1 |
Backes, B. & Cowan, J. (2019). Is the pen mightier than the keyboard? The effect of online testing on measured student achievement. Economics of Education Review, 68(1), 89-103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2018.12.007
DOI
|
2 |
Bennett, R. E., Braswell, J., Oranje, A., Sandene, B., Kaplan, B., & Yan, F. (2008). Does it Matter if I Take My Mathematics Test on Computer? A Second Empirical Study of Mode Effects in NAEP. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 6(9), 1-38.
|
3 |
Buerger, S., Kroehne, U., Koehler, C., & Goldhammer, F. (2019). What makes the difference? The impact of item properties on mode effects in reading assessments. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 62(3), 1-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2019.04.005
DOI
|
4 |
Clements, D. H. (2020). From exercises and tasks to problems and projects: Unique contributions of computers to innovative mathematics education. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19(1), 9-47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0732-3123(00)00036-5
DOI
|
5 |
Poggio, J., Glasnapp, D., Yang, X., & Poggio, A. (2005). A comparative evaluation of score results from computerized and paper & pencil mathematics testing in a large scale state assessment program. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 3(6).
|
6 |
Ebrahimi, M.R., Toroujeni, S.M., & Shahbazi, V. (2019). Score equivalence, gender difference, and testing mode preference in a comparative study between computer-based testing and paper-based testing. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 14(7), 128-143. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v14i07.10175
DOI
|
7 |
Fishbein, B., Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V., & Foy, P. (2018). The TIMSS 2019 item equivalence study: Examining mode effects for computer-based assessment and implications for measuring trends. Large-scale Assessments in Education, 6(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-018-0064-z
DOI
|
8 |
Geraniou, E., & Jankvist, U. T. (2019). Towards a definition of "mathematical digital competency". Educational Studies in Mathematics, 102(1), 29-45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-019-09893-8
DOI
|
9 |
Heyd-Metzuyanim, E., Sharon, A. J., & Baram-Tsabari, A. (2021). Mathematical media literacy in the COVID-19 pandemic and its relation to school mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 108(1), 201-225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10075-8
DOI
|
10 |
Hoogland, K., & Tout, D. (2018). Computer-based assessment of mathematics into the twenty-first century: pressures and tensions. ZDM, 50(4), 675-686. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11858-018-0944-2
DOI
|
11 |
Hu, L., Chen, G., Li, P., & Huang, J. (2021). Multimedia effect in problem solving: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 33(4), 1717-1747. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1007/s10648-021-09610-z
DOI
|
12 |
Jeong, H. (2014). A comparative study of scores on computer-based tests and paper-based tests. Behaviour & Information Technology, 33(4), 410-422. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2012.710647
DOI
|
13 |
Drasgow, F., & Mattern, K. (2006). New tests and new Items: Opportunities and issues. In D. Bartram, & R. K. Hambleton (Eds.), Computer-based Testing and the Internet: Issues and Advances (pp. 59-76). John Wiley and Sons Ltd.
|
14 |
Jung, H. Y. (2022). Perceptions of students and teachers towards computer based test in National Assessment of Educational Achievement : Focused on high school mathematics test. School Mathematics, 24(1), 119-145. http://doi.org/10.29275/sm.2022.3.24.1.119
DOI
|
15 |
Martin, M. O., von Davier, M., & Mullis, I. V. S. (2020) Methods and Procedures: TIMSS 2019 Technical Report. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.
|
16 |
Karay, Y., Schauber, S., Stosch, C., & Schuttpelz-Brauns, K. (2015). Computer versus paper: Does it make any difference in test performance? Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 27(1), 57-62. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2014.979175
DOI
|
17 |
Kingston, N. (2008). Comparability of computer- and paper-administered multiple-choice tests for K-12 populations: A synthesis. Applied Measurement in Education, 22(1), 22-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957340802558326
DOI
|
18 |
Lee, J. B., Kim, Y. H., Kim, J. S., Nam, M. W., Park, J. S., Park, J. H., Baek, J. H., Sung, K. H., Lee, S. R., Jang, E. S., & Jung, H. Y. (2021). Advancing the test tools for Electronic National Assessment of Educational Achievement (eNAEA). KICE.
|
19 |
Martin, R. (2008). New possibilities and challenges for assessment through theuse of technology. In F. Scheuermann, & G. Pereira (Eds.). Towards a research agenda on computer-based assessment (pp. 6-9). Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
|
20 |
McDonald, A. (2002). The impact of individual differences on the equivalence of computer-based and paper-and-pencil educational assessments. Computers and Education, 39(3), 299-312. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1315(02)00032-5
DOI
|
21 |
Arslan, B., Jiang, Y., Keehner, M., Gong, T., Katz, I. R., & Yan, F. (2020). The Effect of Drag-and-Drop Item Features on Test-Taker Performance and Response Strategies. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 39(2), 96-106. https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12326
DOI
|
22 |
Noyes, J., & Garland, K. (2008). Computer- vs. paper-based tasks: Are they equivalent? Ergonomics, 51(9), 1352-1375. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130802170387
DOI
|
23 |
Russell, M. (1999). Testing on computers: A follow-up study comparing performance on computer and on paper. Boston College.
|
24 |
Spires, H. A., Paul, C. M., & Kerkhoff, S. N. (2019). Digital literacy for the 21st century. In D. B. A. Khosrow-Pou (Ed.). Advanced methodologies and technologies in library science, information management, and scholarly inquiry (pp. 12-21). IGI Global.
|
25 |
Yoo, S. M. (2013). SPSS statistical analysis for writing a thesis. Slow& Steady.
|
26 |
Wang, S., Jiao, H., Young, M. J., Brooks, T., & Olson, J. (2007). A meta-analysis of testing mode effects in grade K-12 mathematics tests. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67(2), 219-238. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164406288166
DOI
|
27 |
Bridgeman, B. (1992). A Comparison of quantitative questions in open-ended and multiple-choice formats. Journal of Educational Measurement, 29(3), 253-271.
DOI
|
28 |
Csapo, B., Ainley, J., Bennett, R. E., Latour, T., & Law, N. (2012). Technological issues for computer-based assessment. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw, & E. Care (Eds.). Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills. Springer.
|
29 |
Eid, G. K. (2005). An investigation into the effects and factors influencing computer-based online math problem-solving in primary schools. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 33(3), 223-240. https://doi.org/10.2190/J3Q5-BAA5-2L62-AEY3
DOI
|
30 |
Pommerich, M. (2004). Developing computerized versions of paper-and-pencil tests: mode effects for passage-based tests. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 2(6), 1-44.
|
31 |
Rose, J., Low-Choy, S., Singh, P., & Vasco, D. (2020). NAPLAN discourses: A systematic review after the first decade. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 41(6), 871-886. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2018.1557111
DOI
|
32 |
Russell, M., & Tao, W. (2004). The influence of computer-print on rater scores. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 9(10), 1-13.
|
33 |
Zilles, C., West, M., Mussulman, D., & Bretl, T. (2018). Making testing less trying: Lessons learned from operating a Computer-Based Testing Facility. In 2018 IEEE Frontiers in Education (FIE) Conference, IEEE.
|
34 |
Scalise, K., & Gifford, B. (2006). Computer-based assessment in E-Learning: A framework for constructing "Internet Constraint" questions and tasks for technology platforms. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 4(6). Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/103254/.
DOI
|
35 |
Shacham, M. (1998). Computer-based exams in undergraduate engineering courses. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 6(3), 201-209.
DOI
|
36 |
Taylor, C., Jamieson, J., Eignor, D. & Kirsch, I. (1998). The Relationship between computer familiarity and performance on computer-based TOEFL test tasks. Educational Testing Service.
|
37 |
Haladyna, T., Downing, S., & Rodriguez, M. (2002). A review of multiple-choice item-writing guidelines for classroom assessment. Applied Measurement in Education, 15(3), 309-333. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15324818AME1503_5
DOI
|
38 |
Schleppegrell, M. J. (2007). The linguistic challenges of mathematics teaching and learning: A research review. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 23(2), 139-159. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573560601158461
DOI
|
39 |
Schoenfeld, A. H. (2017). On learning and assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 24(3), 369-378. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2017.1336986
DOI
|
40 |
Sireci, S. G., & Zenisky, A. L. (2006). Innovative item formats in computer-based testing: In pursuit of improved construct representation. In S. M. Downing, &T. M. Haladyna (Eds.), Handbook of test development (pp. 329-347). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
|
41 |
Lee, S.-G., Ham, Y., Lee, J. H., & Park, K.-E. (2020). A case study on college mathematics education in untact DT era. Communications of Mathematical Education, 34(3), 201-214. https://doi.org/10.7468/JKSMEE.2020.34.3.201
DOI
|
42 |
Horkay, N., Bennett, R., Allen, N., Kaplan, B., &Yan, F. (2006). Does it matter if I take my writing test on computer? An empirical study of mode effects in NAEP. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 5(2). Retrieved from https://ejournals.bc.edu/index.php/jtla/article/view/1641
|
43 |
Jewsbury, P., Finnegan, R., Xi, N., Jia, Y., Rust, K., Burg, S., Donahue, P., Mazzeo, J., Cramer, E. B., & Lin, A. (2017). NAEP transition to digitally based assessments in mathematics and reading at grades 4 and 8: Mode evaluation study. National Center for Education Statistics.
|
44 |
Keng, L., McClarty, K., & Davis, L. (2008). Item-level comparative analysis of online and paper administrations of the texas assessment of knowledge and skills. Applied Measurement in Education, 21(3), 207-226. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957340802161774
DOI
|
45 |
Mcclelland, T., & Cuevas, J. (2020). A comparison of computer based testing and paper and pencil testing in mathematics assessment. The Online Journal of New Horizons in Education, 10(2), 78-89.
|
46 |
Sandene, B., Horkay, N., Bennett, R., Allen, N., Braswell, J., Kaplan, B., & Oranje, A. (2005). Online assessment in mathematics and writing: Reports from the NAEP technology-based assessment project, research and development series. National Center for Education Statistics.
|
47 |
Park, M. (2020). Applications and possibilities of artificial intelligence in mathematics education. Communications of Mathematical Education, 34(4), 545-561. https://doi.org/10.7468/JKSMEE.2020.34.4.545
DOI
|
48 |
Parshall, C. G., Harmes, J. C., Davey, T., & Pashley, P. J. (2009). Innovative items for computerized testing. In W. J. van der Linden (Ed.). Elements of adaptive testing (pp. 215-230). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-85461-8_11
DOI
|