ABSTRACT
When undergraduate students are allowed to choose a time slot in which to take an exam from a large number of options (e.g., 40), the students exhibit strong preferences among the times. We found that students can be effectively modelled using constrained discrete choice theory to quantify these preferences from their observed behavior. The resulting models are suitable for load balancing when scheduling multiple concurrent exams and for capacity planning given a set schedule.
- A. de Palma, N. Picard, and P. Waddell. 2007. Discrete choice models with capacity constraints: An empirical analysis of the housing market of the greater Paris region. Journal of Urban Economics 62, 2 (2007), 204-230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2007.02.007Google ScholarCross Ref
- K. E. Train. 2009. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation (second ed.). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- M. West, C. Zilles, and G. Herman. 2015. PrairieLearn: Mastery-based Online Problem Solving with Adaptive Scoring and Recommendations Driven by Machine Learning. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) 2015 Annual Conference. http://dx.doi.org/10.18260/p.24575Google Scholar
- C. Zilles, R. T. Deloatch, J. Bailey, B. B. Khattar, W. Fagen, C. Heeren, D Mussulman, and M. West. 2015. Computerized Testing: A Vision and Initial Experiences. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) 2015 Annual Conference. http://dx.doi.org/10.18260/p.23726Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Modeling Student Scheduling Preferences in a Computer-Based Testing Facility
Recommendations
Do Performance Trends Suggest Wide-spread Collaborative Cheating on Asynchronous Exams?
L@S '17: Proceedings of the Fourth (2017) ACM Conference on Learning @ ScaleUsing a data set from 29,492 asynchronous exams in an on-campus proctored computer-based testing facility (CBTF), we observed correlations between when a student chooses to take their exam within the exam period and their score on the exam. Somewhat ...
Comments