我背叛了我的道德原则:调查CS硕士论文的标记实践

M. B. Ada
{"title":"我背叛了我的道德原则:调查CS硕士论文的标记实践","authors":"M. B. Ada","doi":"10.1109/TALE54877.2022.00021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The project or dissertation is the most significant element in a master’s program. Despite the increased regulation and accountability regarding academic standards, there is very little debate on grading practices, particularly dissertation marking. The limited research on the assessment of master’s dissertations indicates the need for more research in that area. This paper presents a study that investigated markers’ (n=31) master’s project dissertations marking practices in Computing Science at a university. Findings also show that many assessors do not typically use marking schemes; the marking load negatively affects their marking. Most would prefer complete anonymity of marking, including blind negotiation. A third of assessors have had issues marking dissertations outside their area of expertise. Thematic analysis of the qualitative data corroborated those findings and revealed three overarching themes: 1) I felt that I betrayed my ethical principles, 2) I tried to acknowledge my bias/familiarity with the topic, and 3) Improving the marking experience, second marking and reconciliation process. The paper highlights four key points to consider to improve the master’s dissertation marking process.","PeriodicalId":369501,"journal":{"name":"2022 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment and Learning for Engineering (TALE)","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"I betrayed my ethical principles: Investigating master’s dissertation marking practices in CS\",\"authors\":\"M. B. Ada\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/TALE54877.2022.00021\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The project or dissertation is the most significant element in a master’s program. Despite the increased regulation and accountability regarding academic standards, there is very little debate on grading practices, particularly dissertation marking. The limited research on the assessment of master’s dissertations indicates the need for more research in that area. This paper presents a study that investigated markers’ (n=31) master’s project dissertations marking practices in Computing Science at a university. Findings also show that many assessors do not typically use marking schemes; the marking load negatively affects their marking. Most would prefer complete anonymity of marking, including blind negotiation. A third of assessors have had issues marking dissertations outside their area of expertise. Thematic analysis of the qualitative data corroborated those findings and revealed three overarching themes: 1) I felt that I betrayed my ethical principles, 2) I tried to acknowledge my bias/familiarity with the topic, and 3) Improving the marking experience, second marking and reconciliation process. The paper highlights four key points to consider to improve the master’s dissertation marking process.\",\"PeriodicalId\":369501,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2022 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment and Learning for Engineering (TALE)\",\"volume\":\"43 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2022 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment and Learning for Engineering (TALE)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/TALE54877.2022.00021\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2022 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment and Learning for Engineering (TALE)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/TALE54877.2022.00021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

项目或论文是硕士课程中最重要的元素。尽管增加了对学术标准的监管和问责制,但对评分实践,特别是论文标记,几乎没有争论。对硕士学位论文评价的研究有限,表明这方面的研究还需要进一步深入。本文对某高校计算机科学专业硕士生项目论文阅卷人(n=31)的阅卷行为进行了调查研究。调查结果还显示,许多评估师通常不使用评分方案;阅卷负荷对他们的阅卷产生负面影响。大多数人更喜欢完全匿名的标记,包括盲目谈判。三分之一的审核员在给他们专业领域以外的论文打分时遇到过问题。定性数据的专题分析证实了这些发现,并揭示了三个主要主题:1)我觉得我背叛了我的道德原则,2)我试图承认我对主题的偏见/熟悉,以及3)改善评分体验,二次评分和协调过程。本文强调了改进硕士学位论文批改过程应考虑的四个要点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
I betrayed my ethical principles: Investigating master’s dissertation marking practices in CS
The project or dissertation is the most significant element in a master’s program. Despite the increased regulation and accountability regarding academic standards, there is very little debate on grading practices, particularly dissertation marking. The limited research on the assessment of master’s dissertations indicates the need for more research in that area. This paper presents a study that investigated markers’ (n=31) master’s project dissertations marking practices in Computing Science at a university. Findings also show that many assessors do not typically use marking schemes; the marking load negatively affects their marking. Most would prefer complete anonymity of marking, including blind negotiation. A third of assessors have had issues marking dissertations outside their area of expertise. Thematic analysis of the qualitative data corroborated those findings and revealed three overarching themes: 1) I felt that I betrayed my ethical principles, 2) I tried to acknowledge my bias/familiarity with the topic, and 3) Improving the marking experience, second marking and reconciliation process. The paper highlights four key points to consider to improve the master’s dissertation marking process.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信