{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,6,19]],"date-time":"2025-06-19T04:52:39Z","timestamp":1750308759414,"version":"3.41.0"},"reference-count":8,"publisher":"Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)","issue":"4","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2008,11,30]],"date-time":"2008-11-30T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1228003200000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.acm.org\/publications\/policies\/copyright_policy#Background"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["dl.acm.org"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["SIGCSE Bull."],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2008,11,30]]},"abstract":"<jats:p>Critiquing the negative consequences of journal impact factor measurement on software engineering researchers, Offut has noted the amount of time many of us spend measuring and observed that \"measurement is very difficult\" [1]. Then proceeding to critique our measurements in the teaching context he asserted, \"We assign students grades in classes (a process once described as 'an inadequate report of an inaccurate judgment by a biased and variable judge of the extent to which a student has attained an undefined level of mastery of an unknown proportion of an indefinite amount of material')\" [1].<\/jats:p>\n          <jats:p>This paints a rather dismal picture of the grading process? Yet as computing educators can we really refute this argument?<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1145\/1473195.1473201","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2008,12,10]],"date-time":"2008-12-10T15:32:31Z","timestamp":1228923151000},"page":"13-15","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1145\/crossmark-policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":1,"title":["Thinking issues"],"prefix":"10.1145","volume":"40","author":[{"given":"Tony","family":"Clear","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand"}]}],"member":"320","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2008,11,30]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_2_1_1_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/stvr.v18:1"},{"first-page":"266","volume-title":"McGraw-Hill)","author":"Myer","key":"e_1_2_1_2_1"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_3_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Tan K. and Prosser M. Qualitatively different ways of differentiating student achievement: a phenomenographic study of academics' conceptions of grade descriptors. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. 267--282.  Tan K. and Prosser M. Qualitatively different ways of differentiating student achievement: a phenomenographic study of academics' conceptions of grade descriptors. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. 267--282.","DOI":"10.1080\/0260293042000188230"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_4_1","first-page":"21","author":"Barker A.","year":"1995","journal-title":"Palmerson North"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_5_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Hager P. and Gonczi A. General issues about assessment of competence. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 19 (1). 3--17.  Hager P. and Gonczi A. General issues about assessment of competence. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 19 (1). 3--17.","DOI":"10.1080\/0260293940190101"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_6_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1145\/1352135.1352226"},{"volume-title":"Conferences in Research and Practice in Information Technology, 52","author":"Whalley J.","key":"e_1_2_1_7_1"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_8_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1145\/1404520.1404531"}],"container-title":["ACM SIGCSE Bulletin"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/dl.acm.org\/doi\/10.1145\/1473195.1473201","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/dl.acm.org\/doi\/pdf\/10.1145\/1473195.1473201","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,6,18]],"date-time":"2025-06-18T20:22:26Z","timestamp":1750278146000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/dl.acm.org\/doi\/10.1145\/1473195.1473201"}},"subtitle":["assessment in computing education: measuring performance or conformance?"],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2008,11,30]]},"references-count":8,"journal-issue":{"issue":"4","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2008,11,30]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1145\/1473195.1473201"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1145\/1473195.1473201","relation":{},"ISSN":["0097-8418"],"issn-type":[{"type":"print","value":"0097-8418"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2008,11,30]]},"assertion":[{"value":"2008-11-30","order":2,"name":"published","label":"Published","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}}]}}