Improving Accountability Models by Using Technology-Enabled Knowledge Systems (TEKS). CSE Report 656
Saved in:
| Title: | Improving Accountability Models by Using Technology-Enabled Knowledge Systems (TEKS). CSE Report 656 |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Baker, Eva L., California Univ., Los Angeles. Center for the Study of Evaluation. |
| Source: | National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST). 2005. |
| Availability: | Center for the Study of Evaluation (CSE)/National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST), 300 Charles E. Young Drive North, GSE&IS Bldg., 3rd Flr./Mailbox 951522, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1522. Tel: 310-206-1532. |
| Peer Reviewed: | N |
| Page Count: | 30 |
| Publication Date: | 2005 |
| Sponsoring Agency: | Institute of Education Sciences (ED), Washington, DC. |
| Document Type: | Reports - Research |
| Descriptors: | Evaluation Criteria, Accountability, Information Technology, Models, Feedback, Decision Making, Computer Security, Information Management, Management Information Systems |
| Abstract: | This paper addresses accountability and the role emerging technologies can play in improving education. The connection between accountability and technology can be best summarized in one term: feedback. Technological supports provide ways of designing, collecting and sharing information in order to provide the basis for the improvement of systems and outcomes. Because technological options are so varied and the future of their development unpredictable, the paper argues that the first screen for the review of technology is one addressing core functions that technology serves. Technologies can provide greater efficiency in managing information or serve to improve the quality of the information used to guide the system. At this point, these functions are frequently mutually exclusive, but in the future, wise selection of technology should involve a consideration of how the technology adds value by increasing quality and efficiency in the enterprise. Quality is added when more knowledge is available to the user. For choices that need to be made about investments, a set of criteria is provided to guide decision logic. Criteria include validity, accuracy, and utility, with an emphasis on users directly involved in learning (students and teachers). In addition, criteria are reviewed related to software/hardware operation, including security, backup, compatibility, resilience, and transparency. The assumption is that systematic application of criteria will influence the market to drive development of more useful systems for education at a cost that can be withstood. Throughout, examples of technology uses now and soon to be available are discussed. The paper concludes with two extended educational scenarios constructed to show elements of design and technology in practice in two very different settings. |
| Abstractor: | ERIC |
| Number of References: | 38 |
| Entry Date: | 2005 |
| Accession Number: | ED488718 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| FullText | Text: Availability: 0 CustomLinks: – Url: https://eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED488718 Name: ERIC Full Text Category: fullText Text: Full Text from ERIC |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: ED488718 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Report PubTypeId: report PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Improving Accountability Models by Using Technology-Enabled Knowledge Systems (TEKS). CSE Report 656 – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Baker%2C+Eva+L%2E%22">Baker, Eva L.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22California+Univ%2E%2C+Los+Angeles%2E+Center+for+the+Study+of+Evaluation%2E%22">California Univ., Los Angeles. Center for the Study of Evaluation.</searchLink> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22National+Center+for+Research+on+Evaluation%2C+Standards%2C+and+Student+Testing+%28CRESST%29%22"><i>National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST)</i></searchLink>. 2005. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: Center for the Study of Evaluation (CSE)/National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST), 300 Charles E. Young Drive North, GSE&IS Bldg., 3rd Flr./Mailbox 951522, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1522. Tel: 310-206-1532. – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: N – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 30 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2005 – Name: SourceSuprt Label: Sponsoring Agency Group: SrcSuprt Data: Institute of Education Sciences (ED), Washington, DC. – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Reports - Research – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Evaluation+Criteria%22">Evaluation Criteria</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Accountability%22">Accountability</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Information+Technology%22">Information Technology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Models%22">Models</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Feedback%22">Feedback</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Decision+Making%22">Decision Making</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Computer+Security%22">Computer Security</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Information+Management%22">Information Management</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Management+Information+Systems%22">Management Information Systems</searchLink> – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: This paper addresses accountability and the role emerging technologies can play in improving education. The connection between accountability and technology can be best summarized in one term: feedback. Technological supports provide ways of designing, collecting and sharing information in order to provide the basis for the improvement of systems and outcomes. Because technological options are so varied and the future of their development unpredictable, the paper argues that the first screen for the review of technology is one addressing core functions that technology serves. Technologies can provide greater efficiency in managing information or serve to improve the quality of the information used to guide the system. At this point, these functions are frequently mutually exclusive, but in the future, wise selection of technology should involve a consideration of how the technology adds value by increasing quality and efficiency in the enterprise. Quality is added when more knowledge is available to the user. For choices that need to be made about investments, a set of criteria is provided to guide decision logic. Criteria include validity, accuracy, and utility, with an emphasis on users directly involved in learning (students and teachers). In addition, criteria are reviewed related to software/hardware operation, including security, backup, compatibility, resilience, and transparency. The assumption is that systematic application of criteria will influence the market to drive development of more useful systems for education at a cost that can be withstood. Throughout, examples of technology uses now and soon to be available are discussed. The paper concludes with two extended educational scenarios constructed to show elements of design and technology in practice in two very different settings. – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: ERIC – Name: Ref Label: Number of References Group: RefInfo Data: 38 – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2005 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: ED488718 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=ED488718 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 30 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Evaluation Criteria Type: general – SubjectFull: Accountability Type: general – SubjectFull: Information Technology Type: general – SubjectFull: Models Type: general – SubjectFull: Feedback Type: general – SubjectFull: Decision Making Type: general – SubjectFull: Computer Security Type: general – SubjectFull: Information Management Type: general – SubjectFull: Management Information Systems Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Improving Accountability Models by Using Technology-Enabled Knowledge Systems (TEKS). CSE Report 656 Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: California Univ., Los Angeles. Center for the Study of Evaluation. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Baker, Eva L. IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 07 Type: published Y: 2005 Titles: – TitleFull: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST) Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
