Comparing several human and computer-based methods for scoring concept maps and essays

Journal of Educational Computing Research

Volumn 32, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 227-239

  Koul, Ravinder ^a,b   Clariana, Roy B ^a   Salehi, Roya ^a  

^a PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 27744603479     PISSN: 07356331     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2190/5X9Y-0ETN-213U-8FV7     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Clariana, R. B. (2003). ALA-Mapper. Retrieved May 3, 2003, from http://www.personal.psu.edu/rbc4
2. Clariana, R. B. (2004). ALA-Reader (beta version). Retrieved May 3, 2004, from http://www.personal.psu.edu/rbc4
3. Clariana, R. B., & Koul, R. (2004). A computer-based approach for translating text into concept map-like representations. In A. J. Canas, J. D. Novak, and F. M. Gonzales (Eds.), Concept maps: Theory, methodology, technology, vol. 2, in the Proceedings of the First International Conference on Concept Mapping, Pamplona, Spain, Sept 14-17, pp. 131-134. Retrieved October 3, 2004, from http://cmc.ihmc.us/papers/cmc2004-045.pdf
4. Clariana, R. B., Koul, R., & Salehi, R. (2005). The criterion-related validity of a computerbased approach for scoring concept maps. International Journal of Instructional Media, 33(3), in press.
5. Goldsmith, T. E., & Johnson, P. J. (1990). A structural assessment of classroom learning. In R. W. Schvaneveldt (Ed.), Pathfinder associative networks: Studies in knowledge organization, pp. 241-253. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
6. Goldsmith, T. E., Johnson, P. J., & Acton, W. H. (1991). Assessing structural knowledge. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 88-96.
7. Gonzalvo, P., Canas, J. J., & Bajo, M. (1994). Structural representations in knowledge acquisition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 601-616.
8. Jonassen, D. H., Beissner, K., & Yacci, M. (1993). Structural knowledge: Techniques for representing, conveying, and acquiring structural knowledge. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates.
9. Kinchin, I. M. (2001). If concept mapping is so helpful to learning biology, why aren't we all doing it? International Journal of Science Education, 23, 1257-1269.
10. Kinchin, I. M., & Hay, D. B. (2000). How a qualitative approach to concept map analysis can be used to aid learning by illustrating patterns of conceptual development. Educational Research, 42, 43-57.
11. Landauer, T. K., Foltz, P. W., & Laham, D. (1998). Introduction to Latent Semantic Analysis. Discourse Processes, 25, 259-284.
12. Landauer, T. K., Laham, D., Rehder, R., & Schreider, M. E. (1997). How well can passage meaning be derived without using word order? A comparison of latent semantic analysis and humans. In M. G. Shafto & P. Langley (Eds.), Proceedings of the 19th annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 412-417. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Lomask, M., Baron, J. B., Greig, J., & Harrison, C. (1992, March). ConnMap: Connecticut's use of concept mapping to assess the structure of students' knowledge of science. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, in Cambridge, MA.
14. Markham, K. M., Mintzes, J. J., & Jones, M. G. (1994). The concept map as a research and evaluation tool: Further evidence of validity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 91-101.
15. National Research Council (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
16. Nitko, A. J. (1996). Educational assessment of students. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill.
17. Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
18. Powers, D. E., Burstein, J. C., Chodorow, M. S., Fowles, M. E., & Kukich, K. (2002). Comparing the validity of automated and human scoring of essays. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 25, 407-425.
19. Ruiz-Primo, M. A. (2000). On the use of concept maps as an assessment tool in science: What we have learned so far. Revista Electronica de Investigation Educative, 2 (1). Retrieved May 3, 2004, from http://www.redie.ens.uabc.mx/vol2nol/contenido-ruizpri.html
20. Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Schultz, S. E., Li, M., & Shavelson, R. J. (2000). Comparison of the reliability and validity of scores from two concept mapping techniques. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 260-278.
21. Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Shavelson, R. J., Li, M., & Schultz, S. E. (2001). On the validity of cognitive interpretations of scores from alternative concept-mapping techniques. Educational Assessment, 7, 99-141.
22. Safayeni, F., Derbentseva, N., & Cañas, A. J. (2003). Concept maps: A theoretical note on concepts and the need for cyclic concept maps. Retrieved October 3, 2004 from http://cmap.ihmc.us/Publications/ResearchPapers/CyclicConceptMaps.pdf
23. Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1990). Pathfinder associative networks: Studies in knowledge organization. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
24. Shavelson, R. J., Lang, H., & Lewin, B. (1994). On concept maps as potential "authentic" assessments in science (CSE Tech. Rep. No. 388). Los Angeles, CA: University of California, Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CREST).
25. Stoddart, T., Abrams, R., Gasper, E., & Canaday, D. (2000). Concept maps as assessment in science inquiry learning - A report of methodology. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 1221-1246.
26. Taricani, E. M., & Clariana, R. B. (in press). A technique for automatically scoring open-ended concept maps. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), in press.
27. Turns, J., Atman, C. J., & Adams, R. (2000). Concept maps for engineering education: A cognitively motivated tool supporting varied assessment functions. IEEE Transactions on Education, 43, 164-173.