Assessment of Online Discussion Forums for Law Students

This paper goes beyond the existing literature and explores the innovative topic of designing criterionreferenced assessment for online discussion forums. There are several benefits of embedding online discussion forums into subjects including engaging students in collaborative learning, and encouraging deeper analysis, critical thinking and reflection. Using the assessment principles of validity, reliability and transparency, this paper offers a range of practical strategies to tutors who plan to develop criterionreferenced assessment as opposed to norm-referenced assessment for online discussion forums, applies the assessment principles in the context of an undergraduate law subject, and exemplars a rubric for an online discussion forum in a work placement subject.

[1]  Jan Herrington,et al.  Quality conversations: Research and development in higher education , 2002 .

[2]  Kelley J. Burton,et al.  The Design and Implementation of Criterion-referenced Assessment in a First Year Undergraduate Core Law Unit , 2005 .

[3]  Diana Laurillard,et al.  Rethinking University Teaching: A Framework for the Effective Use of Educational Technology , 1993 .

[4]  Janet Macdonald,et al.  Assessing online collaborative learning: process and product , 2003, Comput. Educ..

[5]  Jan Herrington,et al.  Designing for reflection in online courses , 2002 .

[6]  G. Boulton‐Lewis.  Teaching for quality learning at university , 2008 .

[7]  Karen Swan,et al.  Shaping Online Discussion: Assessment Matters , 2007 .

[8]  A. Scarino.  Teacher judgments: going beyond criteria for judging performance. , 2005 .

[9]  Gilly Salmon,et al.  E-tivities: the key to active online learning, 2nd ed. , 2002 .

[10]  Ralph T. Putnam,et al.  Learning to teach. , 1996 .

[11]  Kelley J. Burton,et al.  Designing criterion-referenced assessment , 2012 .

[12]  J. Baron,et al.  Use of rubrics in online assessment , 2003 .

[13]  Allan Jeong,et al.  Effects of Pre‐structuring Discussion Threads on Group Interaction and Group Performance in Computer‐supported Collaborative Argumentation , 2006 .

[14]  Marcy F. Reisetter,et al.  Belonging Online: Students' Perceptions of the Value and Efficacy of an Online Learning Community , 2008 .

[15]  D. Boud,et al.  Rethinking assessment in higher education : learning for the longer term , 2007 .

[16]  Allison Brown.  Designing for learning: What are the essential features of an effective online course? , 1997 .

[17]  S. Bloxham,et al.  Developing Effective Assessment in Higher Education: A Practical Guide , 2007 .

[18]  Diana Laurillard,et al.  Rethinking University Teaching: A Conversational Framework for the Effective Use of Learning Technologies. 2nd Edition , 1993 .

[19]  Kelley J. Burton.  Skills and Criterion Referenced Assessment: Turning LWB236 Real Property A Law into a Subject for the Real World , 2007 .

[20]  C. Page.  The society for research into higher education , 1988 .

[21]  W. R. Klemm,et al.  What's Wrong With On-line Discussions - And How To Fix It , 2000, WebNet.

[22]  Ian Tindal,et al.  Learning in the workplace: a new degree online , 2005 .

[23]  M. J. Le Brun,et al.  The quiet (r)evolution : improving student learning in law , 1994 .

[24]  Beryl C. McEwen,et al.  Effective Online Instructional and Assessment Strategies , 2007 .

[25]  Seija Mahlamaki-Kultanen,et al.  Reflection through web discussions: assessing nursing students' work‐based learning , 2008 .

[26]  Sharon Parry,et al.  The student assessment handbook , 2004 .

[27]  Pedro F. Hernández-Ramos.  Web Logs and Online Discussions as Tools to Promote Reflective Practice , 2004 .

[28]  J. Biggs,et al.  Teaching For Quality Learning At University , 1999 .