Assessing the ease of use in the environment and markers' acceptance of on screen marking: a Rasch measurement perspective

References

• Andrich, D. (2004). Controversy and the Rasch model: A characteristic of incompatible paradigms? Medical Care, 42(Supplement 1), 1–7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Anshel, M. H., Weatherby, N. L., Kang, M., & Watson, T. (2009). Rasch calibration of a unidimensional perfectionism inventory for sport. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 10, 210–216. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2008.07.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2007). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Bos, W., Goy, M., Howie, S. J., Kupari, P., & Wendt, H. (2011). Editorial: Rasch measurement in educational contexts Special issue 2: Applications of Rasch measurement in large-scale assessments. Educational Research and Evaluation, 17, 413–417. doi: 10.1080/13803611.2011.634580
   Google Scholar
• Chan, A. H. S., So, J. C. Y., & Tsang, S. N. H. (2011). Developing optimum interface design for on-screen Chinese proofreading tasks. In Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Human interface and the management of information: Interacting with information - Volume Part II (pp. 3–10). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, C.-H., & Chien, Y.-H. (2005). Effect of dynamic display and speed of display movement on reading Chinese text presented on a small screen. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 100, 865–873. doi: 10.2466/PMS.100.3.865-873
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coniam, D. (2009a). A comparison of onscreen and paper-based marking in the Hong Kong public examination system. Educational Research and Evaluation, 15, 243–263. doi: 10.1080/13803610902972940
   Google Scholar
• Coniam, D. (2009b). Validating onscreen marking in Hong Kong. Asia Pacific Education Review, 11, 423–431. http://www.springerlink.com/content/l6663m43jn501317/ doi: 10.1007/s12564-009-9068-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coniam, D. (2011). A qualitative examination of the attitudes of Liberal Studies markers towards onscreen marking. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42, 1042–1054. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01136.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coniam, D. (2013). The increasing acceptance of onscreen marking – the “tablet computer” effect. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 16(3).2
   Google Scholar
• Coniam, D., & Yeung, S.-C. A. (2010). Markers’ perceptions regarding the onscreen marking of Liberal Studies in the Hong Kong public examination system. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 30, 249–271. doi: 10.1080/02188791.2010.495836
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319–340. doi: 10.2307/249008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fowles, D., & Adams, C. (2005, September). How does assessment differ when e-marking replaces paper-based marking? Paper presented at the 31st International Association for Educational Assessment Conference, Abuja, Nigeria.
   Google Scholar
• Hart, D. L., & Wright, B. D. (2002). Development of an index of physical functional health status in rehabilitation. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 83, 655–665. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2002.31178
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, M., Nádas, R., & Bell, J. F. (2009). Marking essays on screen: An investigation into the reliability of marking extended subjective texts. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41, 814–826. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00979.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Legislative Council Panel on Education. (2005). Grant to support the modernization and development of the Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority's examination systems (LC Paper No. CB(2)323/05-06(01)). Retrieved from http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr05-06/english/panels/ed/papers/ed1114cb2-323-1e.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Linacre, J. M. (2002). Optimizing rating scale category effectiveness. Journal of Applied Measurement, 3, 85–106.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Linacre, J. M. (2006). A user's guide to WINSTEPS/MINISTEP: Rasch-model computer programs. Chicago, IL: Winsteps.com.
   Google Scholar
• Linacre, J. M. (2011). WINSTEPS: Rasch measurement computer program. Chicago, IL: Winsteps.com.
   Google Scholar
• Muís, K. R., Winne, P. H., & Edwards, O. V. (2009). Modern psychometrics for assessing achievement goal orientation: A Rasch analysis. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 547–576. doi: 10.1348/000709908X383472
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Powers, D., Kubota, M., Bentley, J., Farnum, M., Swartz, R., & Willard, A. (1997). A pilot test of on-line essay scoring (ETS Report RM-97-07). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
   Google Scholar
• Rasch, G. (1960/1980). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. (Copenhagen, Danish Institute for Educational Research), expanded edition (1980) with foreword and afterword by B. D. Wright. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schulz, W., & Fraillon, J. (2011). The analysis of measurement equivalence in international studies using the Rasch model. Educational Research and Evaluation, 17, 447–464. doi: 10.1080/13803611.2011.630559
   Google Scholar
• Shaw, S. (2008). Essay marking on-screen: Implications for assessment validity. E–Learning, 5(3), 256–274. doi: 10.2304/elea.2008.5.3.256
   Google Scholar
• Shaw, S., & Imam, H. (2008, September). On-screen essay marking reliability: Towards an understanding of marker assessment behaviour. Paper presented at the International Association for Educational Assessment Conference, Cambridge, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Törmäkangas, K. (2011). Advantages of the Rasch measurement model in analysing educational tests: An applicator's reflection. Educational Research and Evaluation, 17, 307–320. doi: 10.1080/13803611.2011.630562
   Google Scholar
• Twing, J., Nichols, P., & Harrison, I. (2003, June). The comparability of paper-based and image-based marking of a high-stakes, large-scale writing assessment. Paper presented at the International Association for Educational Assessment Conference, Manchester, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Verhelst, N. D., & Glas, C. A. (1995). The one parameter logistic model. In G. H. Fischer & I. W. Molenaar (Eds.), Rasch models: Foundations, recent developments, and applications (pp. 215–237). New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Wang, W. C. (2000). Modeling effects of differential item functioning in polytomous items. Journal of Applied Measurement, 1, 63–82.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing writing. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wendt, H., Bos, W., & Goy, M. (2011). On applications of Rasch models in international comparative large-scale assessments: A historical review. Educational Research and Evaluation, 17, 419–446. doi: 10.1080/13803611.2011.634582
   Google Scholar
• Wright, B. D. (1992). IRT in the 1990s: Which models work best? Rasch Measurement Transactions, 6, 196–200.
   Google Scholar
• Wright, B. D. (1997). A history of social science measurement. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 16(4), 33–45. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3992.1997.tb00606.x
   Google Scholar
• Yan, Z., & Bond, T. G. (2011). Developing a Rasch measurement physical fitness scale for Hong Kong primary school-aged students. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 15, 182–203. doi: 10.1080/1091367X.2011.590772
   Google Scholar
• Yen, N.-S., Tsai, J.-L., Chen, P.-L., Lin, H.-Y., & Chen, A. L. P. (2011). Effects of typographic variables on eye-movement measures in reading Chinese from a screen. Behaviour & Information Technology, 30, 797–808. doi: 10.1080/0144929X.2010.523900
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, Y., Powers, D., Wright, W., & Morgan, R. (2003). Applying the online scoring network (OSN) to advanced program placement program (AP) Tests (ETS Research Report RR-03-12). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
   Google Scholar
• Zumbo, B. D. (2007). Three generations of DIF analyses: Considering where it has been, where it is now, and where it is going. Language Assessment Quarterly, 4, 223–233.
   Google Scholar
• Zwick, R., Thayer, D. T., & Lewis, C. (1999). An empirical Bayes approach to Mantel-Haenszel DIF analysis. Journal of Educational Measurement, 36, 1–28. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3984.1999.tb00543.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar