You are here:

Elements of Network-Based Assessment
PROCEEDINGS

, Vermont Institutes, United States

AACE Award

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-47-1 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Chesapeake, VA

Abstract

ABSTRACT: This article presents an introduction to elements of a network-based assessment system based in recent advances in knowledge and practice in learning theory, assessment design and delivery, and semantic web interoperability. The envisioned architecture takes advantage of the meditating role of technology, the major elements in emerging designs for assessment systems, and how network-based processes can take advantage of these perspectives.

Citation

Gibson, D. (2003). Elements of Network-Based Assessment. In C. Crawford, N. Davis, J. Price, R. Weber & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2003--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 65-71). Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved March 26, 2019 from .

Keywords

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Almond, R. & Mislevy, R. (1999). Graphical models and computerized adaptive testing. Psychological Measurement, 23, 223-237.
  2. Almond, R., Steinberg, L., & Mislevy, R. (2002). Enhancing the design and delivery of assessment systems: A four process architecture. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 1, 5, October.
  3. Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J. & Lassila, O. (2001). The semantic web: A new form of web content that is meaningful to computers will unleash a revolution of new possibilities. Scientific American, 284, 5, 34-43.
  4. Bransford, J., Brown, A. & Cocking, R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school. Washington:DC. National Academy Press.
  5. Bruce, B. & Levin, J. (1997). Educational technology: Media for inquiry, communication, construction, and expression. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 17,1, 79-102.
  6. ETIPs. (2002). Available at http://www.etips.info/
  7. Friedrichs, A. & Gibson, D. (2001). Personalization and secondary school renewal. In Personal Learning: Preparing High School Students to Create Their Future. DiMartino, A. And Clarke, J., eds. Scarecrow Press.
  8. Gibson, D. (2002) Functions of an online mentoring and professional learning portal. A paper presented at the 2003 EdMedia conference. Montreal, Quebec.
  9. Gibson, D., Knapp, M. & Kurowski, B. (2002) Building responsive dissemination systems for education with the semantic web: Using the new open-source "Liber" application. A paper presented at the 2003 EdMedia conference. Montreal, Quebec.
  10. Hawkes, L. & Derry, S. (1989). Error diagnosis and fuzzy reasoning techniques for intelligent tutoring systems. Journal of AI in Education, 1, 43-56.
  11. Holland, J., Holyoak, K., Nisbett, R. & Thagard, P. (1986). Induction: Processes of inference, learning, and discovery. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  12. IMMEX. (2002). Available at http://www.immex.ucla.edu/
  13. Kalik, B. (2001) Teaching thinking through technology: Introduction. In “Developing Minds: A Resource Book for Teaching Thinking, 3rd Edition” Arthur L. Costa, Ed. Alexandria,:VA. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  14. Kurowski, B., Knapp, M., McLaughlin, R., & Gibson, D. (2002). Building responsive dissemination systems for education with the semantic web: Using the new open-source "liber" application. A paper presented at the 2003 EdMedia conference. Montreal, Quebec.
  15. McCallum, A. & Nigam, K. (1998). A comparison of event models for Naive Bayes text classification. In AAAI-98 Workshop on Learning for Text Categorization.
  16. Pelligrino, J., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, R. (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  17. Perrin, K.M. & Mayhew, D. (2000). The reality of designing and implementing an internet-based course. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration. September 2001,3, 4. Available: http://www.westga.edu/distance/ojdla/winter34/mayhew34.html.
  18. Robles, M. & Braathen, S. (2002) Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, 44, 1, 39-49.
  19. Roblyer, M.D., & Ekhaml, L. (2000). How interactive are YOUR distance courses? A rubric for assessing interaction in distance learning. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration. September 2001, 3, 2.
  20. Steinberg, L. & Gitomer, D. (1996). Intelligent tutoring and assessment built on an understanding of a technical problem-solving task. Instructional Science, 24, 223-258.
  21. Stevens, R. (1991). “Search path mapping: A versatile approach for visualizing problem-solving behavior,” Academic Medicine, 66, 9, S72-S75.
  22. Stevens, R., Lopo, A., & Wang, P. (1996). Artificial neural networks can distinguish novice and expert strategies during complex problem solving. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 3, 131-138.
  23. USDOE. (2000). Two exemplary and five promising educational technology programs. Available at http://www.ed.gov/offices/OERI/ORAD/LTD/newtech_progs.html
  24. VISMT. (2002). Available at http://www.vismt.org/
  25. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  26. Walvoord, B.E., & Anderson, V.J. (1998). Effective Grading: A Tool for Learning and Assessment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.
  27. Wolfram, S. (2002). A new kind of science. Champaign, IL: Wolfram Media, Inc.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.