You are here:

Performance and Attitude of Children in Computer Based Versus Paper Based Testing
PROCEEDINGS

, , University of Central Lancashire, United Kingdom

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Montreal, Canada ISBN 978-1-880094-56-3 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Full Text

Abstract

This paper reports the findings of an investigation of children's performance and attitude towards a paper based and computer based test. Twenty children, aged between 7 and 8 of mixed gender, participated in this study using a commercial software application. The children's attitude towards the software was captured through the use of a smarty-o-meter to indicate their level of preference and the performance was based on their tests scores. The conclusions highlight the children's preference for using computer in their assessment and shows that there was no difference in performance between the two test modes.

Citation

Sim, G. & Horton, M. (2005). Performance and Attitude of Children in Computer Based Versus Paper Based Testing. In P. Kommers & G. Richards (Eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2005--World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 3610-3614). Montreal, Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 7, 2024 from .

© 2005 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Ashton, H.S., Schofield, D.K., & Woodger, S.C. (2003). Pilot Summative Web Assessment in Secondary Education. Paper presented at the 7th International Computer Assisted Assessment Conference, Loughborough.
  2. Clariana, R., & Wallace, P. (2002). Paper-based versus computer-based assessment: key factors associated with test mode effect. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(5), 593-602.
  3. Cooper, G. (1990). Cognitive load theory as an aid for instructional design. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 6(2), 108-113.
  4. Dyson, M.C., & Kipping, G.J. (1997). The legibility of screen formats: are three columns better than one? Computers& Graphics, 21(6), 703-712.
  5. Federico, P.A. (1989). Computer-Based and Paper-Based Measurement of Recognition (Research Report No. NPRDC-T R-897): Navy Personnel Research and Development Centre Report.
  6. Greenwood, L., Cole, U.M., McBride, F.V., Morrison, H., Cowan, P., & Lee, M. (2000). Can the same results be obtained using computer-mediated tests as for paper-based tests for national curriculum assessment? Paper presented at the International Conference on Mathematics/ Science Education and Technology, San Diego.
  7. Kirschner, P.A. (2002). Cognitive load theory: implications of cognitive load theory on the design of learning. Learning and Instruction, 12(1), 1-10.
  8. Liu, M., Papathanasiou, E., & Hao, Y. (2001). Exploring the use of multimedia examination formats in undergraduate teaching: results from the fielding testing. Computers in Human Behaviour., 17(3), 225-248.
  9. Mayes, D.K., Sims, V.K., & Koonce, J.M. (2001). Comprehension and workload differences for VDT and paper-based reading. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 28(6), 367-378.
  10. McDonald, A.S. (2002). The impact of individual differences on the equivalence of computer-based and paper-and-pencil educational assessment. Computers& Education, 39(4), 299-312.
  11. Nugent, G. (2003). On-line multimedia assessment for K-4 students. Paper presented at the world Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications, Hawaii.
  12. Pommerich. (2004). Developing computerized versions of paper-and-pencil tests: mode effects for passage-based tests. The journal of technology, learning and assessment, 2(6), 3-44.
  13. Russell, M., & Haney, B. (1997). Testing Writing on Computers: An Experiment Comparing Students Performance on Test Conducted via Computer and via Paper-and-Pencil. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 5(3), 1-19.
  14. Schenkman, B., Fukuda, T., & Persson, B. (1999). Glare from monitors measured with subjective scales and eye movements. Displays, 20, 11-21.
  15. Sim, G., Holifield, P., & Brown, M. (2004). Implementation of computer assisted assessment: lessons from the literature. ALT-J, 12(3), 215-229.
  16. Zandvliet, D. (1997). A comparison of Computer-Administered and Written Tests. Journal of Research on Technology in Education., 29(4), 423-438.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.