Activating Assessment for Learning: Are We on the Way with Web 2.0?

This chapter examines the role Web 2.0 tools can play in promoting the Assessment for Learning Agenda. It presents a number of cases of peer, self and computer assessments that display a range of characteristics proposed by Elliott (2008) for the next generation of assessment tasks. The discussion of the cases revealed a missing characteristic which is a form of feedback to the students that will take their learning forward which I have called 'Advice for Action'. In order for assessment tasks and tools to become more effective they need to be embedded within a pedagogical framework, which in turn, requires a supportive infrastructure as proposed by the 4Ts pyramid. The major components of the pyramid consist of (a) Tool Development, (b) Staff Training, (c) Rethinking the Assessment Tasks and (d) Learning from the Assessment Tasks.

[1]  Kenneth J. Chapman,et al.  International Perspective: A Cross-National Exploration of Business Students' Attitudes, Perceptions, and Tendencies Toward Academic Dishonesty , 2000 .

[2]  M. Weaver,et al.  Do students value feedback? Student perceptions of tutors’ written responses , 2006 .

[3]  Stephen W. Draper,et al.  Catalytic assessment: understanding how MCQs and EVS can foster deep learning , 2009, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[4]  R. Bales.  A set of categories for the analysis of small group interaction. , 1950 .

[5]  A. Collins,et al.  Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning , 1989 .

[6]  Keith Pond,et al.  Student Experiences of Peer Review Marking of Team Projects , 2007 .

[7]  Stylianos Hatzipanagos,et al.  Feedback as dialogue: exploring the links between formative assessment and social software in distance learning , 2009 .

[8]  J. Hattie,et al.  The Power of Feedback , 2007 .

[9]  Mien Segers,et al.  Optimising new modes of assessment : in search of qualities and standards , 2003 .

[10]  Denise Whitelock.  Electronic assessment: marking, monitoring and mediating learning , 2006, Int. J. Learn. Technol..

[11]  Jeremy B. Williams,et al.  The efficacy of final examinations: A comparative study of closed-book, invigilated exams and open-book, open-web exams , 2009, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[12]  M. Oliver,et al.  Electronic Voting Systems for Lectures then and Now: A Comparison of Research and Practice , 2007 .

[13]  J. Poulis,et al.  Physics lecturing with audience paced feedback , 1998 .

[14]  T. Gatfield.  Examining Student Satisfaction with Group Projects and Peer Assessment , 1999 .

[15]  Quintin Cutts,et al.  Electronically enhanced classroom interaction , 2002 .

[16]  Elena Barberà,et al.  Mutual feedback in e-portfolio assessment: an approach to the netfolio system , 2009, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[17]  Stephen W. Draper,et al.  What are learners actually regulating when given feedback? , 2009, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[18]  Richard J. Shavelson,et al.  Assessing Student Learning Responsibly: From History to an Audacious Proposal , 2007 .

[19]  Nancy Falchikov,et al.  PRODUCT COMPARISONS AND PROCESS BENEFITS OF COLLABORATIVE PEER GROUP AND SELF ASSESSMENTS , 1986 .

[20]  P. Black,et al.  Developing the theory of formative assessment , 2009 .

[21]  Caroline Gipps,et al.  Sociocultural Perspectives on Assessment , 2008 .

[22]  Denise Whitelock,et al.  Taking an electronic mathematics examination from home: what the students think , 2003 .

[23]  G. Wells,et al.  Learning for Life in the 21st Century , 2002 .

[24]  Denise Whitelock,et al.  Analysing tutor feedback to students: first steps towards constructing an electronic monitoring system , 2003 .

[25]  D. Boud.  Sustainable Assessment: Rethinking assessment for the learning society , 2000 .

[26]  Michael Cole,et al.  Vygotsky and education: Cognitive development and formal schooling: The evidence from cross-cultural research , 1990 .

[27]  L. Shepard.  The Role of Assessment in a Learning Culture , 2000 .

[28]  Kim McMurtry.  E-Cheating: Combating a 21st Century Challenge. , 2001 .

[29]  Miguel Nussbaum,et al.  Using multiple choice questions as a pedagogic model for face‐to‐face CSCL , 2009, Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ..

[30]  Diana Laurillard,et al.  Rethinking University Teaching 2nd Edition: A conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies , 2002 .

[31]  Jan Herrington,et al.  Authentic Assessment and Multimedia: how university students respond to a model of authentic assessment , 1998 .

[32]  Susan Sipple,et al.  Ideas in Practice: Developmental Writers' Attitudes toward Audio and Written Feedback , 2007 .

[33]  Ron Oliver,et al.  Developing an instructional design strategy to support generic skills development , 2002, ASCILITE.

[34]  Nicola Wilkinson,et al.  A case study of the development of WebPA: An online peer-moderated marking tool , 2009, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[35]  D. Sadler.  Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems , 1989 .

[36]  D. Nicol,et al.  Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice , 2006 .