These Confusing Technology Times:
Making Decisions About What to
Assess and Evaluate
Dr. Curtis J. Bonk
Indiana University and CourseShare.com
http://php.indiana.edu/~cjbonk
cjbonk@indiana.edu
Confusion Reigns
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
How allocate time?
When to assess?
How to assess?
How grade teamwork?
Whose work is it?
Other Issues?
1.
…
Student Assessment:
Product Focus
Traditional Assessment Methods

Most often, students are assessed
in one of the following knowledgefocused ways





Objective test questions
Essay test questions
Papers/Reports
Projects
All are product-oriented in nature
Most Assessment Tools

Focus on tests





Automatic grading/feedback
Test pools
Timing
Favor objective questions
Few tools to facilitate other forms
of assessment

File exchange/dropbox
Focus of Assessment?
1.
2.
3.
4.
Basic Knowledge, Concepts,
Ideas
Higher-Order Thinking Skills,
Problem Solving,
Communication, Teamwork
Both of Above!!!
Other…
Technology Assessments Possible





Online Portfolios of Work
Discussion/Forum Participation
Online Mentoring
Weekly Reflections
Tasks Attempted or Completed,
Usage, etc.
Sample Portfolio Scoring Dimensions
(10 pts each)
(see: http://php.indiana.edu/~cjbonk/p250syla.htm)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Richness
Coherence
Elaboration
Relevancy
Timeliness
Completeness
Persuasiveness
Originality
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Insightful
Clear/Logical
Original
Learning
Fdback/Responsive
Format
Thorough
Reflective
Overall Holistic
More Possible Assessments





Quizzes and Tests
Peer Feedback and Responsiveness
Cases and Problems
Group Work
Web Resource Explorations &
Evaluations
E-Case Analysis Evaluation
Peer Feedback Criteria
(1 pt per item; 5 pts/peer feedback)
(a) Provides additional points that may have
been missed.
(b) Corrects a concept, asks for clarification
where needed, debates issues, disagrees &
explains why.
(c) Ties concepts to another situation or refers
to the text or coursepack.
(d) Offer valuable insight based on personal
experience.
(e) Overall constructive feedback.
Possible Methods of Assessment

Review of online group work spaces


Self and peer assessment



Evidence of regular and substantial
contributions
Have students rate team members on various
dimensions
Have students indicate where work plan was
followed/not followed
Student reflection

Have students write brief reflections on their
group process, indicating what they might change
the next time
E-Peer Evaluation Form
Peer Evaluation. Name: ____________________
Rate on Scale of 1 (low) to 5 (high):
___ 1. Insight: creative, offers
analogies/examples, relationships
drawn, useful ideas and connections,
fosters growth.
___ 2. Helpful/Positive: prompt
feedback, encouraging, informative,
makes suggestions & advice, finds,
shares info.
___ 3. Valuable Team Member:
dependable, links group members, there
for group, leader, participator, pushes
group.
Assessment Issues
Issues to Consider…
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Bonus pts for participation?
Peer evaluation of work?
Assess improvement?
Is it timed? Give unlimited time
to complete?
Allow retakes if lose connection?
How many retakes?
Issues to Consider…
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Cheating? Is it really that
student?
Authenticity?
Negotiate tasks and criteria?
How measure competency?
How do you demonstrate
learning online?
Catching da cheaters!
Increasing Cheating Online
($7-$30/page, http://www.syllabus.com/ January, 2002,
Phillip Long, Plagiarism: IT-Enabled Tools for Deceit?)

http://www.academictermpapers.com/
http://www.termpapers-on-file.com/
http://www.nocheaters.com/

http://www.cheathouse.com/uk/index.html




http://www.realpapers.com/
http://www.pinkmonkey.com/
(“you’ll never buy Cliffnotes again”)
Reducing Cheating Online






Ask yourself, why are they cheating?
Do they value the assignment?
Are tasks relevant and challenging?
What happens to the task after
submitted—reused, woven in, posted?
Due at end of term? Real audience?
Look at pedagogy b4 calling plagiarism
police!
Reducing Cheating Online








Proctored exams
Vary items in exam
Make course too hard to cheat
Try Plagiarism.com ($300)
Use mastery learning for some tasks
Random selection of items for item pool
Use test passwords, rely on IP#
screening
Assign collaborative tasks
Reducing Cheating Online
($7-$30/page, http://www.syllabus.com/ January, 2002,
Phillip Long, Plagiarism: IT-Enabled Tools for Deceit?)






http://www.plagiarism.org/ (resource)
http://www.turnitin.com/ (software, $100,
free 30 day demo/trial)
http://www.canexus.com/ (software; essay
verification engine, $19.95)
http://www.plagiserve.com/ (free database
of 70,000 student term papers & cliff notes)
http://www.academicintegrity.org/ (assoc.)
http://sja.ucdavis.edu/avoid.htm (guide)
Turnitin Testimonials
"Many of my students believe that if they do not
submit their essays, I will not discover their
plagiarism. I will often type a paragraph or two
of their work in myself if I suspect plagiarism.
Every time, there was a "hit." Many students
were successful plagiarists in high school. A
service like this is needed to teach them that such
practices are no longer acceptable and certainly
not ethical!”
Online Assessment Concerns

Problem: Cheating on tests




Problem: Plagiarism




Copying from neighbor
Copying from course materials
Someone else taking the test
Submitting someone else’s paper (previous class)
Copying from (online) sources
Buying paper online
Both are product-oriented concerns
Assessment: Process Focus
(Vanessa Dennen, Sept 2002)
Assessing Process

Easy to do



Many technology tools will archive student
work/interactions
Students create a document trail in process
Helps students develop metacognitive
knowledge


Instructors structure/model/encourage productive
work processes
Students learn how to manage their own work
processes
Why Assess Process?

For the instructor …




Provides formative feedback on course
(e.g., helps gather data about why
students have difficulty with productoriented assessments)
Provides sense of instructor guidance
Clarifies who is doing most work in small
group assignments
Helps prevent cheating
Why Assess Process?

For the student …




Typically improves the quality of their
products
Helps them develop productive work
processes
Puts on a schedule
Shows that you care about individual
growth
Assessment Project Cycle


From Classroom Assessment Techniques
by Angelo & Cross (1993)
Step 1: Plan



Choose class
Focus on assessable question
Design project to answer question
Assessment Project Cycle [2]

Step 2: Implement




Teach target lesson
Collect assessment data
Analyze data
Step 3:



Interpret results
Communicate results
Evaluate assessment project
I. Term Papers

How to do online:




Have students each start their own
thread and post topic of interest
Peers and instructors give feedback
Students post thesis statements, research
sources, etc., with iterations of feedback
Final paper is posted
Term Paper Assessments




Product: the paper
Process: quality and timeliness of
student work from time when paper is
assigned
Process: quality and timeliness of
feedback provided to peers
Process: responsiveness to feedback
received from instructor and peers
II. Discussion Assignments
1. Chain of thought
 Have students develop a solution to
a problem


Have students indicate what led them to
a particular conclusion, method or
approach
Can be done in a discussion board
Discussion Assignments
2. Theory to Practice



Have students match up theories you are
learning about to actual problems
Present students with problems and have
them explain what theories they would
use to solve these problems and how they
would approach it
Debrief the assignment
Discussion Assignment
3. Synthesizer


Have students take roles being the
weekly synthesizer of class discussion
Add a “meta” level in which students
narrate their own experiences while
reading the weekly discussion
III. Group Projects

Tools used

Chat: brainstorming ideas, making group
decisions, regular way to feel connected (should
be archived)
Discussion board: commenting on drafts
 E-mail: quick feedback
 File exchange: sharing project files
 MS Word: Track changes


HINT: If you don’t have a tool that will work, refer
students to yahoo groups: http://www.groups.yahoo.com
Group Project Assessments


Product: project files that are turned in
Process: online archive demonstrating






Who contributed what
Who provided peer feedback
Who worked in a timely manner
How collaborative a group was
Process: peer ratings
Process: interim instructor consultations
III. Project Assignments
1. Work Plans



Have students develop a plan of
work for their project
Make them outline topic, schedule,
resources needed, division of labor
and anticipated form of final
deliverables
At end of project, have students
evaluate how well they followed
their own plan and how useful it
was
Project Assignments
2. Research Trail


Have students document the
steps they took in the research
process and the results
Ask for a brief reflection on how
effective their process was and
what they might change the next
time
Project Assignments
3. Process Presentations



Have students focus on their process as
well as their product in class presentations
To maintain focus, ask them to share 3
main lessons learned
Might ask for some process documents to
be shared, like an early draft
Project Assignments
4. Design Journal



Have students maintain a journal of all
ideas related to their project
Encourage sketches, lists, organizational
charts, etc.
Require journals to be turned in with final
projects
IV. Reflection Assignments


Have students keep a weekly journal of
their thoughts on readings and course
content AND real-world related
instances that they noticed
May make these public, with each
student having their own discussion
thread
Making it Happen

Learners need to see that process is
valuable:





Model appropriate processes
Provide students with scaffolding (guide
sheets) to structure their processes
Give students feedback on their process
Require students to reflect on their
processes
Grade students on process
Online Testing
Tools
Choice: Select companies that
specialize in online assessment.
Or: Use what the courseware
package gives ya…
Test Selection Criteria
(Hezel, 1999)







Easy to Configure Items and Test
Handle Symbols
Scheduling of Feedback (immediate?)
Provides feedback for each response
Randomize Answers Within a Question
Weighting of Answer Options
Supports multiple items types:
multiple choice, true-false, essay, keyword
More Test Selection Criteria






Recording of Multiple Submissions
Comprehensive Statistics
Summarize in Portfolio and
Gradebook
Confirmation of Test Submission
Incorp graphic or audio elements?
Timed Tests
More Test Selection Criteria
(Perry & Colon, 2001)




Flexible scoring—score first, last, or
average submission
Flexible reporting—by individual or by
item and cross tabulations.
Control over number of times students
can submit an activity or test
Provides item analysis statistics (e.g.,
Test Item Frequency Distributions).
Web Resource: http://www.indiana.edu/~best/
Online Survey
Tools for
Assessment
Sample Survey Tools



Zoomerang
(http://www.zoomerang.com)
SurveyMonkey
(http://www.surveymonkey.com/)
QuestionMark

(http://www.questionmark.com/home.html)
SurveyShare (http://SurveyShare.com; from
Courseshare.com)
Survey Solutions from Perseus

Infopoll (http://www.infopoll.com)

(http://www.perseusdevelopment.com/fromsurv.htm)
Web-Based Survey Advantages






Faster collection of data
Standardized collection format
Computer graphics may reduce
fatigue
Computer controlled branching
and skip sections
Easy to answer clicking
Wider distribution of respondents
Web-Based Survey Problems:
Why Lower Response Rates?






Low response rate
Lack of time
Unclear instructions
Too lengthy
Too many steps
Can’t find URL
Survey Tool Features







Support different types of items (Likert, multiple
choice, forced ranking, paired comparisons, etc.)
Maintain email lists and email invitations
Conduct polls
Adaptive branching and cross tabulations
Modifiable templates & library of past surveys
Publish reports
Different types of accounts—hosted, corporate,
professional, etc.
Web-Based Survey
Solutions: Some Tips…







Send second request
Make URL link prominent
Offer incentives near top of request
Shorten survey, make attractive, easy
to read
Disclose purpose, use, and privacy
E-mail cover letters
Prenotify of intent to survey
Evaluation…
Champagne & Wisher (in press)
“Simply put, an evaluation is
concerned with judging the worth
of a program and is essentially
conducted to aid in the making of
decisions by stakeholders.” (e.g.,
does it work as effectively as the
standard instructional approach).
Evaluation Purposes



Cost Savings
Improved Efficiency/Effectiveness
Learner Performance/Competency
Improvement/Progress


What did they learn?
Assessing learning impact


How well do learners use what they learned?
How much do learners use what they learn?
Kirkpatrick’s 4 Levels
Reaction
 Learning
 Behavior
 Results

Percent of Respondents
Figure 26. How Respondent Organizations Measure
Success of Web-Based Learning According to the
Kirkpatrick Model
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Learner satisfaction
Change in
knowledge, skill,
atttitude
Job performance
Kirkpatrick's Evaluation Level
ROI
My Evaluation Plan…
Considerations in Evaluation Plan
8. University
or
Organization
7. Program
6. Course
5. Tech Tool
1. Student
2. Instructor
3. Training
4. Task
What to Evaluate?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Student—attitudes, learning, jobs.
Instructor—popularity, course enrollments.
Training—internal and external.
Task--relevance, interactivity, collaborative.
Tool--usable, learner-centered, friendly, supportive.
Course—interactivity, completion rates.
Program—growth, long-range plans.
University—cost-benefit, policies, vision.
1. Measures of Student Success
(Focus groups, interviews, observations,
surveys, exams, records)






Positive Feedback, Recommendations
Increased Comprehension,
Achievement
High Retention in Program
Completion Rates or Course Attrition
Jobs Obtained, Internships
Enrollment Trends for Next Semester
1. Student Basic Quantitative





Grades, Achievement
Number of Posts
Participated
Computer Log Activity—peak
usage, messages/day, time of task
or in system
Attitude Surveys
1. Student High-End Success






Message complexity, depth, interactivity, q’ing
Collaboration skills
Problem finding/solving and critical thinking
Challenging and debating others
Case-based reasoning, critical thinking
measures
Portfolios, performances, PBL activities
2. Instructor Success





High student evals; more signing up
High student completion rates
Utilize Web to share teaching
Course recognized in tenure
decisions
Varies online feedback and
assistance techniques
3. Training
Outside Support






Training (FacultyTraining.net)
Courses & Certificates (JIU, e-education)
Reports, Newsletters, & Pubs
Aggregators of Info (CourseShare, Merlot)
Global Forums (FacultyOnline.com; GEN)
Resources, Guides/Tips, Link
Collections, Online Journals, Library
Resources
Certified Online Instructor Program


Walden Institute—12 Week
Online Certification (Cost =
$995)
2 tracks: one for higher ed
and one for online corporate
trainer





Online tools and purpose
Instructional design theory &
techniques
Distance ed evaluation
Quality assurance
Collab learning communities
http://www.utexas.edu/world/lecture/
3. Training
Inside Support…







Instructional Consulting
Mentoring (strategic planning $)
Small Pots of Funding
Facilities
Summer and Year Round Workshops
Office of Distributed Learning
Colloquiums, Tech Showcases, Guest
Speakers

Newsletters, guides, active learning grants, annual
reports, faculty development, brown bags
Technology and Professional Dev: Ten
Tips to Make it Better (Rogers, 2000)
1. Offer training
2. Give technology to take home
3. Provide on-site technical support
4. Encourage collegial collaboration
5. Send to prof development conference
6. Stretch the day
7. Encourage research
8. Provide online resources
9. Lunch bytes, faculty institutes
10. Celebrate success
RIDIC5-ULO3US Model of
Technology Use
4. Tasks (RIDIC):





Relevance
Individualization
Depth of Discussion
Interactivity
Collaboration-Control-ChoiceConstructivistic-Community
RIDIC5-ULO3US Model
of Technology Use
5. Tech Tools (ULOUS):
Utility/Usable
 Learner-Centeredness
 Opportunities with Outsiders
Online
 Ultra Friendly
 Supportive

6. Course Success






Few technological glitches/bugs
Adequate online support
Increasing enrollment trends
Course quality (interactivity rating)
Monies paid
Accepted by other programs
7. Program Considerations





Enrollment trends
Relevant and current technology
Number of Graduates and
graduation rates
Sense of community
Format: Self-paced, collaborative,
PBL, mentored, performancebased, individual, etc.
How are costs calculated in
online programs???
7. Online Program or Course Budget
(i.e., how pay, how large is course, tech fees charged, # of courses,
tuition rate, etc.)

Indirect Costs: learner disk space,
phone, accreditation, integration with existing
technology, library resources, on site orientation &
tech training, faculty training, office space

Direct Costs: courseware, instructor, help
desk, books, seat time, bandwidth and data
communications, server, server back-up, course
developers, postage
8. Institutional Success






E-Enrollments from
 new students, alumni, existing
students
Press, publication, partners,
attention
Additional grants
Making Money: Cost-Benefit model
Faculty and student attitudes
Acceptable policies (ADA compliant)
Final advice…whatever you do…