IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/brc/journl/v53y2021i3p24-28.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Online Versus Traditional Assessment In Higher Education

Author

Listed:
  • Ramona Elena ChiÈ›u

    (Constantin Brancoveanu University)

Abstract

Assessing higher education students™ knowledge has been subject to criticism for many years, hence the wide array of suggestions of evaluation methods put forward by scholars and teachers alike. The shift to online teaching has brought along the shift to online assessment, which, if carefully performed and well monitored and followed-up, can prove to be a useful means for bringing to a standstill the memorization of information in isolated and unlinked chunks, most of which were to be quickly forgotten, shortly after the exam. This paper aims to make a comparison between traditional and online assessment and to outline the benefits and drawbacks of each, based on some students™ point of view. Notwithstanding the efficiency and reliability of old-paradigm, time-constrained written tests, we aim to suggest a number of ways in which assessment can be improved.

Suggested Citation

  • Ramona Elena ChiÈ›u, 2021. "Online Versus Traditional Assessment In Higher Education," Management Strategies Journal, Constantin Brancoveanu University, vol. 53(3), pages 24-28.
    • Handle: RePEc:brc:journl:v:53:y:2021:i:3:p:24-28
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.strategiimanageriale.ro/papers/210303.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    e-assessment; motivation; memorization; leaners? knowledge; theory-based; authenticity;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:brc:journl:v:53:y:2021:i:3:p:24-28. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Dan MICUDA (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.univcb.ro/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.