1 / 13

Computerised Assessment with Plagiarism C. A .P. Phil Davies (Computing)

Computerised Assessment with Plagiarism C. A .P. Phil Davies (Computing). The Evils of Higher Education. Students Numbers (Quantity NOT Quality) Plagiarism Identification Luck NOT Judgement Marking Time consuming / Subjective NOT Objective Assessment Exams (% of course) C/works EHFF

ash
Télécharger la présentation

Computerised Assessment with Plagiarism C. A .P. Phil Davies (Computing)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Computerised AssessmentwithPlagiarismC. A .P.Phil Davies (Computing)

  2. The Evils of Higher Education • Students • Numbers (Quantity NOT Quality) • Plagiarism • Identification Luck NOT Judgement • Marking • Time consuming / Subjective NOT Objective • Assessment • Exams (% of course) C/works EHFF • Web • EHFWWW

  3. Turn Evils to Our Advantage • Peer Assessment • Students do the marking for us • Plagiarism • Students with quantity of marking will identify plagiarism easier than lecturer • Time spent on marking • at least 15 mins per script / minimum of 10 • Web • Use it for research and marking

  4. MANUAL OR COMPUTERISED? • Control • Data automatically held on server machine • Client Access following registration • Email in reports • Total Anonymity • Mark in own time • No group marking / limits plagiarism • Learning through marking

  5. COURSEWORK FORMAT • Create report • Include all web sources • Email in report ( 14 marks) • Perform On-line MCQ Test (8 marks) • Peer Assessment (C.A.P.) (10 marks) • Perform On-line MCQ Test (8 marks) • Feedback !!!!!!

  6. FEEDBACK • Students “wanted to know!!!” name of markers • Students wouldn’t accept comments of peers • Wide range of marking • Average out marks • Email in complaints to highlight problems

  7. POSITIVE BENEFITS • Lecturer: Marking Qualitative not Quantitative 150*35 mins * 10 = 800 hours • Immediate Feedback • Learning aid / Open up access to material • Benchmark own performance with peers • Perspective of marker not producer • Objectivity not subjectivity in marking

  8. WORD OF CAUTION • Educational benefits in performing peer assessment • NOT less work for lecturer • “.. We are paying for a service, and we are not getting the service we deserve if the lecturer is not marking our work”

More Related