Prestaties op papieren en digitale examens wat is het verschil?
resultaten_literatuuronderzoek
resultaten_literatuuronderzoek
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Assessm<strong>en</strong>t, 4, 5, 1-34.<br />
Johnson, D.E., & Mihal, W.L. (1973). Performance of blacks and whites in computerized versus<br />
manual testing <strong>en</strong>vironm<strong>en</strong>ts. American Psycholog<strong>is</strong>t, 28, 8, 694–699.<br />
K<strong>en</strong>g, L., McClarty, K.L., & Dav<strong>is</strong>, L.L. (2008). Item-level comparative analys<strong>is</strong> of online and paper<br />
admin<strong>is</strong>trations of the Texas assessm<strong>en</strong>t of knowledge and skills. Applied Measurem<strong>en</strong>t in Education,<br />
21, 3, 207-226.<br />
Kim, J. (1999, October). Meta-analys<strong>is</strong> of equival<strong>en</strong>ce of computerized and P&P tests on ability<br />
measures. Paper pres<strong>en</strong>ted at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Educational Research<br />
Association, Chicago.<br />
Kingston (2009). Comparability of computer- and paper-admin<strong>is</strong>tered multiple-choice<br />
tests for K-12 p<strong>op</strong>ulations: A synthes<strong>is</strong>. Applied Measurem<strong>en</strong>t in Education, 22, 22-37.<br />
Kol<strong>en</strong>, M.J. (1999-2000). Threats to score comparability with applications to performance<br />
assessm<strong>en</strong>ts and computerized adaptive tests. Educational Assessm<strong>en</strong>t 6, 73-96.<br />
Lee, J. (1986). The effects of past computer experi<strong>en</strong>ce on computer aptitude test performance.<br />
Educational and Psychological Measurem<strong>en</strong>t, 46, 727–733.<br />
Lee, J. A., & H<strong>op</strong>kins, L. (1985). The effects of training on computerized aptitude test performance and<br />
anxiety. Paper pres<strong>en</strong>ted at the annual meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association (Boston,<br />
MA, March).<br />
Lee, J.A., Mor<strong>en</strong>o, K.E, & Sympson, J.B. (1986). The effects of test admin<strong>is</strong>tration on test<br />
performance. Educational and Psychological Measurem<strong>en</strong>t, 46, 2, 467-474.<br />
Leeson, H.V. (2006). The mode effect: A literature review of human and technological <strong>is</strong>sues in<br />
computerized testing. International Journal of Testing, 6, 1, 1-24.<br />
Luecht, R.M., Hadadi, A., Swanson, D. B., & Case, S.M. (1998). Testing the test: A comparative study<br />
of a compreh<strong>en</strong>sive basic sci<strong>en</strong>ce test using paper-and-p<strong>en</strong>cil and computer<strong>is</strong>ed formats. Academic<br />
Medicine, 73, 51–53.<br />
Mason, B.J., Patry, M., & Bernstein, D.J. (2001). An examination of the equival<strong>en</strong>ce betwe<strong>en</strong><br />
non-adaptive computer-based and traditional testing. Journal of Educational Computing<br />
Research, 24, 1, 29-39.<br />
Mazzeo, J., & Harvey, A. L. (1988). The equival<strong>en</strong>ce of scores from automated and conv<strong>en</strong>tional<br />
educational and psychological tests: A review of the literature (College Board Rep. No. 88-8, ETS RR<br />
No. 88-21). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.<br />
© Stichting Cito, Arnhem 2015 45
Change language