Six key topics for automated assessment utilisation and acceptance;Šeši svarbiausi klausimai apie automatinio vertinimo naudojimą ir priėmimą

Informatics in Education

Volumn 10, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 47-64

  Reiners, Torsten ^a,b   Dreher, Carl ^b   Dreher, Heinz ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HAMBURG   (Germany)

^b CURTIN UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Automated assessment; Automated essay grading; Benefits realisation, Mixed methods research; Technology acceptance

Indexed keywords

EID: 79955444860     PISSN: 16485831     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Black, P., Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74.
2. Bloom, B.S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. Book 1: Cognitive Domain. Longman, London.
3. Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In: Denzin, N.K., Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nd ed.). Sage, London, 509-535.
4. Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., Warshaw, P.R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003.
5. Dikli, S. (2006). An overview of automated scoring of essays. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 5(1), 1-35.
6. Dreher, C., Reiners, T., Dreher, H. (2011). Investigating factors affecting the uptake of automated assessment technology. Accepted for publication in Journal of IT Education, Informing Science Institute, Santa Rosa, California.
7. Dreher, C., Reiners, T., Dreher, N., Dreher, H. (2009). Virtual worlds as a context suited for information systems education: Discussion of pedagogical experience and curriculum design with reference to second life. Journal of Information Systems Education (JISE), 20(2), 211-224.
8. Dreher, H. (2007). Automatic conceptual analysis for plagiarism detection. Journal of Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 4, 601-614.
9. Dreher, H., Dreher, N., Reiners, T. (2008). Design and integration of an automated assessment laboratory: Experiences and guide. In: Proceedings of the World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications, 2858-2863.
10. 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.
11. Krathwohl, D.R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's Taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 212-218.
12. Murugesan, S. (2009). Handbook of research on Web 2.0, Web 3.0, and X.0: technologies, business, and social applications. Information Science Reference, Hershey, PA.
13. Nicol, D.J., Macfarlane-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.
14. Nievergelt, J. (1994). Complexity, algorithms, programs, systems: The shifting focus. Journal of Symbolic Computation, 17(4), 297-310.
15. O'Brien, J., Marakas, G. (2008). Management Information Systems. McGraw-Hill, New York.
16. Page, E.B. (2003). Project essay grade: PEG. In: Shermis, M.D., Burstein, J.C. (Eds.), Automated Essay Scoring: A Cross-Disciplinary Perspective. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, 43-54.
17. Rees, M., Emerson, L. (2009). The impact that Turnitin® has had on text-based assessment practice. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 5(1), 20-29.
18. Reiter, E., Dreher, H., Guetl, C. (2010). Automatic concept retrieval with Rubrico. In: Proceedings of Multikonferenz Wirtschaftsinformatik (MKWI), 3-12.
19. Shermis, M.D., Burstein, J.C. (Eds.). (2003). Automated Essay Scoring: A Cross-Disciplinary Perspective. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
20. Teddlie, C., Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of Mixed Methods Research: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
21. Venkatesh, V., Davis, F., Morris, M.G. (2007). Dead or alive? The development, trajectory and future of technology adoption research. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(4), 267-286.
22. Williams, R. (2006). The power of normalised word vectors for automatically grading essays. The Journal of Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 3, 721-730.
23. Williams, R., Dreher, H. (2005). Formative assessment visual feedback in computer graded essays. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 2, 23-32.