Beyond objective testing and peer assessmentalternative ways of assessment in MOOCs

  1. Sánchez-Vera, María del Mar
  2. Prendes-Espinosa, María
Journal:
RUSC. Universities and Knowledge Society Journal

ISSN: 1698-580X

Year of publication: 2015

Volume: 12

Issue: 1

Pages: 119-130

Type: Article

DOI: 10.7238/RUSC.V12I1.2262 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: RUSC. Universities and Knowledge Society Journal

Sustainable development goals

Abstract

MOOCs (massive open online courses) are an online teaching proposal that, in their short lives, have already thrown up two very different possibilities: cMOOCs and xMOOCs. Both are analysed in this paper from the perspective of assessing students’ learning. While assessment in xMOOCs is usually limited to multiple choice tests and sometimes delivering tasks, in cMOOCs the aim is to foster interaction from an educational standpoint, usually on the basis of peer assessment. Pedagogically, both models have their limitations. Multiple choice tests are mainly content bound while peer assessment has its own difficulties and drawbacks, which we explain here. We will put forward some useful ideas to give more flexibility to assessment in MOOCs (groups of experts, semantic web, portfolio, learning analytics), in an attempt to address educational assessment not as an end in itself but as another part of the educational process.

Bibliographic References

  • Adell, J. (2013). Los MOOC, en la cresta de la ola. Retrieved from http://elbonia.cent.uji.es/jordi/2013/03/19/los-moocs-en-la-cresta-de-la-ola/
  • Barberá, E. (2006). Aportaciones de la tecnología a la e-Evaluación. RED: Revista de Educación a Distancia. Monograph VI, 1-13 . Retrieved from http://www.um.es/ead/red/M6/barbera.pdf
  • Bali, M. (2014). MOOC pedagogy: gleaning good practice from existing MOOCs. MERLOT. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10 (1), 44-56.
  • Booth, M. (2012). Learning Analytics: the new black. Educause Review Online. Retrieved from http://www.educause. edu/ero/article/learning-analytics-new-black
  • Bondi, A. (2000). Characteristics of scalability and their impact on performance. In WOSP 2000. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2nd International workshop on software and performance. New York, USA (40-49). New York, USA: ACM.
  • Brown, S. (2013). MOOCs, OOCs, flips and hybrids: the new world of higher education. In ICICTE 2013. Paper presented at the Proceedings of IEEE International conference. Austin, USA. (pp. 237-247). North Carolina, USA: IEEE.
  • Codina, L. (2003). La web semántica: una visión crítica. El profesional de la información, 12(2), 149-152.
  • Daradoumis, T., Bassi, R., Xhafa, F., & Caballé, S. (2013). A review on massive e-learning (MOOC) design, delivery and assessment. Paper presented at the Eighth International Conference on P2P, Parallel, Grid, Cloud and Interpreting Computing. Compiegne. USA: IEEE.
  • Davis, H., Dikens, K., Leon-Urrutia, M., Sanchéz-Vera, M. M., & White, S. (2014). MOOCs for Universities and Learners an analysis of motivating factors. Paper presented at the 6th International Conference on Computer Supported Education. Retrieved from http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/363714/
  • Department for business, innovation & skills (2013). The maturing of the MOOC: literature review of massive open online courses and other forms of online distance learning. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/ system/uploads/attachment_data/file/240193/13-1173-maturing-of-the-mooc.pdf
  • Dorrego, E. (2006). Educación a distancia y evaluación del aprendizaje. RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia, 6 , 1-23. Retrieved from http://www.um.es/ead/red/M6/dorrego.pdf
  • Downes, S. (2013). Assessment in MOOCs [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://halfanhour.blogspot.com. es/2013/05/assessment-in-moocs.html
  • Escudero-Muñoz, J. M. (1998). Evaluación Educativa: Aproximación general, orientaciones y ámbitos. In J. M. Escudero, M. T. González, & J. Del Cerro. Evaluación de programas, centros y profesores (pp. 4-22 ). Murcia: Diego Marín.
  • Fernández-Breis, J., Prendes-Espinosa, M. P., Castellanos-Nieves, D., Martínez-Sánchez, F., Valencia-García, R., & Ruíz- Martínez, J. (2007). Evaluación en e-learning basada en tecnologías de la Web semántica y procesamiento del lenguaje natural. Murcia: Diego Marín.
  • Fournier, H., Kop, R., & Durand, G. (2014). Challenges to research in MOOCs. MERLOT. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(1),1-15.
  • Kolowich, S. (2013). The professors who make the MOOCs. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http:// chronicle.com/article/The-Professors-Behind-the-MOOC/137905/#id=overview
  • Lewin, T. (2012). College of the future could be come one, come all. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/20/education/colleges-turn-to-crowd-sourcing-courses.html?_r=0
  • Linn, R. (2011). Test-based accountability. The Gordon Commission on the Future of Assessment in Education.Retrieved from http://www.gordoncommission.org/rsc/pdf/linn_test_based_accountability.pdf
  • Luo, H., & Robinson, A. C. (2014). Is peer grading a valid assessment method for Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs)? Paper presented at the 7th Annual International Symposium. Emerging Technologies for Online Learning. Retrieved from http://sloanconsortium.org/conference/2014/et4online/peer-grading-valid- assessment-method-massive-open-online-courses-moocs
  • O’Toole, R. (2013). Pedagogical strategies and technologies for peer assessment in Massively Open Online Courses (MOOCs). Unpublished discussion paper. University of Warwick, Coventry. Retrieved from http://wrap.warwick. ac.uk/54602/
  • Piech, C., Huang, J., Chen, Z., Do, C., Ng, A., & Koller, D. (2013). Tuned models of peer assessment in MOOCs. Paper presented at the International Conference on Educational Data Mining. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/ abs/1307.2579
  • Prendes, M. P. (2003). Aprendemos... ¿cooperando o colaborando? Las claves del método. In F. Martínez Sánchez, Re- des de comunicación en la enseñanza. Las nuevas perspectivas del trabajo corporativo (pp. 93-128). Barcelona: Paidós.
  • Prendes, M. P. (2007). Internet aplicado a la educación: estrategias didácticas y metodologías. In J. Cabero, (Coord.), Nuevas tecnologías aplicadas a la educación, (pp. 205-222). Madrid: McGraw Hill.
  • Prendes, M. P. (2013). Las aplicaciones educativas de la Web Semántica. In I. Aguaded, & J. Cabero, (Coords.). Tecno- logías y medios para la educación en la e-sociedad (pp. 289-315). Madrid: Alianza.
  • Prendes, M. P., & Sánchez, M. M. (2008). Portafolio electrónico: posibilidades para los docentes. Pixelbit. Revista de Medios y Educación, 1(32), 21-34. Retrieved from http://www.um.es/gite/mmarsanchez/Proyectos%20y%20pu- blicaciones_files/2.pdf
  • Ridway, K., McCursker, S., & Pead, D. (2004). Literature review of E-assessment. Futurelab. Retrieved from http://hal. archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/19/04/40/PDF/ridgway-j-2004-r10.pdf
  • Salinas, J. (1999). Enseñanza flexible, aprendizaje abierto. Las redes como herramientas para la formación. EDUTEC: Revista Electrónica de Tecnología Educativa, 10, 1-18. Retrieved from http://edutec.rediris.es/Revelec2/Revelec10/ revelec10.html
  • Sánchez-Vera, M. M. (2010). Espacios Virtuales para la evaluación de aprendizajes basados en herramientas de Web Semántica [unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Universidad de Murcia, Murcia.
  • Sánchez-Vera, M. M., & Prendes, M. P. (2013). La participación del alumnado en los cursos masivos (MOOC). Paper presented at the II Congreso Internacional de Innovación Docente. Retrieved from http://digitum.um.es/xmlui/ bitstream/10201/39138/1/C156_mooc.pdf
  • Sandeen, C. (2013). Assessment place in the new MOOC word. Research and practice in assessment, 8, 1-8.
  • Tempelaar, D., Cuypers, H., Van de Vrie, E., Heck, A., & Van der Kooij, H. (2013). Formative assessment and learning analytics. Paper presented at LAK 2013. Learning Analytics and Knowledge. Leuven, Belgium.
  • University of Bristol (2013). Learning analytics and technology enhanced assessment (TEA). Retrieved from http://www. bris.ac.uk/education/research/sites/tea/publications/learninganalytics.pdf
  • Valverde, J. (2014). MOOCs: una visión crítica desde las ciencias de la educación. Revista de currículum y formación del profesorado, 18(1), 1-19.
  • Yuan, L., Powell, S., & Olivier, B. (2014). Beyond MOOCs: sustainable online Learning in Institutions. Retrieved from http:// publications.cetis.ac.uk/2014/898
Data source: Dialnet