Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Making learning more visible through e-assessment: implications for feedback

  • Published:
Journal of Computing in Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper aims to explore the role of e-assessment in making the learning process more visible to the instructor, while revealing its impact on the adjustment of ensuing feedback. We carried out a qualitative analysis of two different cases at two different tertiary institutions. One case took place in a virtual mode, the other developed in blended conditions. Data sources were (1) the instructors’ own design of assessment practices, (2) semi-structured interviews to instructors and students, and (3) discursive written exchanges between participants in the virtual space at different stages of the assessment process. The design of activities which allow peer-to-peer communication to be tracked is the most crucial element for the development of a high level of learning transparency. Although substantial learning transparency does not automatically enhance the instructor’s feedback, it may result in a more comprehensive students’ needs analysis as well as a better adjusted and timely support. Practical recommendations regarding these results are considered.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akyol, Z., & Garrison, D. R. (2011). Understanding cognitive presence in an online and blended community of inquiry: Assessing outcomes and processes for deep approaches to learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(2), 233–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, M., Capozzoli, M., McSweeney, L., & Sinha, D. (1999). Beyond kappa: A review of interrater agreement measures. Canadian Journal of Statistics, 27(1), 3–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaumont, C., O’Doherty, M., & Shannon, L. (2011). Reconceptualising assessment feedback: A key to improving student learning? Studies in Higher Education, 36(6), 671–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., & McCormick, R. (2010). Reflections and new directions. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 493–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, C., & Bippus, A. (2012). Underscoring the social nature of classrooms by examining the amount of virtual talk across online and blended college courses. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 1. Retrieved from http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2012/Brooks_Bippus.pdf

  • Caple, H., & Bogle, M. (2013). Making group assessment transparent: What wikis can contribute to collaborative projects. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(2), 198–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiou, C. K., Hwang, G. J., & Tseng, J. C. (2009). An auto-scoring mechanism for evaluating problem-solving ability in a web-based learning environment. Computers & Education, 53(2), 261–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chou, C. (2003). Interactivity and interactive functions in web-based learning systems: A technical framework for designers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(3), 265–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cross, R., & O’Loughlin, K. (2013). Continuous assessment frameworks within university English Pathway Programs: Realizing formative assessment within high-stakes contexts. Studies in Higher Education, 38(4), 584–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crossouard, B. (2010). Reforms to higher education assessment reporting: Opportunities and challenges. Teaching in Higher Education, 15(3), 247–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denscombe, M. (2003). The good research guide: For small-scale social research projects (2nd ed.). Maidenhead: Open University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flick, U. (2009). An introduction to qualitative research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • García, A. S., García-Álvarez, M. T., & Moreno, B. (2014). Analysis of assessment opportunities of learning spaces: On-line versus face to face methodologies. Computers in Human Behavior, 30, 372–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaytan, J., & McEwen, B. C. (2007). Effective online instructional and assessment strategies. The American Journal of Distance Education, 21(3), 117–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs, G., & Dunbar-Goddet, H. (2007). The effects of programme assessment environments on student learning. The Higher Education Academy. Retrieved from http://www.tlrp.org/themes/seminar/daugherty/docs/grahamgibbspaper.pdf

  • Gikandi, J. W., Morrow, D., & Davis, N. E. (2011). Online formative assessment in higher education: A review of the literature. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2333–2351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hyatt, D. F. (2005). ‘Yes, a very good point!’: A critical genre analysis of a corpus of feedback commentaries on Master of Education assignments. Teaching in Higher Education, 10(3), 339–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, R. E., & Cooke, L. (2006). A window into learning: Case studies of online group communication and collaboration. Alt-J: Research in Learning Technology, 14(3), 261–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanuka, H. (2011). Interaction and the online distance classroom: Do instructional methods effect the quality of interaction? Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 23(2–3), 143–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lafuente, M., Remesal, A., & Álvarez, I. M. (2014). Assisting learning in e-assessment: A closer look at educational supports. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(4), 443–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lemanski, C. (2011). Access and assessment? Incentives for independent study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(5), 565–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macdonald, J. (2003). Assessing online collaborative learning: Process and product. Computers & Education, 40(4), 377–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansour, B., & Mupinga, D. (2007). Students’ positive and negative experiences in hybrid and online classes. College Student Journal, 41(1), 242–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F. (1988). Describing and improving learning. In R. R. Schmeck (Ed.), Learning strategies and learning styles (pp. 53–82). New York: Plenum.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, J. W., Smith, J. L., & DeLuca, D. (2010). Using online discussion boards with large and small groups to enhance learning of assistive technology. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 22(2), 95–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCracken, J., Cho, S., Sharif, A., Wilson, B., & Miller, J. (2012). Principled assessment strategy design for online courses and programs. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 10(1), 107–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, J., & Burton, K. (2010). Assessment of online discussion forums for law students. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 6(2). Retrieved from http://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol6/iss2/6

  • Moskal, B. M., & Leydens, J. A. (2000). Scoring rubric development: Validity and reliability. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 7(10), 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noorbehbahani, F., & Kardan, A. A. (2011). The automatic assessment of free text answers using a modified BLEU algorithm. Computers & Education, 56(2), 337–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price, M., Handley, K., & Millar, J. (2011). Feedback: Focusing attention on engagement. Studies in Higher Education, 36(8), 879–896.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramírez, J. L., Juárez, M., & Remesal, A. (2012). Activity theory and e-course design: An experience in discrete mathematics for computer science. RUSC. Universities and Knowledge Society Journal, 9(1), 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Randolph, J. J. (2005). Free-marginal multirater kappa (multirater K [free]): An alternative to Fleiss’ fixed-marginal multirater Kappa. In Paper presented at the Joensuu University learning and instruction symposium 2005, October 14–15, in Joensuu, Finland.

  • Reasons, S. G., Valadares, K., & Slavkin, M. (2005). Questioning the hybrid model: Student outcomes in different course formats. The Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks (JALN), 9(1), 83–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stödberg, U. (2012). A research review of e-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(5), 591–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuck, J. (2012). Feedback-giving as social practice: Teachers’ perspectives on feedback as institutional requirement, work and dialogue. Teaching in Higher Education, 17(2), 209–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitelock, D. (2010). Activating assessment for learning: Are we on the way with Web 2.0? In M. J. W. Lee & C. McLoughlin (Eds.), Web 2.0-based e-learning: Applying social informatics for tertiary teaching (pp. 319–342). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

  • Yin, R. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. New York: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Educational and Developmental Psychology Department, Psychology Faculty, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

    Marc Lafuente Martínez, Ibis M. Álvarez Valdivia & Ana Remesal Ortiz

Authors
  1. Marc Lafuente Martínez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ibis M. Álvarez Valdivia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ana Remesal Ortiz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marc Lafuente Martínez.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 3.

Table 3 Rubric for evaluating the transparency of assessment activities
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lafuente Martínez, M., Álvarez Valdivia, I.M. & Remesal Ortiz, A. Making learning more visible through e-assessment: implications for feedback. J Comput High Educ 27, 10–27 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-015-9091-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-015-9091-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation