Skip to main content
Open Book Publishers

13. Open Assessment Resources for Deeper Learning

  • David Gibson (author)
  • Dirk Ifenthaler (author)
  • Davor Orlic (author)
Chapter of: Open Education: International Perspectives in Higher Education(pp. 257–280)

Export Metadata

  • ONIX 3.1
  • ONIX 3.0
    • Thoth
    • Project MUSE
      Cannot generate record: No BIC or BISAC subject code
    • OAPEN
      Cannot generate record: Missing PDF URL
    • JSTOR
      Cannot generate record: No BISAC subject code
    • Google Books
      Cannot generate record: No BIC, BISAC or LCC subject code
    • OverDrive
      Cannot generate record: Missing Long Abstract
  • ONIX 2.1
    • EBSCO Host
      Cannot generate record: No PDF or EPUB URL
    • ProQuest Ebrary
      Cannot generate record: No PDF or EPUB URL
  • CSV
  • JSON
  • OCLC KBART
  • BibTeX
  • CrossRef DOI deposit
    Cannot generate record: This work does not have any ISBNs
  • MARC 21 Record
    Cannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
  • MARC 21 Markup
    Cannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
  • MARC 21 XML
    Cannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
Metadata
Title13. Open Assessment Resources for Deeper Learning
ContributorDavid Gibson (author)
Dirk Ifenthaler (author)
Davor Orlic (author)
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0103.13
Landing pagehttps://www.openbookpublishers.com/books/10.11647/obp.0103/chapters/10.11647/obp.0103.13
Licensehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
CopyrightDavid Gibson; Dirk Ifenthaler; Davor Orlic
PublisherOpen Book Publishers
Published on2016-12-19
Page rangepp. 257-280
Print length23 pages
References
  1. Al-Diban, S. and Ifenthaler, D. (2011), Comparison of Two Analysis Approaches for Measuring Externalized Mental Models, Educational Technology & Society, 14(2), pp. 16–30.
  2. Almond, R. and Mislevy, R. (1999), Graphical Models and Computerized Adaptive Testing, Applied Psychological Measurement, 23(3), pp. 223–237, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/01466219922031347
  3. Anderson, L., Krathwohl, D. and Bloom, B. (2001), A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, New York: Longman.
  4. Anderson, T. and McGreal, R. (2012), Disruptive Pedagogies and Technologies in Universities: Unbundling of Educational Services, 15, pp. 380–389.
  5. Angeletou, S. (2008), Semantic Enrichment of Folksonomy Tagspaces. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 5318 LNCS, pp. 889–894, 10.1007/978-3-540-88564-1-58
  6. Atkins, D. E., Brown, J. S. and Hammond, A. L. (2007), A Review of the Open Educational Resources (OER) Movement: Achievements, Challenges, and New Opportunities, William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, http://www.oerderves.org
  7. Benitez-Guerrero, E. I. (2013), Mining Data from Interactions with a Motivational-aware Tutoring System Using Data Visualization, Journal of Educational Data Mining, 5(1), pp. 72–103.
  8. Bennett, R. (2010), Cognitively Based Assessment of, for, and as Learning (CBAL): A Preliminary Theory of Action for Summative and Formative Assessment, Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspective, 8(2–3), pp. 70–91, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15366367.2010.508686
  9. Bonk, C. J. and Graham, C. R. (2006), The Handbook of Blended Learning, Global Perspectives, Local Designs, 1, http://www.lavoisier.fr/livre/notice.asp?ouvrage=1584996
  10. Carson, R. C. (1969), Interaction Concepts of Personality, Chicago: Aldine.
  11. Chamorro-Premuzic, T. and Furnham, A. (2004), A Possible Model for Understanding the Personality-intelligence Interface, British Journal of Psychology, 95, pp. 249–264, http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/000712604773952458
  12. Conrad, D., Mackintosh, W., McGreal, R., Murphy, A. and Witthaus, G. (2013), Report on the Assessment and Accreditation of Learners Using OER. Commonwealth of Learning, http://hdl.handle.net/11599/232
  13. Gibson, D. C. and Jakl, P. (2015), Theoretical Considerations for Game-Based e-Learning Analytics, in T. Reiners and L. Wood (Eds.), Gamification in Education and Business, pp. 403–416, New York: Springer.
  14. Gibson, D. C., Ostashewski, N., Flintoff, K., Grant, S. and Knight, E. (2013), Digital Badges in Education, Education and Information Technologies, 20(2), 403–410, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10639-013-9291-7
  15. Gibson, D. C. and Webb, M. (2013), Assessment as, for and of 21st Century Learning, International Summit on ICT in Education, Torun: EDUsummIT 2013, p. 17, http://www.edusummit.nl/fileadmin/contentelementen/kennisnet/EDU SummIT/Documenten/2013/6_WCCE_2013-_Educational_Assessment_supported_by_IT_1_.pdf
  16. Gibson, D. C. and Webb, M. E. (2015), Data Science in Educational Assessment, Education and Information Technologies, June(4), pp. 697–713, 10.1007/s10639-015-9411-7
  17. Grant, S. (2014), What Counts as Learning: Open Digital Badges for New Opportunities, Irvine, CA: Digital Media and Learning Research Hub https://www.academia.edu/8022569/What_Counts_As_Learning_Open_Digital_Badges_for_New_Opportunities
  18. Gruber, T. (2007), Ontology of Folksonomy: A Mash-up of Apples and Oranges, International Journal on Semantic Web & Information Systems, 3(2), pp. 1–11, http://dx.doi.org/0.4018/jswis.2007010101
  19. Hagel, J. and Singer, M. (1999), Unbundling the Corporation, Harvard Business Review, 77(March-April), pp. 133–141.
  20. Harlen, W. and James, M. (1997), Assessment and Learning: Differences and Relationships between Formative and Summative Assessment, Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 4(3), pp. 365–379, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0969594970040304
  21. Hietanen, H. A. (2008), Creative Commons’ Approach to Open Content, Intellectual Property, pp. 1–88, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1162219
  22. Ifenthaler, D. (2015), Learning Analytics, in J. M. Spector (Ed.), The SAGE Encyclopedia of Educational Technology, 2, pp. 447–451, Thousand Oaks: Sage.
  23. Ifenthaler, D. (2014), AKOVIA: Automated Knowledge Visualization and Assessment, Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 19(1–2), pp. 241–248, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10758-014-9224-6
  24. Ifenthaler, D. (2010), Relational, Structural, and Semantic Analysis of Graphical Representations and Concept Maps, Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(1), pp. 81–97, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11423-008-9087-4
  25. Ifenthaler, D. and Widanapathirana, C. (2014), Development and Validation of a Learning Analytics Framework: Two Case Studies Using Support Vector Machines, Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 19(1–2), pp. 221–240, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10758-014-9226-4
  26. Ifenthaler, D., Eseryel, D. and Ge, X. (2012), Assessment for Game-Based Learning, D. Ifenthaler, D. Eseryel and X. Ge (Eds.), Assessment in Game-Based Learning, Foundations, Innovations, and Perspectives, pp. 3–10, New York: Springer, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3546-4
  27. Jenkins, H., Purushotma, R., Clinton, K., Weigel, M. and Robison, A. (2006), Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century, New Media Literacies Project, Cambridge, MA: MIT, http://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/titles/free_download/9780262513623_Confronting_the_Challenges.pdf
  28. Manninen, T. (2001), Rich Interaction in the Context of Networked Virtual Environments: Experiences Gained from the Multi-player Games Domain, in A. Blanford, J. Vanderdonckt and P. Gray (Eds.), Joint Proceedings of HCI 2001 and IHM 2001 Conference, pp. 383–398, London: Springer.
  29. Newmann, F. and Archibald, D. (1992), The Nature of Authentic Academic Achievement, in H. Berlak, F. Newmann, E. Adams, D. Archbald, T. Burgess, J. Raven and T. Romberg (Eds.), Toward a New Science of Educational Testing and Assessment, Albany: SUNY Press.
  30. Pappano, L. (2012), The Year of the MOOC, New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/04/education/edlife/massive-open-online-courses-are-multiplying-at-a-rapid-pace.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
  31. Pirnay-Dummer, P., Ifenthaler, D. and Spector, M. (2009), Highly Integrated Model Assessment Technology and Tools, Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(1), pp. 3–18, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11423-009-9119-8
  32. Robertson, R. J. (2010), Repositories for OER. JISC CETIS, http://www.slideshare.net/RJohnRobertson/repositoriesforoer
  33. Scharmer, O. (2015), MITx u.lab: Education As Activating Social Fields, Huffington Post, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/otto-scharmer/mitx-ulab-education-as-ac_b_8863806.html?ir=Australia
  34. Schimmel, B. J. (1983), A Meta-Analysis of Feedback to Learners in Computerized and Programmed Instruction, Paper presented at the AREA 1983, Montreal.
  35. Sheehan, N. T. and Stabell, C. B. (2013), Reputation as a Driver in Activity Level Analysis: Reputation and Competitive Advantage in Knowledge Intensive Firms, Corporate Reputation Review, 13(3), pp. 198–208, http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/crr.2010.19
  36. Shermis, M. D. and Hamner, B. (2012), Contrasting State-of-the-art Automated Scoring of Essays, in M. D. Shermis and J. Burstein, Handbook of Automated Essay Evaluation: Current Applications and New Directions, Routledge Handbooks Online, http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203122761.ch19
  37. Sturtz, D. N. (2004), Communal Categorization: The Folksonomy, INFO622 Content Representation, 16(29.03.2007), http://davidsturtz.com/drexel/622/communal-categorization-the-folksonomy.html
  38. Tayebinik, M. and Puteh, M. (2012), Blended Learning or E-learning?, IMACST, 3(1), pp. 103–110.
  39. van Vught, F. (2008), Mission Diversity and Reputation in Higher Education, Higher Education Policy, 21(2), pp. 151–174, http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/hep.2008.5
  40. Wagner, W. and Wagner, S. U. (1985), Presenting Questions, Processing Responses, and Providing Feedback in CAI, Journal of Instructional Development, 8(4), pp. 2–8, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf02906047
  41. Webb, M. (2011), Feedback Enabled by New Technologies as a Key Component of Pedagogy, in M. Koehler & P. Mishra (Eds.), Proceedings of the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2011, pp. 3382–3389, Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)
  42. Webb, M. and Gibson, D. C. (2015), Technology Enhanced Assessment in Complex Collaborative Settings, Education and Information Technologies, 4 (June), pp. 675–695, 10.1007/s10639-015-9413-5
  43. Webb, M. and Gibson, D. C. (2011), Assessment to Move Education into the Digital Age: Brief Report from Thematic Working Group TWG 5 on Assessment, EDUsummIT 2011: Building a Global Community of Policy-Makers, Educators and Researchers to Move Education into the Digital Age, Paris: UNESCO.
  44. Webb, M., Gibson, D. C. and Forkosh-Baruch, A. (2013), Challenges for Information Technology Supporting Educational Assessment, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(5), pp. 451–462, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12033
  45. Wiliam, D. and Black, P. (1996), Meanings and Consequences: A Basis for Distinguishing Formative and Summative Functions of Assessment?, British Educational Research Journal, 22(5), pp. 537–548, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0141192960220502
  46. Wilson, T., Schuwer, R. and McAndrew, P. (2010), Collating Global Evidence of the Design, Use, Reuse and Redesign of Open Educational Content, Open Educational Resources, Paper presented at the 2010 OER10 Conference, 22–24 March 2010, Cambridge, UK.
  47. Xie, H., Li, Q., Mao, X., Li, X., Cai, Y. and Rao, Y. (2014), Community-aware User Profile Enrichment in Folksonomy, Neural Networks, 58, pp. 111–121, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neunet.2014.05.009