Pedagogical, Ethical, and Psychometric Orientations of Digital Assessment Applications within a Conceptual Framework
Abstract
This study aims to examine the criticisms and development suggestions expressed in the academic literature regarding digital assessment and evaluation applications, and the application orientations around which these applications are structured. The research was conducted using a mixed-content analysis approach that combines qualitative thematic coding with quantitative descriptive indicators. The dataset was created from peer-reviewed academic publications on digital assessment tools. Studies were searched in Scopus, Web of Science, ERIC, and Google Scholar databases using the keywords digital assessment, e-exam, e-portfolio, and learning analytics assessment, and selected according to predetermined inclusion criteria. In the analysis process, open, axial, and selective coding stages were applied; the obtained themes were classified within categories based on the pedagogical goals of digital assessment applications, the types of technology used, assessment strategies, and ethical-psychometric principles. The coding process was carried out by two researchers, and inter-coder agreement was checked with comparative evaluation. Qualitative thematic results were supported by frequency and trend analyses. The findings show that data security and access inequality issues are prominent in the literature, and that digital assessment applications largely focus on low and medium-level cognitive skills. Furthermore, the findings reveal that digital assessment processes are structured according to different application orientations based on pedagogical, ethical, and technological dimensions.
Keywords
References
- Andrade, H., & Du, Y. (2007). Student responses to criteria‐referenced self‐assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(2), 159–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930600801928
- Barrett, H. C. (2007). Researching Electronic Portfolios and Learner Engagement: The REFLECT Initiative. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 50(6), 436–449. https://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.50.6.2
- Bearman, M., Dawson, P., Ajjawi, R., Tai, J., & Boud, D. (2020). Re-imagining university assessment in a digital world. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(5), 785–798.
- Bennett, R. (2015). The changing nature of educational assessment. Review of Research in Education.
- Bennett, R., Dawson, P., Bearman, M., Molloy, E., & Boud, D. (2017). How technology shapes assessment design.
- Biggs, J. B., & Tang, C. S. (with Society for Research into Higher Education). (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does (4th edition). McGraw-Hill/Society for Research into Higher Education/Open University Press.
- Biggs, J. B., Biggs, J. B., & Collis, K. F. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy (structure of the observed learning outcome). Academic Press.
- Bozkurt, A., & Sharma, R. C. (2020). Emergency remote teaching in a time of global crisis due to CoronaVirus pandemic. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.3778083
Details
Primary Language
English
Subjects
Measurement and Evaluation in Education (Other)
Journal Section
Research Article
Authors
İsmail Demir
*
0000-0001-9756-1901
Türkiye
Publication Date
May 15, 2026
Submission Date
August 4, 2025
Acceptance Date
April 24, 2026
Published in Issue
Year 2026 Volume: 15 Number: 1