Meta-assessment in a project-based systems engineering course

References

• American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council of Measurement in Education. 2014. Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. 2014th ed. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
   Google Scholar
• Arrow, K. 1962. “The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing.” The Review of Economic Studies 29: 155–173.10.2307/2295952
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bedford, S., and S. Legg. 2007. “Formative Peer and Self Feedback as a Catalyst for Change within Science Teaching.” Chemistry Education Research and Practice 8 (1): 80–92. doi:10.1039/b6rp90022d.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birenbaum, M., K. Breuer, E. Cascallar, F. Dochy, Y. Dori, J. Ridgway, and R. Wiesemes. 2006. “A Learning Integrated Assessment System.” Educational Research Review 1 (1): 61–67. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2006.01.001.
   Google Scholar
• Bransford, J. D., and B. S. Stein. 1993. The Ideal Problem Solver: A Guide to Improving Thinking, Learning, and Creativity No Title. 2nd ed. New York: Freeman.
   Google Scholar
• Cheng, W., and M. Warren. 2000. “Making a Difference: Using Peers to Assess Individual Students’ Contributions to a Group Project.” Teaching in Higher Education 5 (2): 243–255. doi:10.1080/135625100114885.
   Google Scholar
• Crawley, E. F., D. R. Brodeur, and D. H. Soderholm. 2008. “The Education of Future Aeronautical Engineers: Conceiving, Designing, Implementing and Operating.” Journal of Science Education and Technology 17 (2): 138–151. doi:10.1007/s10956-008-9088-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crawley, E. F., J. Malmqvist, W. A. Lucas, and D. R. Brodeur. 2011. “The CDIO Syllabus V2.0. an Updated Statement of Goals for Engineering Education.” In Proceedings of 7th International CDIO Conference. Denmark. http://publications.lib.chalmers.se/records/fulltext/local_143186.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• De Graaff, E., and H. P. Christensen. 2004. “Editorial: Theme Issue on Active Learning in Engineering Education.” European Journal of Engineering Education 29 (4): 461–463.10.1080/03043790410001716310
   Google Scholar
• Dewey, J. 1934. Art as Experience. New York: Minton, Balch and Company. http://dcg.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/DEWEY_expressiveObject.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Dori, D. 2002. Object-process Methodology. Berlin: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-56209-9.
   Google Scholar
• Dori, D. 2015. Model-based Systems Engineering with OPM and SysML. New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Dori, Y. J., and A. Silva. 2010. “Assessing International Product Design & Development Graduate Courses: The MIT-Portugal Program.” Advances in Engineering Education 2 (2): 1–30. http://advances.asee.org/vol02/issue02/02.cfm
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, K. A., and Ş. Purzer. 2015. “Validity: Meaning and Relevancy in Assessment for Engineering Education Research.” Journal of Engineering Education 104 (2): 108–118. doi:10.1002/jee.20070.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dym, C. L., A. M. Agogino, O. Eris, D. D. Frey, and L. J. Leifer. 2005. “Engineering Design Thinking, Teaching, and Learning.” Journal of Engineering Education 94 (1): 103–120.10.1002/jee.2005.94.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fulcher, K. H., and M. R. Good. 2013. “The Surprisingly Useful Practice of Meta-assessmen to Title” [Web log post]. National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment. Accessed August 2, 2015. http://illinois.edu/blog/view/915/99344
   Google Scholar
• Hadim, H. A., and S. K. Esche. 2002. “Enhancing the Engineering Curriculum through Project-based Learning.” In Frontiers in Education, 2002. FIE 2002. 32nd Annual. Vol. 2, F3F–1. IEEE. doi:10.1109/FIE.2002.1158200.
   Google Scholar
• Hersam, M. C., M. Luna, and G. Light. 2004. “Implementation of Interdisciplinary Group Learning and Peer Assessment in a Nanotechnology Engineering Course.” Journal of Engineering Education 93 (1): 49–57. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00787.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huber, J. 2015. On the Origins of Gender Inequality. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Johri, A., and B. M. Olds. 2011. “Situated Engineering Learning: Bridging Engineering Education Research and the Learning Sciences.” Journal of Engineering Education 100 (1): 151–185.10.1002/jee.2011.100.issue-1
   Google Scholar
• Kane, M. T. 2013. “Validating the Interpretations and Uses of Test Scores.” Journal of Educational Measurement 50 (1): 1–73. doi:10.1111/jedm.12000.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, M. 2009. “The Impact of an Elaborated Assessee’s Role in Peer Assessment.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 34 (1): 105–114.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kollar, I., and F. Fischer. 2010. “Peer Assessment as Collaborative Learning: A Cognitive Perspective.” Learning and Instruction 20 (4): 344–348. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krathwohl, D. R. 2002. “A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An Overview.” Theory into Practice 41 (4): 212–218. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, N.-F., and D. Carless. 2006. “Peer Feedback: The Learning Element of Peer Assessment.” Teaching in Higher Education 11 (3): 279–290. doi:10.1080/13562510600680582.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonald, B. 2010. “Improving Learning through Meta Assessment.” Active Learning in Higher Education 11 (2): 119–129. doi:10.1177/1469787410365651.
   Google Scholar
• Messick, S. 1990. Validity of Test Interpretation and Use. ERIC. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED395031.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• NCME. n.d. “Validity.” Glossary of Important Assessment and Measurement Terms. https://www.ncme.org/ncme/NCME/Resource_Center/Glossary/NCME/Resource_Center/Glossary1.aspx?hkey=4bb87415-44dc-4088-9ed9-e8515326a061.
   Google Scholar
• Nevo, D. 1995. School-based Evaluation: A Dialogue for School Improvement. Oxford: Pergamon.
   Google Scholar
• NSF. 1998. The Action Agenda for Systemic Engineering Education Reform – NSF 98-27. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/1998/nsf9827/nsf9827.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Olds, B. M., B. M. Moskal, and R. L. Miller. 2005. “Assessment in Engineering Education: Evolution, Approaches and Future Collaborations.” Journal of Engineering Education 94 (1): 13–25. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00826.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OMG UML. 2015. “Unified Modeling LanguageTM (UML®) Version 2.5.” Accessed July 27, 2015. http://www.omg.org/spec/UML/
   Google Scholar
• Opdecam, E., P. Everaert, H. Van Keer, and F. Buysschaert. 2014. “Preferences for Team Learning and Lecture-based Learning among First-year Undergraduate Accounting Students.” Research in Higher Education 55 (4): 400–432.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orem, C. D. 2012. Demonstrating Validity Evidence of Meta-assessment Scores Using Generalizability Theory. Doctoral dissertation, James Madison University.
   Google Scholar
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2013. “The State of Higher Education 2013.” Accessed August 1, 2015. http://www.oecd.org/edu/imhe/thestateofhighereducation2013.htm
   Google Scholar
• Ory, J. C. 1992. “Meta-assessment: Evaluating Assessment Activities.” Research in Higher Education 33 (4): 467–481.10.1007/BF00973767
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pekkarinen, T. 2012. “Gender Differences in Education.” In Nordic Economic Policy Review Conference. Oslo.
   Google Scholar
• Pellegrino, J. W. 2012. “Assessment of Science Learning: Living in Interesting times.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 49 (6): 831–841. doi:10.1002/tea.21032.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reinholz, D. 2015. “The Assessment Cycle: A Model for Learning through Peer Assessment.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 41 (2): 1–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riegle-Crumb, C., B. King, E. Grodsky, and C. Muller. 2012. “The More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same? Prior Achievement Fails to Explain Gender Inequality in Entry into STEM College Majors over Time.” American Educational Research Journal 49 (6): 1048–1073.10.3102/0002831211435229
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riegle-Crumb, C., and C. Moore. 2013. “Examining Gender Inequality in a High School Engineering Course.” American Journal of Engineering Education 4 (1): 7858.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rugarcia, A., R. M. Felder, D. R. Woods, and J. E. Stice. 2000. “The Future of Engineering Education I. A Vision for a New Century.” Chemical Engineering Education 34 (1): 16–25.
   Google Scholar
• Sluijsmans, D. M. A., S. Brand-Gruwel, and J. J. G. van Merriënboer. 2002. “Peer Assessment Training in Teacher Education: Effects on Performance and Perceptions.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 27 (5): 443–454. doi:10.1080/0260293022000009311.
   Google Scholar
• Thomas, D. 2004. “MDA: Revenge of the Modelers or UML Utopia?” IEEE Software 21 (3): 15–17.10.1109/MS.2004.1293067
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Topping, K. J. 1998. “Peer Assessment between Students in Colleges and Universities.” Review of Educational Research 68 (3): 249–276.10.3102/00346543068003249
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Topping, K. J. 2010. “Methodological Quandaries in Studying Process and Outcomes in Peer Assessment.” Learning and Instruction 20 (4): 339–343. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wengrowicz, N., Y. J. Dori, and D. Dori. 2014. “Transactional Distance in an Undergraduate Project-based Systems Modeling Course.” Knowledge-based Systems 71 (6): 41–51. doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2014.05.022.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zohar, A., and Y. J. Dori. 2012. Metacognition in Science Education: Trends in Current Research. Dordrecht: Springer-Verlag.10.1007/978-94-007-2132-6
   Google Scholar