Open Access
SHS Web Conf.
Volume 149, 2022
International Conference on Social Science 2022 “Integrating Social Science Innovations on Post Pandemic Through Society 5.0” (ICSS 2022)
Article Number 01037
Number of page(s) 5
Section Education and Digital Learning
Published online 18 November 2022
  1. D. Ellis, Aligning Learning Outcomes, Assessments and Teaching Methods, Canada: Teaching Excellence Academy workshop, University of Waterloo, (2007). [Google Scholar]
  2. K. Trigwell and M. Prosser, “Improving the quality of student learning: the influence of learning context and student approaches to learning-on- learning outcomes,” Higher Education, vol. 22(3), pp. 251–266, October (1991). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. K. L. Gustafson and R. M. Branch, “What is instructional design,” Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technol., pp.16–25, (2002). [Google Scholar]
  4. H. Torrance, “Assessment as learning? How the use of explicit learning objectives, assessment criteria and feedback in post‐secondary education and training can come to dominate learning,” Assess. in Education, vol. 14(3), pp. 281–294, November (2007). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. T. A. Angelo and K. P. Cross, Classroom Assessment Techniques: A Handbookfor College Teachers, San Francisco: Jossey-Bas, (1993). [Google Scholar]
  6. W. B. Sabtiawan, L. Yuanita, and Y. S. Rahayu, Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Authentic Assessment on Students’ Attitudes,” JPPS (Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan Sains), vol. 3(1), pp. 282–285, (2017). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. L. M. Earl, Assessment as Learning: Using Classroom Assessment to Maximize Student Learning, Corwin Press, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  8. K. Izci and G. Caliskan, “Development of Prospective Teachers’ Conceptions of Assessment and Choices of Assessment Tasks,” Int. J. of Res. in Education and Sci., vol. 3(2), pp.464–474, July (2017). [Google Scholar]
  9. L. A. Shepard, “The Role of Assessment in a Learning Culture,”Educational researcher, vol. 29(7), pp. 4–14, October (2000). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. J. R. Fraenkel, N. E. Wallen, H. H. Hyun, how to design and evaluate research in education, (MacGraw-Hill, New York, 2012). [Google Scholar]
  11. Campbell, Steve, Melanie Greenwood, Sarah Prior, Toniele Shearer, Kerrie Walkem, Sarah Young, Danielle Bywaters, and Kim Walker. “Purposive sampling: complex or simple? Research case examples.” Journal of research in Nursing 25, no. 8 (2020): 652–661. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. Guarte, Jacqueline M., and Erniel B. Barrios. “Estimation under purposive sampling.” Communications in Statistics- Simulation and Computation 35, no. 2 (2006): 277–284. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. Etikan, Ilker, Sulaiman Abubakar Musa, and Rukayya Sunusi Alkassim. “Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling.” American journal of theoretical andapplied statistics 5, no. 1 (2016): 1–4. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  14. Schmidt, Christiane. “The analysis of semi- structured interviews.” A companion to qualitative research 253, no. 258 (2004): 7619–7374. [Google Scholar]
  15. Newcomer, Kathryn E., Harry P. Hatry, and Joseph S. Wholey. “Conducting semi-structured interviews.” Handbook of practical program evaluation 492 (2015): 492. [Google Scholar]
  16. Carruthers, John. “A Rationale for the Use of Semi‐structured Interviews.” Journal of Educational Administration (1990). [Google Scholar]
  17. Rabiee, Fatemeh. “Focus-group interview and data analysis.” Proceedings of the nutrition society 63, no. 4 (2004): 655–660. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  18. Crehan, Kevin. “Performance Assessment: Comparative Advantages.” (1991). [Google Scholar]
  19. Darling-Hammond, Linda. “Performance-based assessment and educational equity.” Harvard educational review 64, no. 1 (1994): 5–31. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  20. Valentine, Nyoli, Steven J. Durning, Ernst Michael Shanahan, Cees van der Vleuten, and Lambert Schuwirth. “The pursuit of fairness in assessment: Looking beyond the objective.” Medical Teacher (2022): 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  21. Camilli, Gregory. “Test fairness.” Educational measurement 4 (2006): 221–256. [Google Scholar]
  22. Gipps, Caroline, and Gordon Stobart. “Fairness in assessment.” In Educational assessment in the 21st century, pp. 105–118. Springer, Dordrecht, (2009). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.