Category Archives: short-answer free text questions

Answer matching for short-answer questions: simple but not that simple

In describing our use of  (simple) PMatch for answer matching for short-answer free-text questions, I may have made it sound too simple. I’ll give two examples of the sorts of things you need to consider: Firstly, consider the question shown … Continue reading

Posted in short-answer free text questions | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Short-answer questions : how far can you go?

Finally for today, I’d like to talk about where I believe the limits currently sit in the use of short-answer free-text questions. I have written questions where the correct response requires three separate concepts. For example, I have written a … Continue reading

Posted in short-answer free text questions | Tagged | Leave a comment

Short-answer questions : when humans mark more accurately than computers

Hot on the heals of my previous post, I’d like to make it clear that human markers sometimes do better than computers in marking short-answer [less than 20 word] free-text questions.  I have found this to be the case in two situations … Continue reading

Posted in human marking, short-answer free text questions | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Short-answer questions : when computers mark more accurately than humans

Back to short-answer free-text questions. One of the startling findings of my work in this area was that computerised marking (whether provided by Intelligent Assessment Technologies’ FreeText Author or OpenMark PMatch) was consistently more accurate and reliable than human markers. At the time, … Continue reading

Posted in human marking, short-answer free text questions | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Helpful and unhelpful feedback : a story of sandstone

One of the general findings that is coming out of my evaluation of student responses to multi-try e-assessment questions relates to that wonderful thing that I’ll call the ‘Law of unintended consequences’. I used to think that ‘students don’t read … Continue reading

Posted in feedback, short-answer free text questions, student engagement | Tagged , , , | 4 Comments

decease or decrease?

Back in 2007, we were observing students attempting our short-answer free-text e-assessment questions in a Usability Laboratory. One student repeatedly typed ‘decease’ instead of ‘decrease’ and he didn’t realise he was doing it. At the time, the answer matching was linguistically … Continue reading

Posted in short-answer free text questions, student engagement | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Spelling mistakes in student responses to short-answer free-text e-assessment questions

I get asked a lot about how the answer-matching copes with poorly spelt responses to our short-answer free-text responses, and this is certainly something that used to worry me. Fortunately all the evidence is that our answer matching has coped remarkably well with poor … Continue reading

Posted in short-answer free text questions, student engagement | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

More on length of student answers

So what else affects the length of student responses to short-answer free-text questions?

Posted in short-answer free text questions, student engagement | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

How long is short?

I’ve been looking at student responses to our short-answer free-text questions. I’ll start by considering something simple; how long are the responses?

Posted in short-answer free text questions, student engagement, Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

Counting counts but syntax sucks

The quote I’ve used as the title of this post has been attributed to the late Professor Roger Needham at the University of Cambridge. I can’t believe I’ve been blogging for two months and am only now mentioning our work with … Continue reading

Posted in short-answer free text questions | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment