@inproceedings{tarasowa-balanced2013-csedu,
  abstract = {Advantages and disadvantages of a learning assessment based on multiple-choice questions (MCQs) are a long and widely discussed issue in the scientific community. However, in practice this type of questions is very popular due to the possibility of automatic evaluation and scoring. Consequently, an important research question is to exploiting the strengths and mitigate the weaknesses of MCQs. In this work we discuss one particularly important issue of MCQs, namely methods for scoring results in the case, when the MCQ has several correct alternatives (multiple-mark questions, MMQs). We propose a general approach and mathematical model to score MMQs, that aims at recognizing guessing while at the same time resulting in a balanced score. In our approach conventional MCQs are viewed as a particular case of multiple-mark questions, thus, the formulas can be applied to tests mixing MCQs and MMQs. The rational of our approach is that scoring should be based on the guessing level of the question. Our approach can be added as an option, or even as a replacement for manual penalization. We show that our scoring method outperforms existing methods and demonstrate that with synthetic and real experiments.},
  added-at = {2024-06-18T09:45:58.000+0200},
  author = {Tarasowa, Darya and Auer, S{\"o}ren},
  bdsk-url-1 = {http://svn.aksw.org/papers/2013/CSEDU2013_Balanced_scoring/public.pdf},
  biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2d1a190fc66c42761d5063f158eb044cf/aksw},
  booktitle = {5th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2013 )},
  interhash = {f8a3dc1d3681cda05963049089c040be},
  intrahash = {d1a190fc66c42761d5063f158eb044cf},
  keywords = {2013 auer event_csedu group_aksw lod2page peer-reviewed slidewiki tarasowa},
  owner = {tarasowa},
  timestamp = {2024-06-18T09:45:58.000+0200},
  title = {Balanced scoring method for multiple-mark questions},
  url = {http://svn.aksw.org/papers/2013/CSEDU2013_Balanced_scoring/public.pdf},
  year = 2013
}

@inproceedings{tarasowa-balanced2013-csedu,
  abstract = {Advantages and disadvantages of a learning assessment based on multiple-choice questions (MCQs) are a long and widely discussed issue in the scientific community. However, in practice this type of questions is very popular due to the possibility of automatic evaluation and scoring. Consequently, an important research question is to exploiting the strengths and mitigate the weaknesses of MCQs. In this work we discuss one particularly important issue of MCQs, namely methods for scoring results in the case, when the MCQ has several correct alternatives (multiple-mark questions, MMQs). We propose a general approach and mathematical model to score MMQs, that aims at recognizing guessing while at the same time resulting in a balanced score. In our approach conventional MCQs are viewed as a particular case of multiple-mark questions, thus, the formulas can be applied to tests mixing MCQs and MMQs. The rational of our approach is that scoring should be based on the guessing level of the question. Our approach can be added as an option, or even as a replacement for manual penalization. We show that our scoring method outperforms existing methods and demonstrate that with synthetic and real experiments.},
  added-at = {2023-04-25T16:34:50.000+0200},
  author = {Tarasowa, Darya and Auer, S{\"o}ren},
  bdsk-url-1 = {http://svn.aksw.org/papers/2013/CSEDU2013\_Balanced\_scoring/public.pdf},
  biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2d1a190fc66c42761d5063f158eb044cf/dice-research},
  booktitle = {5th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2013 )},
  interhash = {f8a3dc1d3681cda05963049089c040be},
  intrahash = {d1a190fc66c42761d5063f158eb044cf},
  keywords = {2013 auer event\_csedu group\_aksw lod2page peer-reviewed slidewiki tarasowa},
  owner = {tarasowa},
  timestamp = {2023-04-25T16:34:50.000+0200},
  title = {Balanced scoring method for multiple-mark questions},
  url = {http://svn.aksw.org/papers/2013/CSEDU2013_Balanced_scoring/public.pdf},
  year = 2013
}

@inproceedings{DBLP:conf/csedu/TarasowaA13,
  added-at = {2021-02-19T12:10:28.000+0100},
  author = {Tarasowa, Darya and Auer, S{\"{o}}ren},
  bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, https://dblp.org},
  biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/24e0672ac9d7e421b8ead16ff2f6b3fc5/soeren},
  booktitle = {{CSEDU} 2013 - Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on
               Computer Supported Education, Aachen, Germany, 6-8 May, 2013},
  crossref = {DBLP:conf/csedu/2013},
  doi = {10.5220/0004384304110416},
  editor = {Foley, Owen and Restivo, Maria Teresa and Uhomoibhi, James Onohuome and Helfert, Markus},
  interhash = {f8a3dc1d3681cda05963049089c040be},
  intrahash = {4e0672ac9d7e421b8ead16ff2f6b3fc5},
  isbn = {978-989-8565-53-2},
  keywords = {imported myown},
  pages = {411--416},
  publisher = {SciTePress},
  timestamp = {2021-02-19T12:10:28.000+0100},
  title = {Balanced Scoring Method for Multiple-mark Questions},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.5220/0004384304110416},
  year = 2013
}

@inproceedings{tarasowa-balanced2013-csedu,
  abstract = {Advantages and disadvantages of a learning assessment based on multiple-choice
	questions (MCQs) are a long and widely discussed issue in the scientific
	community. However, in practice this type of questions is very popular
	due to the possibility of automatic evaluation and scoring. Consequently,
	an important research question is to exploiting the strengths and
	mitigate the weaknesses of MCQs. In this work we discuss one particularly
	important issue of MCQs, namely methods for scoring results in the
	case, when the MCQ has several correct alternatives (multiple-mark
	questions, MMQs). We propose a general approach and mathematical
	model to score MMQs, that aims at recognizing guessing while at the
	same time resulting in a balanced score. In our approach conventional
	MCQs are viewed as a particular case of multiple-mark questions,
	thus, the formulas can be applied to tests mixing MCQs and MMQs.
	The rational of our approach is that scoring should be based on the
	guessing level of the question. Our approach can be added as an option,
	or even as a replacement for manual penalization. We show that our
	scoring method outperforms existing methods and demonstrate that
	with synthetic and real experiments.},
  added-at = {2017-01-27T23:28:47.000+0100},
  author = {Tarasowa, Darya and Auer, S{\"o}ren},
  bdsk-url-1 = {http://svn.aksw.org/papers/2013/CSEDU2013_Balanced_scoring/public.pdf},
  biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2d1a190fc66c42761d5063f158eb044cf/soeren},
  booktitle = {5th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2013 )},
  interhash = {f8a3dc1d3681cda05963049089c040be},
  intrahash = {d1a190fc66c42761d5063f158eb044cf},
  keywords = {2013 auer event_csedu group_aksw lod2page peer-reviewed slidewiki tarasowa},
  owner = {tarasowa},
  timestamp = {2017-01-27T23:30:12.000+0100},
  title = {Balanced scoring method for multiple-mark questions},
  url = {http://svn.aksw.org/papers/2013/CSEDU2013_Balanced_scoring/public.pdf},
  year = 2013
}

@inproceedings{conf/csedu/TarasowaA13,
  added-at = {2013-10-23T00:00:00.000+0200},
  author = {Tarasowa, Darya and Auer, Sören},
  biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/25c29dcf433fbe399d80bc016c4d7fca4/dblp},
  booktitle = {CSEDU},
  crossref = {conf/csedu/2013},
  editor = {Foley, Owen and Restivo, Maria Teresa and Uhomoibhi, James Onohuome and Helfert, Markus},
  ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.5220/0004384304110416},
  interhash = {f8a3dc1d3681cda05963049089c040be},
  intrahash = {5c29dcf433fbe399d80bc016c4d7fca4},
  isbn = {978-989-8565-53-2},
  keywords = {dblp},
  pages = {411-416},
  publisher = {SciTePress},
  timestamp = {2013-10-24T11:35:10.000+0200},
  title = {Balanced Scoring Method for Multiple-mark Questions.},
  url = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/db/conf/csedu/csedu2013.html#TarasowaA13},
  year = 2013
}