Introduction of CAA into a Mathematics Course for Technology Students to Address a Change in Curriculum Requirements

Pollock, Maggie

doi:10.1023/a:1020229330655

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This has targeted objective type questions [Clark 2002;Feng et al 2006], free response text based questions [Valenti et al 2003;Perez et al 2005;Kerejeta et al 2005], mathematics based questions [Beevers 2002;Pollock 2002] and computer programming questions [Ala-Mutka 2005]. There has also been growing interest in diagram based questions [Hoggarth and Lockyer 1998;Higgins et al 2002;Thomas 2004;Tselonis and Sargeant 2005] but results to date have been limited.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Problem of Labels in E-Assessment of Diagrams

Jayal

Shepperd

2009

J. Educ. Resour. Comput.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we explore a problematic aspect of automated assessment of diagrams. Diagrams have partial and sometimes inconsistent semantics. Typically much of the meaning of diagram resides in the labels, however, the choice of labeling is largely unrestricted. This means a correct solution may utilise differing yet semantically equivalent labels to the specimen solution. With human marking this problem can be easily overcome. Unfortunately with e-assessment this is challenging. We empirically explore the scale of the problem of synonyms by analysing 160 student solutions to a UML task. From this we find that cumulative growth of synonyms only shows a limited tendency to reduce at the margin despite using a range of text processing algorithms such as stemming and auto-correction of spelling errors. This finding has significant implications for the ease in which we may develop future e-assessment systems of diagrams, in that the need for better algorithms for assessing label semantic similarity becomes inescapable.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Problem of Labels in E-Assessment of Diagrams

Jayal

Shepperd

2009

J. Educ. Resour. Comput.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There has been substantial previous research work to automatically mark coursework. This has targeted objective type questions [6,7], free response text based questions [8,9,10], mathematics based questions [11,12] and computer programming questions [12] However, there is now growing interest in diagram-based questions [14,15,17] but results to date have been limited. Diagrams are difficult to automatically mark because of problems such as the diagrams being malformed or possessing missing or extraneous features [18].…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Improved Method for Label Matching in E-Assessment of Diagrams

Jayal

Shepperd

2009

Innovation in Teaching and Learning in Information and Computer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A challenging problem for e-assessment is automatic marking of diagrams. There are a number of difficulties not least that much of the meaning of a diagram resides in the labels and hence label matching is an important process in the e-assessment of diagrams. Previous research has shown that the labels used by the students in the diagrams can be diverse and imprecise which makes this problematic. In this paper we propose and evaluate a new method for label matching to support e-assessment of diagrams and address problems of synonyms, spelling errors and differing levels of decomposition. We have implemented the syntactic part of our method and evaluated it using 160 undergraduate assessments based upon a UML design task. We have found that our method performs better than the other syntax matching algorithms. This framework has significant implications for the ease in which we may develop future e-assessment systems. The results from this pilot study have been encouraging and motivate us to implement the semantic similarity part of our method and conduct further evaluations.

show abstract

“…Most mature students typically join the course with post school qualifications in an engineering discipline but increasingly we are receiving applications from students with a design or skills (carpentry) background. The entrance qualifications were relaxed several years ago and the first year mathematics course has been adapted to allow students to learn and be assessed at their own pace [1]. In order to accommodate the greater variety of students and also reduce the overall workload in first year the Basic Technology course was split into its component parts of Electricity and Electronics which was kept in first year and Mechanics which was moved to the second year.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Basic Mechanics: Learning by Teaching – an increase in student motivation (a small scale study with Technology Education students)

Pollock¹

Proceedings Frontiers in Education 35th Annual Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses the introduction of peer learning and teaching into the Basic Mechanics course of a Technology degree. Statics was taught conventionally using lectures and tutorials. Dynamics was taught using the premiss "Tell me and I forget; show me and I remember; involve me and I understand" as an educational principle. The students worked in small groups and were asked to learn agreed topics by teaching them to other groups of students. The course was extensively evaluated and 82% said they enjoyed the dynamics part of the course. When checking the results there was no significant difference between the raw scores obtained in either the statics or dynamics exam for the females and mature males, but when the scores of the males aged 20 or less were also included a significant difference (p<0.05) between the exam scores appeared. 83% of the young males scored considerably higher in the dynamics exam. There was roughly an equal number of males aged 20 or less, females and mature males in the class. This is the completion of a work in progress paper given at FIE2003.

show abstract

Introduction of CAA into a Mathematics Course for Technology Students to Address a Change in Curriculum Requirements

Cited by 8 publications

References 6 publications

The Problem of Labels in E-Assessment of Diagrams

The Problem of Labels in E-Assessment of Diagrams

An Improved Method for Label Matching in E-Assessment of Diagrams

Basic Mechanics: Learning by Teaching – an increase in student motivation (a small scale study with Technology Education students)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Introduction of CAA into a Mathematics Course for Technology Students to Address a Change in Curriculum Requirements

Cited by 8 publications

References 6 publications

The Problem of Labels in E-Assessment of Diagrams

The Problem of Labels in E-Assessment of Diagrams

An Improved Method for Label Matching in E-Assessment of Diagrams

Basic Mechanics: Learning by Teaching &#8211; an increase in student motivation (a small scale study with Technology Education students)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Basic Mechanics: Learning by Teaching – an increase in student motivation (a small scale study with Technology Education students)