|
Title:
|
ALTERNATIVE METHODS TO SUMMATIVE, ONLINE ASSESSMENTS IN MATHEMATICS AND OTHER APPLICATIONS |
|
Author(s):
|
Justin Hatt |
|
ISBN:
|
978-972-8924-58-4 |
|
Editors:
|
Miguel Baptista Nunes and Maggie McPherson (series editors: Piet Kommers, Pedro Isaías and Nian-Shing Chen) |
|
Year:
|
2008 |
|
Edition:
|
V I, 2 |
|
Keywords:
|
Summative assessment, online assessment, objective questions, educational theory, mathematics, science. |
|
Type:
|
Full Paper |
|
First Page:
|
419 |
|
Last Page:
|
426 |
|
Language:
|
English |
|
Cover:
|
|
|
Full Contents:
|
click to dowload 
|
|
Paper Abstract:
|
Online, objective testing usually generates the notion of responses being scored with an all or none marking system;
either the answer is correct or it is incorrect. In many cases, this marking system will score each correct answer with only
one mark and otherwise with zero marks. Quite often, especially in the development of fundamental mathematics skills,
this marking system seems reasonable. Objective questions have definite results, but obtaining those results can often
involve multiple steps and therefore, such a marking system should not be considered. However, this now raises the issue
of how to effectively mark questions in an online, objective assessment.
Mathletics is an online learning and assessment tool that uses QuestionMark Perception to test students in mathematics.
Much discussion has been made using Mathletics and the implementation of mal-rules, common errors students make
when solving problems. Mal-rules help students to understand what errors they may have performed in solving problems
and Mathletics can give additional feedback to show them how to correct such errors in the future. However, many
problems still use the all or none marking scheme and thus, at least summatively, mal-rules do not serve much purpose.
Also, mathematics is a widely-used, interdisciplinary subject and for each subject, different ideas need to be considered
when designing questions, including the scenario to be explained.
This paper discusses issues that occur in the evaluation of higher-level mathematics problems using online, objective
testing. Different evaluation schemes are reviewed and alternative methods are used to denote what is to be considered a
correct answer in a given problem. Possible applications for the use of such strategies are also noted, especially in
consideration of current, educational theories. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
