Journal of Educational Technology,
18 (1), 13-23. |
| |
|
Description of the PPV system, with an useful summery of pedagogic possibilities.
Also available from: http://www.psy.gla.ac.uk/~steve/ilig/handsets.html |
| |
|
| |
Eccleston,
K., & Pryor, J. (2003). "Learning Careers" or "Assessment
Careers"? The Impact of Assessment Systems on Learning. British
Educational Research Journal, 29 (4). |
| |
|
| |
Elliott,
C. (2003). Using a Personal Response System in Economics Teaching.
International Review of Economics Education, 1 (1), 80-86. |
| |
|
| |
Elwood,
J. (2006). Formative Assessment: Possibilities, Boundaries and Limitations.
Assessment in Education, 13 (2), 215-232. |
| |
|
Review essay from two books. Critical note about assessing at the end of the book are mostly cultural and gender related. |
| |
|
| |
Fisher,
D., Waldrip, B. & Dorman, J. P. (2005). Student Perceptions of
Assessment: Development and Validation of a Questionnaire. Paper presented
at the Annual Conference of the American Educational Reserach Association,
Montreal, Canada. |
| |
|
| |
Foggo,
L. (2007). Using Blogs for Formative Assessment and Interactive Teaching.
Ariadne, 51. Available from: http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue51/foggo/ |
| |
|
Small study about using a blog as formative tool. Partly successful. Limited success by lake of personal engagement. |
| |
|
| |
Frank,
M. & Barzilai, A. (2004). Integrating Alternative Assessment in
a Project-Based Learning Course for Pre-Service Science and Technology
Teachers. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29 (1).
|
| |
|
| |
Gijbels,
D., & Dochy, F. (2006). Students' Assessment Preferences and Approaches
to Learning: Can Formative Assessment make a Difference. Educational
Studies, 32 94), 399-409. |
| |
|
| |
Gipps,
C. V. (2005). What is the role for ICT-based assessment in universities?
Studies in Higher Education, 30 (2), 171-180. |
| |
|
General revues of ICT use in universities, contains some useful indications. Makes use of Black & Wiliam (1998). |
| |
|
| |
Gleaves, A., Walker, A. & Grey, J. (2007). Using digital and paper diaries for learning and assessment purposes in higher education; a comparative study of feasibility and reliability. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32( 6). |
| |
|
Studies differences between Paper- and Online-diaries for reflective use. Outcome p-diary more deep but fewer. D-diaries more frequent but shorter and more fragmentary. Interesting to keep in mind using blogs as a method of reflection. |
| |
|
| |
Greenhow,
M. (2002). Answer Files - What more do they reveal? Maths CAA Series
Jan 2002. Retrieved February 1, 2007 from http://mathstore.ac.uk/articles/maths-caa-series/jan2002/index.shtml#whydiagnostic |
| |
|
| |
Greer,
L. (2001). Does Changing the Method of Assessment of a Module Improve
the Performance of a Student? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher
Education, 26 (2). |
| |
|
Small study to show impact of add formative feedback into course to stimulate deep approach of learning. Difficult to proof success, but positive student feedback. |
| |
|
| |
Hake,
R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: a
six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory
physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66 (1), 64–74.
|
| |
|
| |
Haladyna,
T. M., Downing, S. M., & Rodriguez, M. C. (2002). A Review of
Multiple-Choice Item-Writing Guidelines for Classroom Assessment.
Applied Measurement In Education, 15 (3), 309-334. |
| |
|
| |
Hardré, P.L., Crowson, H.M., Xie, K., & Ly, C. (2007), Testing differential effects of computer-based, web-based and paper-based administration of questionnaire research instruments. British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol 38 (1), 5–22. |
| |
|
Outcome differences between PBA & CBA in favour of PBA. See also: -Clariana R B and Wallace P E (2002) |
| |
|
| |
Hargreaves,
E. (2005). Assessment for Learning? Thinking Outside the (Black) Box.
Cambridge Journal of Education, 35 (2), 213-224. |
| |
|
| |
Harlen,
W. (2005). Teachers' Summative Practices and Assessment for Learning
- Tensions and Synergies. The Curriculum Journal, 16 (2), 207-223. |
| |
|
| |
Horne, J., (2007) Gender differences in computerised and conventional educational tests. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 47–55. |
| |
|
Study about gender difference between CBA and PBA. Now differences were found. |
| |
|
| |
Hudson,
J. N., & Bristow, D. R. (2006). Formative Assessment Can be Fun
as well as Educational. Advances in Physiology Education, 30, 33-37.
|
| |
|
EVC. Formative assessments in game form using cards instead of EVC. Positive benefits on student’s interaction and self-directed learning. Without an EVC same positive effects. |
| |
|
| |
Hutchinson,
C., & Hayward, L. (2005). The Journey so Far: Assessment for Learning
in Scotland. The Curriculum Journal, 16 (2), 225-248. |
| |
|
| |
Johnson,
D. (2001). Web Watch: Assessment Resources. Reading Online, 5 (2).
Available from: http://www.readingonline.org/electronic/elec_index.asp?HREF=webwatch/assessment/index.html |
| |
|
Reviews web resources from a standardized testing point of view. A couple of resources are not available any more. |
| |
|
| |
Johnson,
M. & Green, S. (2004). On-Line Assessment: The Impact of Mode
on Student Performance. Paper presented at the at the Annual Conference
of the British Educational Research Association, Manchester, UK. |
| |
|
Now difference between pen and paper and online assessment with children. Interesting failure points. Also available from: www.cambridgeassessment.org.uk/ |
| |
|
| |
Jones,
A., & Moreland, J. (2005). The Importance of Pedagogical Content
Knowledge in Assessment for Learning Practices: A Case-Study of a
Whole-School Approach. The Curriculum Journal, 16 (2), 193-206. |
| |
|
| |
Kim, D. H., & Huynh, H. (2007). Comparability of Computer and Paper-and-Pencil
Versions of Algebra and Biology Assessments. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 6(4). Availabe from http://www.jtla.org. |
| |
|
Shows like Puhan, P., Boughton, K., & Kim, S. (2007) study no real difference between CBA and PPA in administration mode. |
| |
|
| |
Kirton,
A., Hallam, S., Peffers, J., Robertson, P., & Stobart, G. (2007).
Revolution, Evolution or a Trojan Horse? Piloting Assessment for Learning
in Some Scottish Primary Schools. British Educational Research Journal,
33 (4), 605-627. |
| |
|
| |
Lawson,
D. (1999). Formative Assessment Using Computer-Aided Assessment. Teaching
Mathematics and Its Applications, 18 (4), 155-158. |
| |
|
| |
Liang,
X., & Crasy, K. (2004). Classroom assessment in web-based instructional
environment: instructors’ experience. Practical Assessment,
Research & Evaluation, 9(7). Retrieved January 30, 2007 from http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=9&n=7. |
| |
|
Interesting article about the pedagogical consequences of online assessment. Pros and cons about e-learning. Assessment should be centred on “assessment for learning” to increase learner autonomy. More possibilities to show skills, learn to be autonomous, relied heavily on writing communication and visual layout. |
| |
|
| |
Lilley,
M., & Barker, T. (2007). Students' Perceived Usefulness of Formative
Feedback for a Computer-adaptive Test. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning,
5 (1), 31-38. |
| |
|
Using CAT strategy for formative assessments. Students found it useful. |
| |
|
| |
Masikunas,
G., Panayiotidis, A., & Burke, L. (2007). The
use of electronic voting systems in lectures within business and marketing:
a case study of their impact on student learning. ALT-J, Research
in Learning Technology, 15(1), 3-20. |
| |
|
| |
Mason, R., Pegler, C., & Weller, M. (2004). E-portfolios: an assessment tool for online courses. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(6), 717-727. |
| |
|
Case study about the benefits of e-portfolios, a method of assessment, builds independence and learning-to-learn skills. Less critical to how to assess and criteria for it. |
| |
|
| |
McGuire,
L. (2005). Assessment Using New Technology. Innovations in Education
and Teaching International, 42 (3), 265-276. |
| |
|
Study using mobile telephone and voice recordings as a way to assess. |
| |
|
| |
Miller,
D., & Lavin, F. (2007). "But Now I feel I want to Give it
a Try": Formative Assessment, Self-Esteem and a Sense of Competence.
The Curriculum Journal, 18 (1), 3-25. |
| |
|
Long-term benefits of formative assessments for self-competence. Formative assessments as a tool for a dialog. |
| |
|
| |
Moskal,
B. M.(2003). Developing Classroom Performance Assessments and Scoring
Rubrics - Part I. ERIC Digest. ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and
Evaluation. |
| |
|
| |
Moskal,
B. M.(2003). Developing Classroom Performance Assessments and Scoring
Rubrics - Part II. ERIC Digest. ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and
Evaluation. |
| |
|
| |
Nicol, D. (2007). 'E-assessment by design: using multiple-choice tests to good effect'. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 31(1), 53 - 64. |
| |
|
Interesting article which lays several case studies to their 7 principle of Nicol, D. J., & Macfalane-Dick, D. (2006) article. Especially the table mapping the seven principles of good feedback practice and the confidence based marking + MCQ is interesting. |
| |
|
| |
Nicol,
D. J., & Macfalane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative Assessment and Self-Regulated
Learning: A Model and Seven Principles of Good Feedback Practice.
Studies in Higher Education, 31 (2), 199-218. |
| |
|
Good advice on giving feedback, with practical easy-to-implement strategies. |
| |
|
| |
Nicol,
D., Milligan, C. (2006). Rethinking Technology-Supported Assessment
Practices in Relation to the Seven Principles of Good Feedback Practice.
Innovative Assessment in Higher Education. |
| |
|
| |
Nitko,
A.J. (1996). Educational assessment of students. (2nd ed.). Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Merrill. |
| |
|
| |
Northcote,
M. (2002). Online Assessment: Friend, Foe or Fix? British Journal
of Educational Technology, 33 (5), 623-625. |
| |
|
| |
Oliver, R. (2006). Exploring a technology-facilitated solution to cater for advanced students in large undergraduate classes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22, 1–12. |
| |
|
Case study to offer open ended computer facilitated assessment in big group of students course. The small participating group was enthusiastic about authenticity, but requires tutor monitoring, useful conclusions for similar projects. |
| |
|
| |
Orsmond,
P., Merry, S., & Callaghan, A. (2004). Implementation of a Formative
Assessment Model Incorporating Peer and Self-Assessment. Innovations
in Education and Teaching International, 41 (3). |
| |
|
General formative assessment findings from peer feedback. Relies on Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998) article. |
| |
|
| |
Peat,
M., & Franklin, S. (2003). Has Student Learning been Improved
by the Use of Online and Offline Formative Assessment Opportunities?
Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 19 (1), 87-99. |
| |
|
Research on effect of formative assessment. Outcome, no improvements, opposite of the Buchana (2000) article, although positive response from students. |
| |
|
| |
Pear,
M., & Franklin, S. (2002). Supporting Student Learning: The Use
of Computer-Based Formative Assessment Modules. British Journal of
Educational Technology, 33 (5), 515-523. |
| |
|
| |
Pope,
N. (2001). An Examination of the Use of Peer Rating for Formative
Assessment in the Context of the Theory of Consumption Values. Assessment
& Evaluation in Higher Education, 26 (3). |
| |
|
| |
Priestley,
M., & Sime, D. (2005). Formative Assessment for All: A Whole-School
Approach to Pedagogic Change. The Curriculum Journal, 16 (4), 475-492.
|
| |
|
| |
Puhan, P., Boughton, K., & Kim, S. (2007). Examining Differences in Examinee
Performance in Paper and Pencil and Computerized Testing. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 6(3). Available from http://www.jtla.org. |
| |
|
Large comparison between CBA and PPA, outcome now significant differences. |
| |
|
| |
Ravitz,
J. (2002). CILT2000: Using Technology to Support Ongoing Formative
Assesment in the Classroom. Journal of Science Education and Technology,
11 (3), 293-296. |
| |
|
| |
Roos,
B. & Hamilton, D. (2004). Towards Constructivist Assessment? Paper
presented at the Annual Conference of the Nordisk Forening for Pedagogisk
Forskning (NFPF), Reykjavik, Iceland. |
| |
|
| |
Rotheram,
B. (2007). Using an MP3 Recorder to Give Feedback on Student Assignments.
Educational Developments, 8.2, 7-10. |
| |
|
| |
Ruiz-Primo,
M. A., & Furtak, E. M. (2007). Exploring Teachers' Informal Formative
Assessment Practices and Students' Understanding in the Context of
Scientific Inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Learning, 44 (1),
57-84. |
| |
|
| |
Russell,
J., Elton, L., Swinglehurst, D., & Greenhalgh, T. (2006). Using
the Online Environment in Assessment for Learning: A Case-Study of
a Web-Based Course in Primary Care. Assessment & Evaluation in
Higher Education, 31 (4), 465-478. |
| |
|
| |
Russell,
M., & Haney, W. (2000). Bridging the Gap between Testing and Technology
in Schools. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8 (19). |
| |
|
| |
Sato,
M., Coffey, J., & Moorthy, S. (2005). Two Teachers Making Assessment
for Learning Their Own. The Curriculum Journal, 16 (2), 177-191. |
| |
|
Description about the difficulties to address chance in teaching styles among teachers and difference in aims of individual teachers and the results of that. |
| |
|
| |
Scalise, K., & Gifford, B. (2006). Computer-Based Assessment in E-Learning: A Frame work for Constructing “Intermediate Constraint” Questions and Tasks for Technology Platforms. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 4 (6). Available from http://www.jtla.org. |
| |
|
Useful matrix of item and comments on constraint and unconstraint items. |
| |
|
| |
Scouller, K. (1998). The influence of assessment method on students’ learning approaches: Multiple choice question examination versus assignment essay. |
| |
|
Older study investigates relationship between student approach to assessment form, the assessment outcome and “deep approach vs surface approach” learning. In favoured for assignment essay for deep approach learning. |
| |
|
| |
Singh,
B. (1999). Formative Assessment: Which Way Now? Paper presented at
Annual Confernce of the British Educational Research Association,
Brighton, UK. |
| |
|
| |
Sly,
L. (1999). Practise Tests as Formative Assessment Improve Student
Performance on Computer-Managed Learning Assessments. Assessment &
Evaluation in Higher Education, 24 (3), 339-343. |
| |
|
| |
Taras,
M. (2002). Using Assessment for Learning and Learning from Assessment.
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27 (6). |
| |
|
Article about the use of feedback around assessment, leaning on article from Sadler 1989 “Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems”, William and “Black Inside the black box”, standards of excellent teaching and previous articles from herself. Main conclusion student involvement in standards of assessing. |
| |
|
| |
Taras,
M. (2006). Do Unto Others Or Not: Equity in Feedback for Undergraduates.
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31 (3), 365-377.
|
| |
|
Critical notes for the current situation of feedback for undergraduate students. More or less similar to 2002 article. Main challenge between academic work and skills develop for undergraduates. |
| |
|
| |
Taylor,
C.S., & Nolen, S.B. (2005). Classroom assessment. Supporting teaching
and learning in real classrooms. New Jersey: Pearson Education. |
| |
|
| |
Thompson,
G., Hoskisson, D., Brauner, C., & Christensen, V. (1998). Students,
Learning, Assessment and Technology: A Campus-Wide Merger. In SITE
98 Conference Proceedings, (9th, Washington, DC, March 10-14, 1998). |
| |
|
| |
Topping,
K. J., & Fisher, A. M. (2003). Computerised Formative Assessment
of Reading Comprehension: Field Trials in the UK. Journal of Research
in Reading, 26 (3), 267-279. |
| |
|
| |
Torrance,
H., & Pryor, J. (2001). Developing Formative Assessment in the
Classroom: Using Action Research to Explore and Modify Theory. British
Educational Research Journal, 27 (5). |
| |
|
| |
Trotter, E., (2006). Student perceptions of continuous summative assessments. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(5), 505-521. |
| |
|
Case study about continuous summative assessment method. Positive outcome but generates much workload. |
| |
|
| |
Vendlinski,
T., Underdahl, J., Simpson, E., & Stevens, R. (2002). Authentic
Assessment of Student Understanding in Near-Real Time! In NECC 2002:
National Educational Computing Conference Proceedings (23rd, San Antonio,
Texas, June 17-19, 2002). |
| |
|
| |
Wang,
T. H. (2007). What Strategies are Effective for Formative Assessment
in an E-Learning Environment? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning,
23, 171-186. |
| |
|
Effect of different strategies of formative assessments on different learning styles.
Effective ways/tools of making a good formative assessment. |
| |
|
| |
Wang,
K. H., Wang, T. H., Wang, W. L., & Huang, S. C. (2006). Learning
Styles and Formative Assessment Strategy: Enhancing Student Achievement
in Web-Based Learning. Journal of Computer Assissted Learning, 22,
207-217. |
| |
|
| |
Whitelock,
D. (2006). Roadmap for e-Assessment. Report for JISC. Retrieved February
1, 2007 from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearning_pedagogy/elp_assessment.aspx. |
| |
|
General situation and development UK |
| |
|
| |
Wiggins,
G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria,
VA: ASCD. |
| |
|
| |
Williams, J.B. (2007). Assertion-reason multiple-choice testing as a tool for deep learning: a qualitative analysis. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31( 3). |
| |
|
Useful analysis of complex MCQ questions, could assess higher order thinking but also rely strongly on language abilities, fits in Item analyses from Scalise, K., & Gifford, B., (2006). |
| |
|
| |
Yorke,
M. (2005). Formative Assessment in Higher Education: Its Significance
for Employability, and Steps Towards its Enhancement. Tertiary Education
and Management, 11, 219-238. |
| |
|
| |
Yorke,
M. (2003). Formative Assessment in Higher Education: Moves Towards
Theory and the Enhancement of Pedagogic Practice. Higher Education,
45 (4), 477-501. |
| |
|
Abstract article about the possible ingredients for theory over formative assessments. Highlights numerous different theories related to formative assessment.
Summative vs formative, formal vs informal, convergent vs divergent, planned vs interactive, performance vs learning. Reflection on action, reflection in action and reflection for action. |
| |
|
| |
Zakrzewski, S, Bull, J. (1998). The mass implementation and evaluation of computer-based assessments, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 23(2), 141-52. |
| |
|
| |
Zaremba,
S., & Schultz, M. T. (1993). An Analysis of Traditional Classroom
Assessment Techniques and a Discussion of Alternative Methods of Assessment.
In Teaching of Psychology: Ideas and Innovations. Proceedings of the
Annual Conference on Undergraduate Teaching of Psychology (7th, Ellenville,
New York, March 24-26, 1993). |
| |
|
Evaluation of QMP in 1998 of University of Luton using huge amount of students for sum & form assessments. Most of the issues and recommendations are still valid today. |
| |
|
| Reports |
| |
|
| |
Bull,
J., & McKenna, C. (2001). Blueprint for Computer-Assisted Assessment.
Computer Assisted Assessment Centre, HEFCE, UK. |
| |
|
| |
ERIC
Clearinghouse on Information and Technology, Syracuse, NY. (1993).
Alternative Assessment and Technology. ERIC Digest, |
| |
|
| |
JISC
(2007). Effective Practice with e-Assessment. An overview of technologies,
policies and practice in further and higher education. |
| |
|
| Websites |
| |
|
| |
ALPS
- Assessment and Learning in Practice Setting
http://www.westyorkswdc.nhs.uk/content.aspx?objectuuid=12CCAB09-7107-49C1-8527-9B244FD05689
|
| |
|
| |
e-assessment.
JISC Website
http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/themes/elearning/assessment.aspx |
| |
|
| |
Interactive
lectures interest group (ILIG)
http://www.psy.gla.ac.uk/%7Esteve/ilig/main.html#Papers
|
| |
|
| |
Measurement
theory: Frequently asked questions
ftp://ftp.sas.com/pub/neural/measurement.html |
| |
|
| |
Mobile
Learning Support Tools Project Website
http://www.mplat.ecs.soton.ac.uk/ |
| |
|
| |
|
| Case
Studies |
| |
Using
Texting Technology in Teaching History
http://www.hca.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/case_Studies/using_texting_technology_in_teaching_history.php |
