Assessment 2.0


Published on

Published in: Education, Technology

Assessment 2.0

  1. 1. Assessment 2.0Luís TinocaInstitute of EducationUniversity of Lisbon
  2. 2. Agenda Web 2.0:New learning landscapes Learning 2.0: New learning cultures Assessment 2.0: the chalenges of e- assessment
  3. 3. New learning landscapes
  4. 4. Web 2.0
  5. 5. Bologna Process (European Commission, 2008)challenged higher education topromote learning environments that arecentered in the development ofcompetences
  6. 6. The e-learning explosionThe emergence of new digitallysupported learning environments Garrisson & Anderson (2003), McConnell (2006), Pereira et al. (2009) • Collaborative • Student centered
  7. 7. Language and communication• Four main types of metacompetences (Pereira et al., 2009): » Problem solving » Group work » Metacognitive » Fluency in ICT use
  8. 8. New learning culture 8
  9. 9. Learning Complicated  Complex Technological mediation Learning theories 2.0Student centered  Participative Open  Transparent
  10. 10. Learning 2.0 (Redecker, 2009)• Conectivism (Siemens, 2005)• Comunities of Learning (Wenger et al., 2002)• Comunities of Inquiry (Garrison & Anderson, 2003)• Produsage (Bruns & Humphreys, 2007)
  11. 11. C-Learning: learning with othersfrom e-learning to c-learning Mota (2009)Comunity Comunication Colaboration Conections Alec Couros (2006)Learning is framed by social processes
  12. 12. Assessment 2.0
  13. 13. “Tell me how you assessI ll tell you how youteach” Abrantes (1990)
  14. 14. A new assessment cultureEmerging from the growing criticism oftraditional testing methods relating tothe unrealistic nature of the tests, theloss of faith in them as valid measuresof learning, and an over-reliance ontests as the ultimategoal of the instructionprocess.
  15. 15. Assessment OF learningassessment focused on measurementand scaling
  16. 16. Assessment FOR learningassessment meantfor the students,through feedback,to understand theirown learningprocesses andthe goals that theyintend to achieve
  17. 17. From psychometrics to edumetricsEdumetrics criteria are recognized as more validand fair for competence based assessment, giventheir emphasis in flexibility and authenticity, aswell as their integration into the learning processvaluing the formative function of assessment
  18. 18. The challenge of e-assessment “Confusion of tongues”“e-assessment occurs when there is an automatedmarking/response to student input on-screen in atest, informing on the process of answering aquestion and providing feedback to learners andtheir teachers through well-crafted advice andreports”. (Beevers, 2010)“e-assessment is sometimes used to refer solelyto on-screen assessment but, in its broadestsense, can refer to all technology-enabledassessment activities”. (JISC, 2010)
  19. 19. e-assessment our definitione-assessment refers to all technology-enabledassessment activities where the design andstudent activities (complete, present, submit)must be mediated by technologies.It is regarded as optional the format in which theinstructor presents the assignment, as well asthe way feedback is provided@ssess – project financed through FCT (PTDC/CPE-CED/104373/2008)
  20. 20. Steps of an e-assessment strategy Student• design • classification• presentation • complete • feedback • present • submit Instructor Instructor must be mediated by technologies
  21. 21. e-assessment benefits (JISC, 2010)• Greater variety and authenticity in assessment designs• Improved learner engagement• Choice in the timing and location of assessments• Capture of wider skills and attributes• Efficient submission, marking, moderation and data storage• Consistent, accurate results• Increased opportunities for learners to act on feedback
  22. 22. Conceptual framework for e-assessment authenticity consistency e-assessment transparency practicability
  23. 23. E-assessmentauthenticity consistency transparency practicability instruction- similarity assessment democratization cost alignment multiple complexity engagement efficiency indicators relevant adequacy visibility sustainability criteria competences- significance assessment impact alignment
  24. 24. Authenticity• Similarity – competeces needed in real/professioanl life• Complexity – cognitive chalenge• Adequacy – adequate performing conditions• Significance – value for students, instructors and employers
  25. 25. ConsistencyThis dimension emerges as an answer to thetraditional demands for validity and reliability,associated with psychometric indicators.• Instruction-assessment alignment• Relevant criteria• Competences-assessment alignment• Multiple indicators – assessment methods, contexts and assessors
  26. 26. Transparency• Democratization – availability and participation• Engagement – participation in the definition of the learning goals• Visibility – present/share processes and/or products• Impact – effect on the learning process and on course design
  27. 27. Practicability• Cost – time, digital resources, training, …• Efficiency• Sustainability – implement and sustain the proposed assessment design, taking into account the learner profiles and the contextual constraints, both for the organizations and for the assessors
  28. 28. DiscussionThese dimensions are articulated, representing severaldegrees of reciprocal interdependence.The criteria, more than just illustratingthe different features of each dimension,allow for the operational description ofeach criterion stage of implementation, and so contributeto the evaluation of the achieved assessment strategyquality level.
  29. 29. DiscussionWhat can be the contributions ofe-assessment for the assessment culture?How can e-assessment be usedfor internal improvement andexternal accreditation?From a research standpoint should alldimensions be regarded as equallyimportant?
  30. 30. Thank You! Gracias! Obrigado! I care so I share @luistinoca