The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
THE FOUR GENERATIONS OF COMPUTERIZED EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT
Abstract
Educational measurement is undergoing a revolution, due to the rapid dissemination of information‐processing technology. One of the most notable aspects of that revolution is the rapidity with which it has come upon us. It is perhaps inevitable that the recent growth in power and sophistication of computing resources and the widespread dissemination of computers in daily life have brought about irreversible changes in educational measurement. Recent developments in computerized measurement are summarized by placing them in a four‐generation framework, in which each generation represents a genus of increasing sophistication and power. Generation 1. Computerized testing (CT): administering conventional tests by computer Generation 2. Computerized adaptive testing (CAT): tailoring the difficulty or contents of the next piece presented or an aspect of the timing of the next item on the basis of examinees' responses Generation 3. Continuous measurement (CM): using calibrated measures embedded in a curriculum to continuously and unobtrusively estimate dynamic changes in the student's achievement trajectory and profile as a learner Generation 4. Intelligent measurement (IM): producing intelligent scoring, interpretation of individual profiles, and advice to learners and teachers, by means of knowledge bases and inferencing procedures While acknowledging the obvious pitfalls associated with proposing a framework in a developing field, the authors hope that the suggested framework will provide an ad interim contribution to the field's universe of discourse and facilitate communication about the rapidly developing issues.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Hambleton, R. K., & Swaminathan, H. (1985) · doi:10.1007/978-94-017-1988-9 · Cited by 1,777
Cited by
Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate?
McHorney, C. A., & Tarlov, A. R. (1995) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1007/bf01593882 · Cited by 2,206
A review of project-based learning in higher education: Student outcomes and measures
Guo, P., Saab, N., Post, L. S., & Admiraal, W. (2020) · International Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101586 · Cited by 1,309
Cella, D., Gershon, R., Lai, J.-S., & Choi, S. (2007) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1007/s11136-007-9204-6 · Cited by 623
(2005) · Open Access Journals at BC (Boston College) · Cited by 67
Metadata
- Authors
- Bunderson, C. V., Inouye, D. K., & Olsen, J. B.
- Venue
- ETS Research Report Series
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1988-06
- Volume
- 1988
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 2330-8516 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2007888849
- Cited by
- 234
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 5.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: THE FOUR GENERATIONS OF COMPUTERIZED EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/j.2330-8516.1988.tb00291.x
- The paper
- Bunderson, C. V., Inouye, D. K., & Olsen, J. B. (1988). THE FOUR GENERATIONS OF COMPUTERIZED EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT. ETS Research Report Series. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2330-8516.1988.tb00291.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.