Computer-aided assessment (CAA) has been used at a university with one of the largest mathematics and engineering undergraduate cohorts in the UK for more than ten years. Lecturers teaching mathematics to first year students were asked about their current use of CAA in a questionnaire and in interviews.This paper presents the issues that these lecturers faced as they made use of this assessment tool. Lecturers explained how they attempted to overcome these issues. The findings show that while the lecturers were happy to use the CAA system because it is efficient and timesaving, there were concerns that it might not always be beneficial for students. The bases for lecturers' concerns were that some students developed tendencies to depend on the feedback to complete assessments and to develop procedural, context-dependent strategies for solving problems.

No abstract

Computer-Aided Assessment (CAA) is becoming an increasingly popular method for assessing students in their mathematics courses in higher education. This article examines six lecturers' practices of using CAA on their mathematics courses. The interviews with these lecturers revealed that the CAA system did provide many of the benefits that were promised; however, there were some important aims not satisfied by the system, which limited the scope of its effectiveness. Using a model for effective assessment, which draws upon ideas from the assessment literature and cultural-historical activity theory, the lecturer interviews give an insight into what stops this assessment tool from remaining effective. This study shows that the CAA system was reasonably effective to an extent, and lecturers had achieved a relatively stable practice that they were satisfied to maintain; however, there were shortcomings with the existing system that limited the scope of its effectiveness, which led to diverse practices and a desire to change system.

Objective: We assessed feasibility of an educational program designed to enhance stakeholder knowledge and perceptions of pharmacogenomics at a federally qualified health center (FQHC).Design: FQHCs have a rich history of providing care to the underserved, but often are not represented by studies evaluating cutting-edge concepts. We used a novel educational platform to provide participato­ry genomic testing and classroom education. We assessed participant knowledge and perceptions using questionnaires between May and July 2018.Setting: We partnered with a FQHC affili­ated with an academic medical center in Chicago. Participants: Using convenience sampling, we recruited 20 providers and 10 commu­nity members for a feasibility study. Provid­ers included physicians, physician extend­ers, community health workers, and patient health navigators. Community members were patients, supporters, and/or FQHC advisory board members.Intervention: Participants had the option to undergo personal genomic testing. Online educational modules included basic genet­ics, cardiovascular pharmacogenomics, and personalized medicine. Education conclud­ed in a 2-hour live course with case-based discussions.Main Outcome Measures: Our main out­come was testing pilot feasibility. Baseline knowledge and perceptions were compared with post-intervention assessments using descriptive statistics, t tests (or Wilcoxon rank-sum) for continuous variables and chi-squared (or Fisher’s exact) for categorical variables.Results: We found that attitudes toward the intervention were positive and remained so after intervention. Our intervention was both feasible and acceptable. Genomics knowledge increased for nearly all partici­pants.Conclusions: We have determined that a pharmacogenomics educational program tailored for an underrepresented commu­nity is feasible and acceptable. Outcomes will advise methodology for larger imple­mentation studies. Ethn Dis. 2020;30(Suppl 1):167-176; doi:10.18865/ed.30.S1.167

Computer-Aided Assessment (CAA) is becoming an increasingly popular method for assessing students in their mathematics courses in higher education. This article examines six lecturers' practices of using CAA on their mathematics courses. The interviews with these lecturers revealed that the CAA system did provide many of the benefits that were promised; however, there were some important aims not satisfied by the system, which limited the scope of its effectiveness. Using a model for effective assessment, which draws upon ideas from the assessment literature and cultural-historical activity theory, the lecturer interviews give an insight into what stops this assessment tool from remaining effective. This study shows that the CAA system was reasonably effective to an extent, and lecturers had achieved a relatively stable practice that they were satisfied to maintain; however, there were shortcomings with the existing system that limited the scope of its effectiveness, which led to diverse practices and a desire to change system.