Student interviews as a tool for assessment and learning in a systems analysis and design course
Abstract
This paper examines the use of student interviews as a means of assessment for systems analysis and design assignments and as a means of providing feedback to students on their performance in the assignment. It uses student feedback from 510 student surveys gathered from Semester 1 2001 to Semester 2 2003 to assess the opinion of students on the use of interviews and describes the lessons learnt about this form of assessment.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Students who underwent the interview assessment received immediate feedback and had opportunities to practice and develop their communication skills.
“Further positive findings were that students received immediate feedback and had opportunities to practice and develop their communication skills.”
From Bob or Bot: Exploring ChatGPT's Answers to University Computer Science Assessment (2024) · cites this paper as [15]
Performing interviews at two points during a semester-long team project eliminated the student practice of copying assignments and disguising plagiarism by making minor changes.
“Motivated by reducing plagiarism in a system analysis and design course, Dick studied student interviews as a means of assessment [15] and found that performing interviews at two points during a semester-long team project eliminated the student practice of copying assignments and disguising plagiarism by making minor changes.”
From Bob or Bot: Exploring ChatGPT's Answers to University Computer Science Assessment (2024) · cites this paper as [15]
Many students found the interview process stressful and expressed a strong dislike for this form of assessment.
“On the negative side, many students found the interview process stressful and expressed a strong dislike for this form of assessment.”
From Bob or Bot: Exploring ChatGPT's Answers to University Computer Science Assessment (2024) · cites this paper as [15]
Cites
The unicorn, the normal curve, and other improbable creatures.
Micceri, T. (1989) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.105.1.156 · Cited by 1,487 · see citing works
A Teacher's Guide to Alternative Assessment: Taking the First Steps
Corcoran, C. A., Dershimer, E. L., & Tichenor, M. S. (2004) · The Clearing House A Journal of Educational Strategies Issues and Ideas · doi:10.3200/tchs.77.5.213-218 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Joughin, G. (2003) · Griffith Research Online · doi:10.25904/1912/1621 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Lundgren, P. (1998) · Chalmers Publication Library (Chalmers University of Technology) · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Jarmoszko, A. T., Petkova, O., & Gendron, M. S. (2003) · Informing Science and IT Education Conference · doi:10.28945/2713 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Dick, M.
- Affiliations
- RMIT University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Dick, Martin
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 10th annual SIGCSE conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2005-06-27
- Pages
- 24-28
- OpenAlex
- W1987515413
- Cited by
- 10
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 2.53
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE) (publishedVersion)
- RMIT Research Repository (RMIT University Library) (submittedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Education › Problem and Project Based Learning
- Social Sciences › Education › Reflective Practices in Education
- Keywords
- student interviews, assessment, system analysis and design, feedback to students, student perceptions, computer science education
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
