It identifies the main principles of general assessment theory, examines how these principles. We can be applied to a web environment and identifies and describes several assessment issues that have special significance during a virtual classroom. The problems of proctored testing, identity security, academic honesty, and therefore the use of online discussions for assessment purposes are examined.
Practical suggestions are included to help both first-time and experienced online instructors develop assessment components for their online courses. Throughout this text, the stress is on creating assessments during a constructivist environment where the eye is on relationships, inquiry, invention, and therefore the selectie assessment of understanding through collaborative work and discussions.
Assessment performances are day-to-day activities which will even be authentic and interesting demonstrations of students' abilities to grapple with the central challenges of a discipline in real-life contexts" (Kulieke, Bakker, Collins, Fennimore, Fine, Herman, Jones, Raack, & Tinzmann, 1990, p.2).
Assessment is one of the crucial components of instruction. People within the educational
Community, i.e., policymakers, educators, students, parents, administrators, have different ideas regarding implementing assessment strategies (Dietel, Herman, and Knuth, 1991). While some believe traditional Assessment methods are simpler, others think that alternative assessment tools are superior. This article is written to tell people about assessment practices at a distance, particularly within distance education.
However, the content of the assessment is not a field-specific, and it can be applied to various instructional settings
(Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, and Zvacek, 2000). Therefore, anyone directly or indirectly associated with education –distance or face-to-face- might find the knowledge presented during this article useful.
Multiple-choice tests are commonly utilized by teachers, schools, and selectie assessment organizations for the subsequent reasons (Bailey, 1998, p. 130):
1. They're fast, easy, and economical to attain. They are machine scorable.
2. They will be scored objectively and thus may give the test appearance of being fairer and more reliable than subjectively scored tests.
3. They "look like" tests and should thus seem to be acceptable by convention.
4. They reduce the probabilities of learners guessing the right items as compared to true-false items.
Alternative Assessment Tools:
According to Simonson et al., there are three alternative assessment approaches Authentic assessment, performance-based assessment, and constructivist assessment. Similarly, Reeves (2000) suggests three main strategies to integrate alternative assessment into online learning settings:
1. Cognitive assessment,
2. Performance assessment,
3. Portfolio assessment. Researchers and educators use the terms performance-based,
Alternative, and authentic assessment interchangeably. As Wangsatorntanakhun (1997) states the term, performance-based assessment embraces both alternative and authentic assessment. Therefore, throughout this article, performance assessment is employed to ask for alternative assessment.
Two major concepts describe performance assessment:
"1. Performance: A student's active generation of a response that's observable either directly or indirectly via a permanent product,
2. Authentic: the character of the task and context during which the assessment occurs has relevancy and represents "real world" problems or issues" (Elliott, 1995). The authentic assessment aims to relate the instruction to the real-world experience of the learners. The task must be meaningful to be authentic (Simonson et al.).
Winking (1997) also points out the role of authenticity and states that alternative assessments require higher-order thinking skills so that students can solve real-life related problems. Finally, Bailey (1998) relates the power of the performance tests aren't their authenticity and their direct and highly contextualized nature.