确保在线评估质量:无人在线评估案例

IF 1.5 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EDUCATION Pub Date : 2022-07-11 DOI:10.1108/qae-02-2022-0048
L. Lin, D. Foung, Julia Chen
{"title":"确保在线评估质量:无人在线评估案例","authors":"L. Lin, D. Foung, Julia Chen","doi":"10.1108/qae-02-2022-0048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis study aims to examine the impact of the transformation of an assessment on students’ performance and perspectives in an English for Academic Purposes course in Hong Kong. The assessment was changed from the traditional pen-and-paper mode to an unproctored online mode.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nUsing mixed methods, the research team analysed the differences between the assessment performances of those who took the course before the pandemic (n = 664) and those who took it during the pandemic (n = 702). Furthermore, focus group interviews were conducted with seven students regarding their perspectives on the unproctored assessment.\n\n\nFindings\nThe results revealed that, although there were no major differences in the overall grades of the two groups, students who were assessed online during the pandemic performed significantly better in terms of their English use. Nevertheless, the shift to online assessment had several negative effects on the students.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nPrevious studies on unproctored online assessments (UOA) were concerned with potential learning quality issues, such as plagiarism and grade inflation. This study, however, provided empirical evidence that high-quality assessment delivery can be provided via UOA if the question types and assessment arrangements are carefully decided.\n","PeriodicalId":46734,"journal":{"name":"QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assuring online assessment quality: the case of unproctored online assessment\",\"authors\":\"L. Lin, D. Foung, Julia Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/qae-02-2022-0048\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThis study aims to examine the impact of the transformation of an assessment on students’ performance and perspectives in an English for Academic Purposes course in Hong Kong. The assessment was changed from the traditional pen-and-paper mode to an unproctored online mode.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nUsing mixed methods, the research team analysed the differences between the assessment performances of those who took the course before the pandemic (n = 664) and those who took it during the pandemic (n = 702). Furthermore, focus group interviews were conducted with seven students regarding their perspectives on the unproctored assessment.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nThe results revealed that, although there were no major differences in the overall grades of the two groups, students who were assessed online during the pandemic performed significantly better in terms of their English use. Nevertheless, the shift to online assessment had several negative effects on the students.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nPrevious studies on unproctored online assessments (UOA) were concerned with potential learning quality issues, such as plagiarism and grade inflation. This study, however, provided empirical evidence that high-quality assessment delivery can be provided via UOA if the question types and assessment arrangements are carefully decided.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":46734,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EDUCATION\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EDUCATION\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/qae-02-2022-0048\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EDUCATION","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/qae-02-2022-0048","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的本研究旨在探讨在香港的学术英语课程中,评估方式的转变对学生的表现和观点的影响。考试从传统的纸笔模式改为无监考的在线模式。设计/方法/方法研究小组采用混合方法,分析了大流行前参加课程的学生(n = 664)和大流行期间参加课程的学生(n = 702)在评估表现方面的差异。此外,对7名学生进行了焦点小组访谈,了解他们对无监督评估的看法。结果显示,尽管两组学生的总体成绩没有重大差异,但在疫情期间接受在线评估的学生在英语使用方面的表现明显更好。然而,向在线评估的转变对学生产生了一些负面影响。原创性/价值先前关于无人监督在线评估(UOA)的研究关注的是潜在的学习质量问题,如抄袭和分数膨胀。然而,本研究提供的经验证据表明,如果仔细选择问题类型和评估安排,可以通过UOA提供高质量的评估交付。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Assuring online assessment quality: the case of unproctored online assessment
Purpose This study aims to examine the impact of the transformation of an assessment on students’ performance and perspectives in an English for Academic Purposes course in Hong Kong. The assessment was changed from the traditional pen-and-paper mode to an unproctored online mode. Design/methodology/approach Using mixed methods, the research team analysed the differences between the assessment performances of those who took the course before the pandemic (n = 664) and those who took it during the pandemic (n = 702). Furthermore, focus group interviews were conducted with seven students regarding their perspectives on the unproctored assessment. Findings The results revealed that, although there were no major differences in the overall grades of the two groups, students who were assessed online during the pandemic performed significantly better in terms of their English use. Nevertheless, the shift to online assessment had several negative effects on the students. Originality/value Previous studies on unproctored online assessments (UOA) were concerned with potential learning quality issues, such as plagiarism and grade inflation. This study, however, provided empirical evidence that high-quality assessment delivery can be provided via UOA if the question types and assessment arrangements are carefully decided.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EDUCATION
QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EDUCATION EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
20.00%
发文量
47
期刊介绍: QAE publishes original empirical or theoretical articles on Quality Assurance issues, including dimensions and indicators of Quality and Quality Improvement, as applicable to education at all levels, including pre-primary, primary, secondary, higher and professional education. Periodically, QAE also publishes systematic reviews, research syntheses and assessment policy articles on topics of current significance. As an international journal, QAE seeks submissions on topics that have global relevance. Article submissions could pertain to the following areas integral to QAE''s mission: -organizational or program development, change and improvement -educational testing or assessment programs -evaluation of educational innovations, programs and projects -school efficiency assessments -standards, reforms, accountability, accreditation, and audits in education -tools, criteria and methods for examining or assuring quality
期刊最新文献
The impact of gamification on meaningful learning and student performance in an undergraduate online engineering course Generative AI: hopes, controversies and the future of faculty roles in education AI-enhanced education: exploring the impact of AI literacy on generation Z’s academic performance in Northern India Stakeholders’ involvement in economics and management programs quality assurance Experimental evidence for the efficacy of generative AI in improving students’ writing skills
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1