Abstract
Information technology advancements have facilitated the widespread adoption of online education, providing learners with more flexible and convenient means of accessing educational resources and completing learning tasks. To improve the quality of online education and promote collaborative learning, online assessment is crucial in this transition. However, there are concerns about the transparency of the existing online assessment system. Centralized control by educational authorities restricts user access to the assessment process, resulting in a lack of user trust in assessment outcomes. Moreover, the abundance of online users also raises concerns about the reliability of assessors. In this paper, we present AssessChain, a decentralized system that integrates hybrid blockchains to make all assessment procedures, including set criteria, feedback, calculation, and moderation, visible and verifiable to users. Besides, AssessChain introduces an assessor selection scheme (ASEL) employing an enhanced density clustering algorithm to ensure the reliability of assessors, avoiding low-quality feedback. We have implemented the system and proved that the performance is reasonable in terms of throughput and latency, and the proposed ASEL can generally identify malicious assessors with more than 95% accuracy. By integrating information technology, the system encourages all educational participants to trust the assessment process and results, which helps promote equity in educational assessment.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
No public datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study. The simulation experiment data shown in the paper are available in https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/sourceCode_and_data_in_simulation_experiment _rar/25146188.
References
Alammary, A., Alhazmi, S., Almasri, M., & Gillani, S. (2019). Blockchain-based applications in education: A systematic review. Applied Sciences, 9(12), 2400. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9122400
Alruwais, N., Wills, G., & Wald, M. (2018). Advantages and challenges of using e-assessment. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 8(1), 34–37. https://doi.org/10.18178/IJIET.2018.8.1.1008
Balloo, K., Evans, C., Hughes, A., Zhu, X., & Winstone, N. (2018). Transparency isn’t spoon-feeding: How a transformative approach to the use of explicit assessment criteria can support student self-regulation. In Frontiers in Education(Vol. 3, p. 69). https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2018.00069
Bamber, M. (2015). The impact on stakeholder confidence of increased transparency in the examination assessment process. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 40(4), 471–487. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.921662
Belotti, M., Božić, N., Pujolle, G., & Secci, S. (2019). A vademecum on blockchain technologies: When, which, and how. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 21(4), 3796–3838.
Bidry, M., Ouaguid, A., & Hanine, M. (2023). Enhancing e-learning with blockchain: Characteristics, projects, and emerging trends. Future Internet, 15(9), 293. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi15090293
Boneh, D., Lynn, B., & Shacham, H. (2004). Short signatures from the Weil pairing. Journal of cryptology, 17, 297–319. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45682-1_30
Carless, D. (2009). Trust, distrust and their impact on assessment reform. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(1), 79–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930801895786
Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1315–1325. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354
Cheriguene, A., Kabache, T., Kerrache, C. A., Calafate, C. T., & Cano, J. C. (2022). Nota: A novel online teaching and assessment scheme using Blockchain for emergency cases. Education and Information Technologies, 27(1), 115–132. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10629-6
Csapó, B., & Molnár, G. (2019). Online diagnostic assessment in support of personalized teaching and learning: The eDia system. Frontiers in psychology, 10, 1522. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01522
Darvishi, A., Khosravi, H., Sadiq, S., & Gašević, D. (2022). Incorporating AI and learning analytics to build trustworthy peer assessment systems. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(4), 844–875. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13233
Dospinescu, O., & Dospinescu, N. (2020). Perception over e-learning tools in higher education: Comparative study Romania and Moldova. In Proceedings of the IE 2020 International Conference, Madrid, Spain (pp. 20–23). https://doi.org/10.24818/ie2020.02.01
Garg, A., Kumar, P., Madhukar, M., Loyola-González, O., & Kumar, M. (2022). Blockchain-based online education content ranking. Education and information technologies, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10797-5
Gingerich, A., Regehr, G., & Eva, K. W. (2011). Rater-based assessments as social judgments: Rethinking the etiology of rater errors. Academic Medicine, 86(10), S1–S7. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31822a6cf8
Hoang, L. P., Le, H. T., Van Tran, H., Phan, T. C., Vo, D. M., Le, P. A., ... & Pong-Inwong, C. (2022). Does evaluating peer assessment accuracy and taking it into account in calculating assessor’s final score enhance online peer assessment quality? Education and Information Technologies, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10763-1
Hornbæk, K., & Frøkjær, E. (2008). A study of the evaluator effect in usability testing. Human-Computer Interaction, 23(3), 251–277. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370020802278205
Ismael, H. R., & Ameen, S. Y. (2022). Investigation and development of transparent online assessment: A case study at DPU.In 2022 International Conference on Decision Aid Sciences and Applications (DASA) (pp. 66–70). https://doi.org/10.1109/DASA54658.2022.9765071
Jonsson, A. (2014). Rubrics as a way of providing transparency in assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(7), 840–852. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.875117
Lam, T. Y., & Dongol, B. (2022). A blockchain-enabled e-learning platform. Interactive learning environments, 30(7), 1229–1251. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1716022
Li, Z., Kang, J., Yu, R., Ye, D., Deng, Q., & Zhang, Y. (2017). Consortium blockchain for secure energy trading in industrial internet of things. IEEE transactions on industrial informatics, 14(8), 3690–3700. https://doi.org/10.1109/TII.2017.2786307
Li, H., Xiong, Y., Hunter, C. V., Guo, X., & Tywoniw, R. (2020). Does peer assessment promote student learning? A meta-analysis. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(2), 193–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1620679
Lizcano, D., Lara, J. A., White, B., & Aljawarneh, S. (2020). Blockchain-based approach to create a model of trust in open and ubiquitous higher education. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 32, 109–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-019-09209-y
Lockyer, J., Carraccio, C., Chan, M.-K., Hart, D., Smee, S., Touchie, C., ... & Collaborators, I. (2017). Core principles of assessment in competency-based medical education. Medical teacher,39(6), 609–616. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2017.1315082
Loukil, F., Abed, M., & Boukadi, K. (2021). Blockchain adoption in education: A systematic literature review. Education and information technologies, 26(5), 5779–5797. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10481-8
Matcha, W., Gašević, D., Pardo, A., et al. (2019). A systematic review of empirical studies on learning analytics dashboards: A self-regulated learning perspective. IEEE transactions on learning technologies, 13(2), 226–245. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2019.2916802
Mekterović, I., Brkić, L., Milašinović, B., & Baranović, M. (2020). Building a comprehensive automated programming assessment system. IEEE Access, 8, 81154–81172. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2990980
Montenegro-Rueda, M., Luque-de la Rosa, A., Sarasola Sánchez-Serrano, J. L., & Fernández-Cerero, J. (2021). Assessment in higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review. Sustainability, 13(19), 10509. https://doi.org/10.3390/su131910509
Okada, A., Whitelock, D., Holmes, W., & Edwards, C. (2019). E-Authentication for online assessment: A mixed-method study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(2), 861–875. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12608
Patchan, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2015). Understanding the benefits of providing peer feedback: How students respond to peers’ texts of varying quality. Instructional Science, 43, 591–614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-015-9353-x
Pongnumkul, S., Siripanpornchana, C., & Thajchayapong, S. (2017). Performance analysis of private blockchain platforms in varying workloads. In 2017 26th International Conference on Computer Communication and Networks (ICCCN) (pp. 1–6). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCCN.2017.8038517. IEEE.
Rodriguez, A., & Laio, A. (2014). Clustering by fast search and find of density peaks. Science, 344(6191), 1492–1496. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1242072
Saadati, Z., Zeki, C. P., & Vatankhah Barenji, R. (2021). On the development of blockchain-based learning management system as a metacognitive tool to support self-regulation learning in online higher education. Interactive Learning Environments, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1920429
Stone, C. (2019). Transparency of assessment in practice environments. An extension of the tape model. The Journal of Practice Teaching and Learning, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1921/jpts.v16i1.1249
Stone, C. (2018). Transparency of assessment in practice education: The tape model. Social Work Education, 37(8), 977–994. https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2018.1475556
St-Onge, C., Ouellet, K., Lakhal, S., Dubé, T., & Marceau, M. (2022). COVID-19 as the tipping point for integrating e-assessment in higher education practices. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(2), 349–366. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13169
Sun, A., & Chen, X. (2016). Online education and its effective practice: A research review. Journal of Information Technology Education,15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0220-3
Syta, E., Tamas, I., Visher, D., Wolinsky, D. I., Jovanovic, P., Gasser, L., ... & Ford, B. (2016). Keeping authorities“ honest or bust ” with decentralized witness cosigning. In 2016 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP) (pp. 526–545). https://doi.org/10.1109/SP.2016.38. Ieee.
Tai, J., Ajjawi, R., Boud, D., Dawson, P., & Panadero, E. (2018). Developing evaluative judgement: Enabling students to make decisions about the quality of work. Higher education, 76, 467–481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0220-3
Tang, H., Shi, Y., & Dong, P. (2019). Public blockchain evaluation using entropy and topsis. Expert Systems with Applications, 117, 204–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2018.09.048
Tasatanattakool, P., & Techapanupreeda, C. (2018). Blockchain: Challenges and applications. In 2018 International Conference on Information Networking (ICOIN) (pp. 473–475). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICOIN.2018.8343163. IEEE.
Thathsarani, H., Ariyananda, D. K., Jayakody, C., Manoharan, K., Munasinghe, A., & Rathnayake, N. (2023). How successful the online assessment techniques in distance learning have been, in contributing to academic achievements of management undergraduates? Education and Information Technologies, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11715-7
Tinoca, L., Pereira, A., & Oliveira, I. (2014). A conceptual framework for e-assessment in higher education: Authenticity, consistency, transparency, and practicability. In Handbook of research on transnational higher education (pp. 652–673). https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-4458-8.ch033
Tsai, C. T., & Wu, J. L. (2022). A blockchain-based fair and transparent homework grading system for online education. In Principles and practice of blockchains (pp. 303–326). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10507-4_13
Yang, Z., Zheng, K., Yang, K., & Leung, V. C. (2017). A blockchain-based reputation system for data credibility assessment in vehicular networks. In 2017 IEEE 28th annual international symposium on personal, indoor, and mobile radio communications (PIMRC) (pp. 1–5). https://doi.org/10.1109/PIMRC.2017.8292724
Zainuddin, Z., Shujahat, M., Haruna, H., & Chu, S. K. W. (2020). The role of gamified e-quizzes on student learning and engagement: An interactive gamification solution for a formative assessment system. Computers & Education, 145, 103729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103729
Zeng, Z., & Zio, E. (2017). A classification-based framework for trustworthiness assessment of quantitative risk analysis. Safety Science, 99, 215–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.04.001
Zeroual, N., Lamia, M., & Hafidi, M. (2023). A pedagogical orientation system based on blockchain technology and machine learning. Education and Information Technologies, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11941-z
Zhang, Y., Pi, Z., Chen, L., Zhang, X., & Yang, J. (2021). Online peer assessment improves learners’ creativity: Not only learners’ roles as an assessor or assessee, but also their behavioral sequence matter. Thinking skills and creativity, 42, 100950. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100950
Zheng, Y. (2021). Design of a blockchain-based e-portfolio evaluation system to assess the education and teaching process. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 16(5), 261–280. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0220-3
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflicts of interest
Authors declare no competing interests.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Qingyi, Y., Liangmin, W., Senshan, P. et al. AssessChain: A hybrid blockchain-based system for transparent and reliable online assessment. Educ Inf Technol 29, 20665–20689 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12713-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Version of record:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12713-z