Advertisement

Electronic learning contract for the assessment of projects in information systems

  • R. C. W. Kwok
  • J. Ma
Part of the IFIP — The International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT)

Abstract

Assessment of students’ learning is a crucial factor that will influence students’ approaches to learning. This study investigates the effects of using electronic learning contracts on students’ approaches to learning. An Electronic Learning Contract (ELC) is a continuously renegotiable working agreement between students and lecturers for assessing the outcomes of students projects. It focuses on group decision making through electronic meetings towards the learning outcomes. It specifies what students will learn, how this will be accomplished, within what period of time, and what the criteria of assessment will be. A Group Support System (GSS) is used to provide an environment for electronic meeting and to assist the processes for discussing, negotiating, formulating, re-negotiating and revising the content of the ELC among students and lecturers. Students’ participation in the construction of the electronic learning contract will enhance their perception of assessment criteria. It will generate the backwash effects of assessment on learning, and thus encourage deep and achieving approaches to learning.

Keywords

Higher education Assessment learning contract group support system 

References

  1. Biggs, J.B. (1989) Students’ approach to learning in Anglo-Chinese schools. Educational Research Journal, 4, 8–17.Google Scholar
  2. Biggs, J.B. (1991). Approaches to learning in secondary and tertiary students in Hong Kong: some comparative studies. Educational Research Journal, 6, 27–39.Google Scholar
  3. Biggs, J.B. (1992). Why and how do Hong Kong students learn? (Using the Learning and Study Process Questionnaires). Faculty of Education, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.Google Scholar
  4. Biggs, J.B. (1996). Assessing learning quality: reconciling institutional, staff and educational demands. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 21 (1), 5–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chang, P.L. & Chen, Y.C. (1994). A fuzzy multi-criteria decision making method for technology transfer strategy selection in biotechnology. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 63, 131–139.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Donald, J.G. (1976). Contracting for learning. Learning and Development, 7(5), 1–7. Elton, L. & Laurillard, D. (1979). Trends in students learning. Studies in Higher Education, 4, 87–102.Google Scholar
  7. Grabisch, M. (1995). Fuzzy integral in multicriteria decision making. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 69, 279–298.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gray, P., Mandviwalla, M., Olfman, L. & Satzinger J. (1993). The user interface in group support systems, in Group Support Systems (eds. L.Jessup & J.S. Valacich ), Macmillan, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Imrie, B. W. (1995). Assessment for learning: quality and taxonomies. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 20 (2), 175–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Tompkins, C. & McGraw, M.J. (1988). The negotiated learning contract, in Developing Student Autonomy in Learning (2nd Edition) (ed. D. Boud), Kogan Page, London. Turban, E. (1995). Decision support and expert systems. Prentice Hall, London.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. C. W. Kwok
    • 1
  • J. Ma
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Information SystemsCity University of Hong KongKowloonHong Kong

Personalised recommendations