Components and Design Alternatives in E-Assessment Systems

  • Michael StrieweEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11681)


In the domain of e-learning and e-assessment, many different components are used to realise particular system features. Even for similar features using similar components there are different ways of realisation in terms of connection and integration. This paper presents results from literature review and design-space explorations that result in a catalogue of components and an overview on design alternatives.


  1. 1.
    Dagger, D., O’Connor, A., Lawless, S., Walsh, E., Wade, V.P.: Service-oriented e-learning platforms: from monolithic systems to flexible services. IEEE Internet Comput. 11(3), 28–35 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gusev, M., Ristov, S., Armenski, G., Velkoski, G., Bozinoski, K.: E-assessment cloud solution: architecture, organization and cost model. iJET 8(Special Issue 2), 55–64 (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Harrer, A., Pinkwart, N., McLaren, B.M., Scheuer, O.: The scalable adapter design pattern: enabling interoperability between educational software tools. TLT 1(2), 131–143 (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    García-Holgado, A., García-Peñalvo, F.J.: Architectural pattern to improve the definition and implementation of elearning ecosystems. Sci. Comput. Program. 129, 20–34 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Devedzic, V., Harrer, A.: Architectural patterns in pedagogical agents. In: Cerri, S.A., Gouardères, G., Paraguaçu, F. (eds.) ITS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2363, pp. 81–90. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). Scholar
  6. 6.
    Amelung, M., Krieger, K., Rösner, D.: E-assessment as a service. IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol. 4, 162–174 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Armenski, G., Gusev, M.: E-testing based on service oriented architecture. In: Proceedings of the 10th CAA Conference (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bridgeman, S., Goodrich, M.T., Kobourov, S.G., Tamassia, R.: PILOT: an interactive tool for learning and grading. In: Proceedings of the 31st SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, pp. 139–143 (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cheniti-Belcadhi, L., Henze, N., Braham, R.: Implementation of a personalized assessment web service. In: Sixth International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), pp. 586–590 (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Costa, E., Silva, P., Silva, M., Silva, E., Santos, A.: A multiagent-based ITS using multiple viewpoints for propositional logic. In: Cerri, S.A., Clancey, W.J., Papadourakis, G., Panourgia, K. (eds.) ITS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7315, pp. 640–641. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). Scholar
  11. 11.
    El-Sheikh, E., Sticklen, J.: Generating intelligent tutoring systems from reusable components and knowledge-based systems. In: Cerri, S.A., Gouardères, G., Paraguaçu, F. (eds.) ITS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2363, pp. 199–207. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). Scholar
  12. 12.
    Goguadze, G., Melis, E.: Combining evaluative and generative diagnosis in ACTIVEMATH. In: AIED, pp. 668–670 (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gonzalez-Sanchez, J., et al.: A system architecture for affective meta intelligent tutoring systems. In: Trausan-Matu, S., Boyer, K.E., Crosby, M., Panourgia, K. (eds.) ITS 2014. LNCS, vol. 8474, pp. 529–534. Springer, Cham (2014). Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hatzilygeroudis, I., Koutsojannis, C., Papavlasopoulos, C., Prentzas, J.: Knowledge-based adaptive assessment in a web-based intelligent educational system. In: Sixth International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), pp. 651–655 (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kenfack, C., Nkambou, R., Robert, S., Tato, A.A.N., Brisson, J., Kissok, P.: A brief overview of logic-muse, an intelligent tutoring system for logical reasoning skills. In: Micarelli, A., et al. (eds.) Intelligent Tutoring Systems, ITS 2016, LNCS, vol. 9684, pp. 511–513 (2016). Scholar
  16. 16.
    Martens, A.: Time in the adaptive tutoring process model. In: Ikeda, M., Ashley, K.D., Chan, T.-W. (eds.) ITS 2006. LNCS, vol. 4053, pp. 134–143. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). Scholar
  17. 17.
    Martin, B.: Authoring educational games with greenmind. In: Woolf, B.P., Aïmeur, E., Nkambou, R., Lajoie, S. (eds.) ITS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5091, pp. 684–686. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). Scholar
  18. 18.
    Murray, T.: Having it all, maybe: design tradeoffs in ITS authoring tools. In: Frasson, C., Gauthier, G., Lesgold, A. (eds.) ITS 1996. LNCS, vol. 1086, pp. 93–101. Springer, Heidelberg (1996). Scholar
  19. 19.
    Richter, T., Boehringer, D.: Towards electronic exams in undergraduate engineering. In: IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), pp. 196–201 (2014)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rickel, J.W.: Intelligent computer-aided instruction: a survey organized around system components. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 19(1), 40–57 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Siddiqi, R., Harrison, C.J., Siddiqi, R.: Improving teaching and learning through automated short-answer marking. TLT 3(3), 237–249 (2010)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Weng, M.M., Fakinlede, I., Lin, F., Shih, T.K., Chang, M.: A conceptual design of multi-agent based personalized quiz game. In: 11th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), pp. 19–21 (2011)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Davies, W.M., Howard, Y., Davis, H.C., Millard, D.E., Sclater, N.: Aggregating assessment tools in a service oriented architecture. In: 9th International CAA Conference (2005)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Devedzic, V., Radovic, D., Jerinic, L.: On the notion of components for intelligent tutoring systems. In: Goettl, B.P., Halff, H.M., Redfield, C.L., Shute, V.J. (eds.) ITS 1998. LNCS, vol. 1452, pp. 504–513. Springer, Heidelberg (1998). Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kurup, M., Greer, J.E., McCalla, G.I.: The Fawlty article tutor. In: Frasson, C., Gauthier, G., McCalla, G.I. (eds.) ITS 1992. LNCS, vol. 608, pp. 84–91. Springer, Heidelberg (1992). Scholar
  26. 26.
    Neji, M., Ben Ammar, M.: Agent-based collaborative affective e-learning framework. Electron. J. e-Learn. 5(2), 123–134 (2007)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zschaler, S., White, S., Hodgetts, K., Chapman, M.: Modularity for automated assessment: a design-space exploration. In: Combined Proceedings of the Workshops of the German Software Engineering Conference (SE) (2018)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Iffländer, L., Dallmann, A., Daniel-Beck, P., Ifland, M.: PABS - a programming assignment feedback system. In: Proceedings of the Second Workshop “Automatische Bewertung von Programmieraufgaben” (2015)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Striewe, M.: An architecture for modular grading and feedback generation for complex exercises. Sci. Comput. Program. 129, 35–47 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Casany, M.J., et al.: Moodbile: a framework to integrate m-learning applications with the LMS. J. Res. Pract. Inf. Technol. 44(2), 129–149 (2012)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    IMS learning tools integration specification. IMS Global Learning Consortium Std., Rev. 1.1.1 (2012)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Núñez, A., Fernández, J., Garcia, J.D., Prada, L., Carretero, J.: M-PLAT: multi-programming language adaptive tutor. In: Eighth IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), pp. 649–651 (2008)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Pardo, A.: A multi-agent platform for automatic assignment management. In: Proceedings of the 7th Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE), pp. 60–64 (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.paluno - The Ruhr Institute for Software TechnologyUniversity of Duisburg-EssenEssenGermany

Personalised recommendations