Evaluation Strategies Mediated by ICT: A Literature Review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15359/ree.25-2.16Keywords:
Educational assessment, information technology, technology education, literature reviewsAbstract
This article aims to present evaluation strategies through information and communication technologies (ICT), using a configurative and aggregative systematic literature review, employing grounded theory for data analysis. For this particular case, strategies, uses, types of evaluations, and tools, used in recent years (2010-2016) to mediate or support evaluation processes were taken into account. As main evidence, it is well known that the use of ICT in evaluation processes has gradually strengthened, and its inclusion has several purposes. It is concluded that it is necessary to bear in mind the strategy, type of evaluation required to favor, ICT or technology available, and the learning environment for the education process.
References
Amasha, M. yAlkhalaf, S. (2015). The effect of using facebook markup language (FBML) for designing an E-Learning Model in hgher education. International Journal of Research in Computer Science, 4(5), 1-9.
Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Barry, S. (2012). A video recording and viewing protocol for student group presentations: Assisting self-assessment through a Wiki environment. Computers & Education, 59(3), 855-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.008
Belland, B. R., Walker, A. E., Olsen, M. W. y Leary, H. (2015). A pilot meta-analysis of computer-based scaffolding in STEM education a pilot meta-analysis of computer-based scaffolding in STEM Education. International Forum of Educational Technology & Society, 18(1), 183-97.
Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Schmid, R. F. y Tamim, R. M. (2014). An exploration of bias in meta-analysis: The case of technology integration research in higher education. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 26(3), 183-209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-014-9084-z
Bordas Alsina, M. I. y Cabrera Rodríguez, F. Á. (2001). Estrategias de evaluación de los aprendizajes centrados en el proceso. Revista Española de Pedagogía, 59(218), 25-48. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23765840?seq=1
Buente, W., Winter, J. S., Kramer, H., Dalisay, F., Hill, Y. Z. y Buskirk, P. A. (2015). Program-Based Assessment of Capstone ePortfolios for a Communication BA Curriculum. International Journal of ePortfolio, 5(2), 169-179. http://theijep.com/pdf/IJEP191.pdf
Chapelle, C. A. y Voss, E. (2016). 20 years of technology and language assessment in Language Learning & Technology. Language Learning & Technology, 20(2), 116-128. https://www.lltjournal.org/item/2950
Cheng, I. N. Y., Chan, J. K. Y., Kong, S. S. Y. y Leung, K. M. Y. (2016). Effectiveness and obstacle of using Facebook as a tool to facilitate student-centred learning in higher education. In Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 17(2), 2-10. https://www.eduhk.hk/apfslt/
Cohen, J. (1968). Weighted kappa: Nominal scale agreement provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychological bulletin, 70(4), 213-220. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0026256
Cusi, A., Morselli, F. y Sabena, C. (2013). The use of technology in formative assessment to raise achievement. FaSMEd. Position paper. https://research.ncl.ac.uk/fasmed/positionpapers/The+use+of+technology+in+FA+to+raise+achievement_Revision+UNITO-FINAL.pdf
Dochy, F., Segers, M. y Dierick, S. (2002). Nuevas vías de aprendizaje y enseñanza y sus consecuencias: Una nueva era de evaluación. Revista de Docencia Universitaria, 2(2), 13-28. https://redined.mecd.gob.es/xmlui/handle/11162/91274?locale-attribute=gl
Esteve Mon, F. M. y Gisbert Cervera, M. (2011). El nuevo paradigma de aprendizaje y nuevas tecnologías. REDU. Revista de Docencia Universitaria, 9(3), 55-73. https://doi.org/10.4995/redu.2011.6149
Ferenchick, G. S., Solomon, D., Foreback, J., Towfiq, B., Kavanaugh, K., Warbasse, L., Addison, J, Chames, F, Dandan, A. y Mohmand, A. (2013). Mobile technology for the facilitation of direct observation and assessment of student performance. Teaching and learning in medicine, 25(4), 292-299. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2013.827972
Fink, A. (2013). Conducting research literature reviews: From the internet to paper. SAGE. https://books.google.com.co/books?id=Dg5zAwAAQBAJ
García Laborda, J., Sampson, D. G., Hambleton, R. K. y Guzman, E. (2015). Guest editorial: Technology supported assessment in formal and informal learning. Educational Technology & Society, 18(2), 1-2. https://www.j-ets.net/collection/published-issues/18_2
García-Valcárcel-Muñoz-Repiso, A., Basilotta-Gómez-Pablos, V. y López-García, C. (2014). Las TIC en el aprendizaje colaborativo en el aula de primaria y secundaria. Comunicar, 21(42), 65-74. https://doi.org/10.3916/C42-2014-06
Gautreau, C. (2011). Motivational factors affecting the integration of a learning management system by faculty. Journal of Educators Online, 8(1), 1-23. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ917870
Gómez-Escalonilla, M., Santín M. y Mathieu, G. (2011). La educación universitaria on-line en el periodismo desde la vision del estudiante. Comunicar, 19(37), 73-80. https://doi.org/10.3916/C37-2011-02-07
Gough, D., Thomas, J. y Oliver, S. (2012). Clarifying differences between review designs and methods. Systematic reviews, 1(28), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-1-28
Hersh, M. (2014). Evaluation Framework for ICT-based learning technologies for disabled people. Computers & Education, 78, 30-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.05.001
Hu, C. (2016). Application of e-learning assessment based on AHP-BP algorithm in the cloud computing teaching platform. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 11(08), 27-32. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v11i08.6039
Izquierdo, B. (2008). De la evaluación clásica a la evaluación pluralista: Criterios para clasificar los distintos tipos de evaluación. Empiria: Revista de Metodología de Ciencias Sociales, 16, 115-134. https://doi.org/10.5944/empiria.16.2008.1392
Jagodziński, P. y Wolski, R. (2015). Assessment of application technology of natural user interfaces in the creation of a virtual chemical laboratory. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(1), 16-28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-014-9517-5
Kim, M. K., Zouaq, A. y Kim, S. M. (2016). Automatic detection of expert models: The exploration of expert modeling methods applicable to technology-based assessment and instruction. Computers & Education, 101, 55-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.05.007
Maas, N. A. y Flood, L. S. (2011). Implementing high-fidelity simulation in practical nursing education. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 7(6), e229-e235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2010.04.001
Martín Gámez, C., Ruiz Mora, A. B. y Ruiz-Mora, I. (2015). El blog para la adquisición de competencias profesionales en la enseñanza superior. Revista Opcion, 31(Especial 2), 730-752. https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=31045568040
Mathrani, A., Christian, S. y Ponder-Sutton, A. (2016). PlayIT: Game based learning approach for teaching programming concepts. Educational Technology & Society, 19(2), 5-17. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Z8tpXBV1hFX25QSpfG5Ih1Ia9LVFlrsh/view
Muñoz, J. M. (2008). NNTT, TIC, NTIC, TAC... en educación ¿pero esto qué es? Quaderns digitals: Revista de Nuevas Tecnologías y Sociedad, 51, 43-60. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/ejemplar/186213
Navazesh, M., Rich, S. K. y Tiber, A. (2014). The rationale for and implementation of learner-centered education: Experiences at the Ostrow School of Dentistry of the University of Southern California. Journal of Dental Education, 78(2), 165-180.
Pásztor, A., Molnár, G. y Csapó, B. (2015). Technology-based assessment of creativity in educational context: The case of divergent thinking and its relation to mathematical achievement. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 18, 32-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2015.05.004
Pirnay-Dummer, P., Ifenthaler, D. y Spector, J. M. (2010). Highly integrated model assessment technology and tools. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(1), 3-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-009-9119-8
Ried, L. D. (2010). A distance education course in statistics. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 74(9), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.5688/aj7409172
Ritchie, S. M. (2016). Self-assessment of video-recorded presentations: Does it improve skills? Active Learning in Higher Education, 17(3), 207-221. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787416654807
Rust, C. (2002). The impact of assessment on student learning: How can the research literature practically help to inform the development of departmental assessment strategies and learner-centred assessment practices? Active Learning in Higher Education, 3(2), 145-158. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787402003002004
Ryan, B. J. (2013). Line up, line up: Using technology to align and enhance peer learning and assessment in a student centred foundation organic chemistry module. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14(3), 229-238. https://doi.org/10.1039/C3RP20178C
Said, H., Kirgis, L., Verkamp, B. y Johnson, L. J. (2015). On-line vs. face-to-face delivery of information technology courses: Students’ assessment. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 14, 297-312. https://doi.org/10.28945/2274
San Martín Cantero, D. (2014). Teoría fundamentada y Atlas. ti: Recursos metodológicos para la investigación educativa. Revista electrónica de investigación educativa, 16(1), 104-122. https://redie.uabc.mx/redie/article/view/727/906
Sánchez Vera, M. del M., Prendes Espinosa, M. P. y Fernández Breis, J. T. (2013). Tecnologías semánticas para la evaluación en red: Análisis de una experiencia con la herramienta OeLE. Revista de Investigación Educativa, 31(2), 447-464. https://doi.org/10.6018/rie.31.2.116721
Shih, R.-C. (2011). Can Web 2.0 technology assist college students in learning English writing? Integrating Facebook and peer assessment with blended learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(5), 829-845. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.934
Singh, L. (2013). Guided assessment or open discourse: A comparative analysis of students interaction on Facebook Groups. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 14(1), 35-43. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/tojde/issue/16895
Strauss, A. y Corbin, J. (2002). Bases de la investigación cualitativa. Técnicas y procedimientos para desarrollar la teoría fundamentada. Editorial Universidad de Antioquia.
Summak, M. S., Samancioğlu, M. y Bağlibel, M. (2010). Technology integration and assesment in educational settings. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 1725-1729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.973
van der Kleij, F. M., Eggen, T. J. H. M., Timmers, C. F. y Veldkamp, B. P (2012). Effects of feedback in a computer-based assessment for learning. Computers & Education, 58(1), 263-272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.020
van Niekerk, E., Ankiewicz, P. y de Swardt, E. (2010). A process-based assessment framework for technology education: A case study. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 20(2), 191-215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-008-9070-8
van Rooij, S. W. (2010). Higher Education and FOSS for e-Learning: The Role of Organizational Sub-cultures in Enterprise-wide Adoption. International Journal of Open Source Software and Processes (IJOSSP), 2(1), 15-31. https://doi.org/10.4018/jossp.2010010102
Wakimoto, D. K. y Lewis, R. E. (2014). Graduate student perceptions of eportfolios: Uses for reflection, development, and assessment. The Internet and Higher Education, 21, 53-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2014.01.002
Wang, S. (2014). The college physical education teaching evaluation based on the Fuzzy AHP-Entropy and the computer simulation. International Journal of Multimedia and Ubiquitous Engineering, 9(10), 45-56. https://doi.org/10.14257/ijmue.2014.9.10.05
Wiliam, D. (2011). What is assessment for learning? Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37(1), 3-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2011.03.001
Williams, K., Wryobeck, J., Edinger, W., McGrady, A., Fors, U. y Zary, N. (2011). Assessment of competencies by use of virtual patient technology. Academic Psychiatry, 35(5), 328-330. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ap.35.5.328
Wilson, M., Gochyyev, P. y Scalise, K. (2016). Assessment of learning in digital interactive social networks: A learning analytics approach. Online Learning, 20(2), 97-119. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v20i2.799
Wu, J. (2011). Improving the writing of research papers: IMRAD and beyond. Landscape Ecology, 26(10), 1345-1349. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-011-9674-3
Yuretich, R. F. y Kanner, L. C. (2015). Examining the effectiveness of team-based learning (TBL) in different classroom settings. Journal of Geoscience education, 63(2), 147-156. https://doi.org/10.5408/13-109.1
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
1. In case the submitted paper is accepted for publication, the author(s) FREELY, COSTLESS, EXCLUSIVELY AND FOR AN INDEFINITE TERM transfer copyrights and patrimonial rights to Universidad Nacional (UNA, Costa Rica). For more details check the Originality Statement and Copyright Transfer Agreement
2. REUTILIZATION RIGHTS: UNA authorizes authors to use, for any purpose (among them selfarchiving or autoarchiving) and to publish in the Internet in any electronic site, the paper´'s final version, both approved and published (post print), as long as it is done with a non commercial purpose, does not generate derivates without previous consentment and recognizes both publisher's name and authorship.
3. The submission and possible publication of the paper in the Educare Electronic Journal is ruled by the Journal’s editorial policies, the institutional rules of Universidad Nacional and the laws of the Republic of Costa Rica. Additionally, any possible difference of opinion or future dispute shall be settled in accordance with the mechanisms of Alternative Dispute Resolution and the Costa Rican Jurisdiction.
4. In all cases, it is understood that the opinions issued are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position and opinion of Educare, CIDE or Universidad Nacional, Costa Rica. It is also understood that, in the exercise of academic freedom, the authors have carried out a rogorous scientific-academic process of research, reflection and argumentation thar lays within the thematic scope of interest of the Journal.
5. The papers published by Educare Electronic Journal use a Creative Commons License:
The articles published by Educare Electronic Journal can be shared with a Creative Commons License: 
