You are here:

Utilizing Situated Assessment in Education: Sounding Board: A System for Supporting Situated Assessment

, National Institute of Multimedia Education, Japan ; , , University of Tsukuba, Japan ; , Ibaraki University, Japan

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Vienna, Austria ISBN 978-1-880094-65-5 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC


An alternative educational assessment is discussed from the social constructivist’s point of views. Ethnomethodology discovered that people during the course of everyday activities are making their practice meaningful by formulating, accounting, and reporting of each other’s actions. Mostly unconscious assessment of each other’s performance, which we refer to as “situated assessment”, is considered as a kind of such interactive formulating. Through situated assessment, “practical ability” is socially visualized and constructed; therefore, situated assessment is educationally significant when we reflect the original purpose of education. Therefore, the authors developed a system to incorporate situated assessment into the mix of traditional educational assessments to perform an assessment that more accurately reflects practical ability. The system, named Sounding Board, is intended to support the recording of situated assessment events in a cooperative learning environment. The overview of the system is introduced in this paper.


Kato, H., Yamashita, J., Ichimaru, T. & Suzuki, H. (2008). Utilizing Situated Assessment in Education: Sounding Board: A System for Supporting Situated Assessment. In J. Luca & E. Weippl (Eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2008--World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 2407-2416). Vienna, Austria: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved February 16, 2019 from .


View References & Citations Map


  1. Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in Ethnomethodology. Cambridge, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall College Div.
  2. Gergen, K.J. (1994). Realities and Relationships Soundings in Social Construction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  3. Haywood, H.C., & Lidz, C.S. (2007). Dynamic Assessment in Practice: Clinical and Educational Applications. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  4. Moallem, M., Chen, S.J., & Kermani, H. (2005). Using Handheld, Wireless Computers to Improve Assessment of Learning and Instruction. Educational Technology, 45(6), 12–22.
  5. Penuel, W.R., Roschelle, J., & Shechtman, N. (2007). Designing Formative Assessment Software with Teachers: An Analysis of the Co-Design Process. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 2(1), 51–74.
  6. Roschelle, J., Penuel, W.R., Yarnall, L., Shechtman, N., & Tatar, D. (2005). Handheld Tools that ‘Informate’ Assessment of Student Learning in Science: A Requirements Analysis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 190–203.
  7. Shaklee, B.D., Barbour, N.E., Ambrose, R., & Hansford, S.J. (1997). Designing and Using Portfolios. Needham Heights: Allyn & Bacon.
  8. Solomon, C. (1986). Computer Environments for Children. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  9. Sternberg, R.J., & Grigorenko, E.L. (2002). Dynaminc Testing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  10. Suchman, L.A. (1987). Plans and Situated Actions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  11. Wiggins, G. (1998). Educative Assessment: Designing Assessments to Inform and Improve Student Performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass A Wiley Imprint. Acknowledgements

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact