Crunch: Automated Assessment of Microservice Architecture Assignments with Formative Feedback

Author(s):  
Henrik Bærbak Christensen
2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 36-44
Author(s):  
Henning Bostelmann

The paper reports on a programming course for undergraduate Mathematics students in their 2nd year, with some parts compulsory for single-subject students. Assessment takes the form of several programming projects. Formative feedback as well as summative assessment is aided by automated unit tests, which allow for rapid and consistent marking, while focussing marker’s time on students who require the most help.


Author(s):  
Gregory K. W. K. Chung ◽  
Eva L. Baker ◽  
David G. Brill ◽  
Ravi Sinha ◽  
Farzad Saadat ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalie Wagner ◽  
Anita Acai ◽  
Sydney A. McQueen ◽  
Com McCarthy ◽  
Andrew McGuire ◽  
...  

Objective: The purpose of this study was to develop, implement, and evaluate the effectiveness of an assessment framework aimed at improving formative feedback practices in a Canadian orthopaedic postgraduate training program. Methods: Tool development began in 2014 and took place in 4 phases, each building upon the previous and informing the next. The reliability, validity, and educational impact of the tools were assessed on an ongoing basis, and changes were made accordingly. Results: One hundred eighty-two tools were completed and analyzed during the study period. Quantitative results suggested moderate to excellent agreement between raters (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.54-0.93), and an ability of the tools to discriminate between learners at different stages of training (p’s < 0.05). Qualitative data suggested that the tools improved both the quality and quantity of formative feedback given by assessors and had begun to foster a culture change around assessment in the program. Conclusions: The tool development, implementation, and evaluation processes detailed in this article can serve as a model for other training programs to consider as they move towards adopting competency-based approaches and refining current assessment practices.


Author(s):  
Kostyantyn Kharchenko

The approach to organizing the automated calculations’ execution process using the web services (in particular, REST-services) is reviewed. The given solution will simplify the procedure of introduction of the new functionality in applied systems built according to the service-oriented architecture and microservice architecture principles. The main idea of the proposed solution is in maximum division of the server-side logic development and the client-side logic, when clients are used to set the abstract computation goals without any dependencies to existing applied services. It is proposed to rely on the centralized scheme to organize the computations (named as orchestration) and to put to the knowledge base the set of rules used to build (in multiple steps) the concrete computational scenario from the abstract goal. It is proposed to include the computing task’s execution subsystem to the software architecture of the applied system. This subsystem is composed of the service which is processing the incoming requests for execution, the service registry and the orchestration service. The clients send requests to the execution subsystem without any references to the real-world services to be called. The service registry searches the knowledge base for the corresponding input request template, then the abstract operation description search for the request template is performed. Each abstract operation may already have its implementation in the form of workflow composed of invocations of the real applied services’ operations. In case of absence of the corresponding workflow in the database, this workflow implementation could be synthesized dynamically according to the input and output data and the functionality description of the abstract operation and registered applied services. The workflows are executed by the orchestrator service. Thus, adding some new functions to the client side can be possible without any changes at the server side. And vice versa, adding new services can impact the execution of the calculations without updating the clients.


RMD Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. e001183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aurélie Najm ◽  
Alessia Alunno ◽  
Francisca Sivera ◽  
Sofia Ramiro ◽  
Catherine Haines

ObjectivesTo gain insight into current methods and practices for the assessment of competences during rheumatology training, and to explore the underlying priorities and rationales for competence assessment.MethodsWe used a qualitative approach through online focus groups (FGs) of rheumatology trainers and trainees, separately. The study included five countries—Denmark, the Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain and the United Kingdom. A summary of current practices of assessment of competences was developed, modified and validated by the FGs based on an independent response to a questionnaire. A prioritising method (9 Diamond technique) was then used to identify and justify key assessment priorities.ResultsOverall, 26 participants (12 trainers, 14 trainees) participated in nine online FGs (2 per country, Slovenia 1 joint), totalling 12 hours of online discussion. Strong nationally (the Netherlands, UK) or institutionally (Spain, Slovenia, Denmark) standardised approaches were described. Most groups identified providing frequent formative feedback to trainees for developmental purposes as the highest priority. Most discussions identified a need for improvement, particularly in developing streamlined approaches to portfolios that remain close to clinical practice, protecting time for quality observation and feedback, and adopting systematic approaches to incorporating teamwork and professionalism into assessment systems.ConclusionThis paper presents a clearer picture of the current practice on the assessment of competences in rheumatology in five European countries and the underlying rationale of trainers’ and trainees’ priorities. This work will inform EULAR Points-to-Consider for the assessment of competences in rheumatology training across Europe.


2021 ◽  
pp. 104093
Author(s):  
Aparna R. Gullapalli ◽  
Nathaniel E. Anderson ◽  
Rohit Yerramsetty ◽  
Carla L. Harenski ◽  
Kent A. Kiehl

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document