Enriched assessment rubrics: A new medium for enabling teachers to easily assess student's performance when participating in complex interactive learning scenarios

Operational Research

Volumn 11, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 171-186

  Petropoulou, O ^a   Vassilikopoulou, M ^a   Retalis, Symeon ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PIRAEUS   (Greece)

Author keywords

Assessment of students' performance; Assessment rubrics; Computer supported collaborative learning strategies; Enriched assessment rubrics interaction analysis

Indexed keywords

EID: 79958802476     PISSN: 11092858     EISSN: 18661505     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s12351-009-0047-5     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Andrade H (2000) Using rubrics to promote thinking and learning. Educ Leadersh 57(5): 13-18.
2. Andrade H, Boulay B (2003) The role of self-assessment in learning to write. J Educ Res 97(1): 21-34.
3. Barros M, Verjedo M (2000) Analysing student interaction processes in order to improve collaboration. The DEGREE approach. Int J Artif Intell Educ 11:221-241.
4. Bratitsis T, Dimitrakopoulou A (2005) Data performancing and usage interaction analysis in asynchronous discussions: the DIAS system. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on artificial intelligence in education AIED. Workshop on usage analysis in learning systems, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
5. Buzetto-More N (2006) The e-learning and business education paradigm: enhancing education, assessment and accountability. In: Proceedings of the Maryland business education association conference, Ocean City, MD.
6. Chan C, van Aalst J (2006) Learning, assessment and collaboration in computer-supported environments. In: Dillenbourg P (Series ed), Strijbos JW, Kirschner PA, Martens RL (Vol eds) Computer-supported collaborative learning. What we know about CSCL: and implementing it in higher education, vol 3. Kluwer/Springer, Boston, pp 87-112.
7. Chapman C, King R (2005) Differentiated assessment strategies: one tool doesn't fit all. Corwin Press, Thousand Oaks.
8. Daradoumis T, Martínez, Xhafa F (2006) A layered framework for evaluating on-line collaborative learning interactions. Int J Man-Mach Stud 64(7): 622-635.
9. De Laat M, Lally V, Lipponen L, Simons PRJ (2005) Patterns of interaction in a networked learning community: squaring the circle. http://eprints. soton. ac. uk/17267/. Accessed in Oct 2008.
10. Dodge B, Pickette N (2001) Rubrics for web lessons. October 2008 from http://edweb. sdsu. edu/webquest/rubrics/weblessons. htm.
11. Gallardo T, Guerrero LA, Collazos C, Pino JA, Ochoa S (2003) Supporting JIGSAW-type collaborative learning. In: Proceedings of the 36th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences (Hicss'03)-Track 1-vol 1 (06-09 January 2003). IEEE Computer Society, Washington DC, 31. 1.
12. Goodyear P, Banks S, Hodgson V, McConnell D (2004) Advances in research on networked learning, Chap 5. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 91-121.
13. Ho C, Swan K (2007) Evaluating online conversation in an asynchronous learning environment: an application of Grice's cooperative principle. Internet Higher Educ 10: 3-14.
14. Marcos J, Martinez, Dimitriadis Y (2005) Towards adaptable interaction analysis tools in CSCL. In: Representing and analyzing collaborative interactions, Work-shop at the 12th international conference on artificial intelligence in education, AIED'2005, 18-25 July 2005. Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
15. Martínez A,Dimitriadis Y, De La Fuente P (2003) Contributions to analysis of interactions for formative evaluation in CSCL. In: Llamas M, Fernandez MJ, Anido LE (eds) Computers and education: towards of lifelong learning society. Kluwer, The Netherlands, pp 227-238.
16. Mazza R, Dimitrova V (2005) Generation of graphical representations of student tracking data in course management systems. In: Proceedings of the 9th international conference on information visualisation (IV'05), Washington DC, USA, pp 253-258.
17. Moore G (1989) Three types of interaction. Am J Dist Educ 3(2): 1-6.
18. Petkov D, Petkova O (2006) Development of scoring rubrics for IS projects as an assessment tool. Issues Inf Sci Inf Technol Educ 3: 499-510.
19. Petropoulou O, Lazakidou G, Retalis S, Vrasidas C (2007) Analysing interaction behaviour in network supported collaborative learning environments: a holistic approach. Int J Knowl Learn 3(4& 5): 450-464.
20. Petropoulou O, Retalis S, Siassiakos K, Karamouzis S, Kargidis T (2008) Helping educators analyse interactions within networked learning communities: a framework and the AnalyticsTool system. In: 6th international conference on networked learning, 5-7 May 2008, Halkidiki, Greece, pp 317-324.
21. Poole DM (2000) Student participation in a discussion-oriented online course: a case study. J Res Comput Educ 3(2): 162-177.
22. Saltz J, Hiltz R, Turoff M (2004) Student social graphs: visualizing a student's online social network. In: Proceedings of ACM CSCW04 conference on computer-supported cooperative work 2004. 6-10 November 2004, Chicago, Illinois, USA, pp 596-599.
23. Saltz JS, Hiltz SR, Turoff M, Passerini K (2007) Increasing participation in distance learning courses. IEEE Internet Comput 11(3): 36-44.
24. Soller A, Jermann P, Muehlenbrock M, Martinez A (2004) Designing computational models of collaborative learning interaction: introduction to the workshop. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international workshop on designing computational models of collaborative learning interaction, ITS.
25. Spada H, Meier A, Rummel N, Hauser S (2005) A new method to assess the quality of collaborative process in CSCL. In: Proceedings of the CSCL 2005, Taiwan, pp 622-631.
26. Swan K, Shen J, Hiltz SR (2006) Assessment and collaboration in online learning. J Asynchron Learn Netw 10(1): 45-62.
27. Zinn C, Scheuer O (2006) Getting to know your student in distance learning contexts. In: Innovative approaches for learning and knowledge sharing, Proceedings of the first European conference on technology enhanced learning (EC-TEL 2006), Lecture notes in computer science (LNCS 4227). Springer, Berlin, pp 437-451.