Search

This small-scale pilot study aimed to establish how the mode of response in an examination affects candidates' performances on items that require an extended answer. The sample comprised 46 17-year-old students from two classes (one in a state secondary school and one in a state sixth-form college), who sat a mock A-level English Literature examination. The analysis compared writing produced on screen and on paper to try to uncover any systematic differences between the two modes of delivery. The study considered the linguistic features of the texts produced in each mode, the marks achieved and the views of the participants regarding the use of computers in essay-based examinations. The study found that the response mode had a small effect on the length of essay produced, in that students using a computer wrote more, and on the type of language used, in that students writing on paper used denser but less varied language. There was very little effect on the marks achieved. Participants expressed a variety of concerns about computer-based examinations, such as noisy keyboards, assessment of spelling, and unfairness towards those who are less comfortable with the technology.

Technology integration in higher education (HE) has brought immense innovation. While research is investigating the benefits of leveraging, through learning analytics, the data created by the greater presence of technology in HE, it is also analysing the privacy implications of vast universes of data now at the fingertips of HE administrators. This paper argues that student privacy challenges linked to technology integration occur not only "within" but also "beyond" learning environments, namely at the enterprise level. By analysing the UK and US legal frameworks surrounding how HE institutions respond to parents demanding disclosure of their adult children's personal data in the event of mental health crises, this paper offers an example of real and complex privacy issues, often overlooked by interdisciplinary inquiry, that exist in the 'interstitial space' between HE technology and privacy law. The purpose of conducting a comparative analysis was to demonstrate that countries with different privacy regimes are similarly ill-equipped to address certain student privacy issues at the HE enterprise level, leaving HEIs exposed to potential litigation/regulatory risks. The contribution of this work is to invite greater interdisciplinary awareness of, and inquiry into, student privacy beyond learning environments.

It seems anachronistic that we expect students to handwrite essay examinations when almost all their other work is mediated by computer. Two universities, one in the UK and one in Australia, are exploring the use of computers in free text response examinations. This paper compares both the attitudes and the behaviours of their students concerning the use of computers in essay examinations, and contrasts the responses from the two cohorts. Most of the students have confidence in their typing skills and report typing as least as fast as they can handwrite. The analysis demonstrates that although students recognise that examination essays should have good structure and argument, when in the pressure of an examination, it is all too easy for them to be more concerned with the sheer amount of text they can write.

This paper reports a comparison of human and computer marking of approximately 600 essays produced by 11-year-olds in the UK. Each essay script was scored by three human markers. Scripts were also scored by the "e-rater" program. There was a good agreement between human and machine marking. Scripts with highly discrepant scores were flagged and assessed blind by expert markers for characteristics considered likely to produce human-machine discrepancies. As hypothesised, essays marked higher by humans exhibited more abstract qualities such as interest and relevance, while there was little, if any, difference on more mechanical factors such as paragraph demarcation.

Reviews models of staff development in British higher education. Five micro models of staff development practice are described and evaluated; three macro models of staff development responsibility are identified; relationships between micro and macro models are discussed; and the most suitable models are suggested. (20 references) (LRW)