Highly integrated model assessment technology and tools

Educational Technology Research and Development

Volumn 58, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 3-18

  Pirnay Dummer, Pablo ^a   Ifenthaler, Dirk ^a   Spector, J Michael ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FREIBURG   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Automated assessment; Cognitive structure; Knowledge representation; Mental models

Indexed keywords

EID: 76549136577     PISSN: 10421629     EISSN: 15566501     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11423-009-9119-8     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Al-Diban, S. (2002). Diagnose mentaler Modelle. Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovac.
2. Bonato, M. (1990). Wissensstrukturierung mittels Struktur-Lege-Techniken. Eine graphentheoretische Analyse von Wissensnetzen.
3. Bollobàs, B. (1998). Modern graph theory. New York: Springer.
4. Collins, L. M., & Sayer, A. G. (Eds.). (2001). New methods for the analysis of change. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
5. Davis, E. (1990). Representations of commonsense knowledge. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
6. Ding, Y. (2001). A review of ontologies with the semantic Web in view. Journal of Information Science, 27(6), 377-384. doi: 10. 1177/016555150102700603.
7. Dummer, P., & Ifenthaler, D. (2005). Planning and assessing navigation in model-centered learning environments. Why learners often do not follow the path laid out for them. In G. Chiazzese, M. Allegra, A. Chifari, & S. Ottaviano (Eds.), Methods and technologies for learning (pp. 327-334). Sothhampton: WIT Press.
8. Ellson, J., Gansner, E. R., Koutsofios, E., North, S. C., & Woodhull, G. (2003). GraphViz and Dynagraph. Static and dynamic graph drawing tools. Florham Park, NJ: AT& T Labs.
9. Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
10. Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1998). How to study thinking in everyday life. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 5(3), 178-186. doi: 10. 1207/s15327884mca0503_3.
11. Frazier, L. (1999). On sentence interpretation. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
12. Harary, F. (1974). Graphentheorie. München: Oldenbourg.
13. Harris, C. W. (Ed.). (1963). Problems in measuring change. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press.
14. Hietaniemi, J. (2008). Graph-0. 84. Retrieved May 6 2008 from http://search. cpan. org/~jhi/Graph-0. 84/lib/Graph. pod.
15. Ifenthaler, D. (2006). Diagnose lernabhängiger Veränderung mentaler Modelle. Entwicklung der SMD-Technologie als methodologisches Verfahren zur relationalen, strukturellen und semantischen Analyse individueller Modellkonstruktionen. Freiburg: FreiDok.
16. Ifenthaler, D. (2007). Relational, structural, and semantic analysis of graphical representations and concept maps. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the AECT, Anaheim, CA.
17. Ifenthaler, D. (2008). Practical solutions for the diagnosis of progressing mental models. In D. Ifenthaler, P. Pirnay-Dummer, & J. M. Spector (Eds.), Understanding models for learning and instruction. Essays in honor of Norbert M. Seel (pp. 43-61). New York: Springer.
18. Ifenthaler, D., Masduki, I., & Seel, N. M. (2008). Tracking the development of cognitive structures over time. Paper presented at the AREA 2008, New York.
19. Ifenthaler, D., Pirnay-Dummer, P., & Seel, N. M. (2007). The role of cognitive learning strategies and intellectual abilities in mental model building processes. Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning, 5, 353-366.
20. Ifenthaler, D., & Seel, N. M. (2005). The measurement of change: Learning-dependent progression of mental models. Technology, Instruction Cognition and Learning, 2(4), 317-336.
21. Jackendoff, R. (1983). Semantics and cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
22. Jech, T. (2007). Set theory. New York: Springer.
23. Johnson, T. E., O'Connor, D. L., Spector, J. M., Ifenthaler, D., & Pirnay-Dummer, P. (2006). Comparative study of mental model research methods: Relationships among ACSMM, SMD, MITOCAR & DEEP methodologies. In A. J. Cañas & J. D. Novak (Eds.), Concept maps: Theory, methodology, technology. Proceedings of the second international conference on concept Mapping (Vol. 1, pp. 87-94). San José: Universidad de Costa Rica.
24. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models. Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
25. Johnson-Laird, P. N., & Byrne, R. (1991). Deduction. Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum.
26. Kruskal, J. (1964). Nonmetric multidimensional scaling: A numerical method. Psychometric Monographes, 29, 115-129. doi: 10. 1007/BF02289694.
27. Lewin, K. (1922). Das Problem der Wissensmessung und das Grundgesetz der Assoziation. Teil 1. Psychologische Forschung, 1, 191-302. doi: 10. 1007/BF00410391.
28. McCoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1992). Inference during reading. Psychological Review, 99(3), 440-466. doi: 10. 1037/0033-295X. 99. 3. 440.
29. McNamara, T. P. (1992). Priming and constraints it places on theories of memory and retrieval. Psychological Review, 99(4), 650-662. doi: 10. 1037/0033-295X. 99. 4. 650.
30. McNamara, T. P. (1994). Priming and theories of memory: A reply to Ratcliff and McCoon. Psychological Review, 101(1), 185-187. doi: 10. 1037/0033-295X. 101. 1. 185.
31. Pirnay-Dummer, P. (2006). Expertise und Modellbildung: MITOCAR. Freiburg: FreiDok.
32. Pirnay-Dummer, P. (2007). Model inspection trace of concepts and relations. A heuristic approach to language-oriented model assessment. Paper presented at the AREA 2007, Chicago, IL.
33. Pirnay-Dummer, P., Ifenthaler, D., & Johnson, T. E. (2008). Reading with the guide of automated graphical representations. How model based text visualizations facilitate learning in reading comprehension tasks. Paper presented at the AREA 2008, New York.
34. Pirnay-Dummer, P., & Lachner, A. (2008). Towards model based knowledge management. A new approach to the assessment and development of organizational knowledge. Paper accepted for presentation at the Annual Convention of the AECT, Orlando, FL.
35. Pirnay-Dummer, P., & Nußbickel, M. (2008). New ways to find out what is needed to know. Using the latest tools for knowledge elicitation in the processes of needs assessment. Paper presented at the AREA 2008, New York.
36. Pirnay-Dummer, P., & Rauh, K. (2008). Annotations for knowledge structures. Quantitative measurability of propositions in concept maps and new approaches to mental model assessment. Paper presented at the AREA 2008, New York.
37. Pirnay-Dummer, P., & Spector, J. M. (2008). Language, association, and model re-representation. How features of language and human association can be utilized for automated knowledge assessment. Paper presented at the AREA 2008, New York.
38. Pirnay-Dummer, P., & Walter, S. (2008). Bridging the world's knowledge to individual knowledge. Using latent semantic analysis and Web ontologies to implement classical and new knowledge assessment technologies. Paper presented at the AREA 2008, New York.
39. Pollio, H. R. (1966). The structural basis of word association behavior. The Hague: Mouton.
40. Ratcliff, R., & McCoon, G. (1994). Retrieving information from memory: Spreading-activation theories versus compound-cue theories. Psychological Review, 101(1), 177-184.
41. Rothmaler, P. (2000). Introduction to model theory. Amsterdam: Gordon & Breach Science Publishers.
42. Russel, W. A., & Jenkins, J. J. (1954). The complete Minnesota norms for responses to 100 words from the Kent-Rosanoff word association test. Technological Report 11, University of Minnesota.
43. Scheele, B., & Groeben, N. (1984). Die Heidelberger Struktur-Lege-Technik (SLT). Eine Dialog-Konsens-Methode zur Erhebung subjektiver Theorien mittlerer Reichweite. Weinheim: Beltz.
44. Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1990). Pathfinder associative networks: Studies in knowledge organization. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
45. Seel, N. M. (1991). Weltwissen und mentale Modelle. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
46. Spector, J. M. (2006a). A methodology for assessing learning in complex and ill-structured task domains. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 43(2), 109-120.
47. Spector, J. M. (2006b). Introduction to the special issue on models, simulations and learning in complex domains. Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning, 3(3-4), 199-204.
48. Spector, J. M., & Koszalka, T. A. (2004). The DEEP methodology for assessing learning in complex domains (Final report to the National Science Foundation Evaluative Research and Evaluation Capacity Building). Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University.
49. Stachowiak, F. J. (1979). Zur semantischen Struktur des subjektiven Lexikons. München: Wilhelm Fink Verlag.
50. Tutte, W. T. (2001). Graph theory. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
51. Tversky, A. (1977). Features of similarity. Psychological Review, 84, 327-352.