These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
131 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32598359)
1. Assisting students' writing with computer-based concept map feedback: A validation study of the CohViz feedback system. Burkhart C; Lachner A; Nückles M PLoS One; 2020; 15(6):e0235209. PubMed ID: 32598359 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Mind the gap! Automated concept map feedback supports students in writing cohesive explanations. Lachner A; Burkhart C; Nückles M J Exp Psychol Appl; 2017 Mar; 23(1):29-46. PubMed ID: 28045279 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Beyond subjective judgments: Predicting evaluations of creative writing from computational linguistic features. Zedelius CM; Mills C; Schooler JW Behav Res Methods; 2019 Apr; 51(2):879-894. PubMed ID: 30264366 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Peer feedback and Chinese medical students' English academic writing development: a longitudinal intervention study. Wu C; Zhang YW; Li AW BMC Med Educ; 2023 Aug; 23(1):578. PubMed ID: 37587429 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Concept Maps for Improved Science Reasoning and Writing: Complexity Isn't Everything. Dowd JE; Duncan T; Reynolds JA CBE Life Sci Educ; 2015; 14(4):ar39. PubMed ID: 26538388 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Automated essay scoring and the future of educational assessment in medical education. Gierl MJ; Latifi S; Lai H; Boulais AP; De Champlain A Med Educ; 2014 Oct; 48(10):950-62. PubMed ID: 25200016 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Generalisability theory analyses of concept mapping assessment scores in a problem-based medical curriculum. Kassab SE; Fida M; Radwan A; Hassan AB; Abu-Hijleh M; O'Connor BP Med Educ; 2016 Jul; 50(7):730-7. PubMed ID: 27295477 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Critical thinking evaluation in reflective writing: Development and testing of Carter Assessment of Critical Thinking in Midwifery (Reflection). Carter AG; Creedy DK; Sidebotham M Midwifery; 2017 Nov; 54():73-80. PubMed ID: 28866350 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The bit in the middle and why it's important: a computational analysis of the linguistic features of body paragraphs. Myers JC; McCarthy PM; Duran ND; McNamara DS Behav Res Methods; 2011 Mar; 43(1):201-9. PubMed ID: 21287126 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The role and features of peer assessment feedback in college English writing. Sun Q; Chen F; Yin S Front Psychol; 2022; 13():1070618. PubMed ID: 37435098 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Natural language processing in an intelligent writing strategy tutoring system. McNamara DS; Crossley SA; Roscoe R Behav Res Methods; 2013 Jun; 45(2):499-515. PubMed ID: 23055164 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Which characteristics of written feedback are perceived as stimulating students' reflective competence: an exploratory study. Dekker H; Schönrock-Adema J; Snoek JW; van der Molen T; Cohen-Schotanus J BMC Med Educ; 2013 Jul; 13():94. PubMed ID: 23829790 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A word-count approach to analyze linguistic patterns in the reflective writings of medical students. Lin CW; Lin MJ; Wen CC; Chu SY Med Educ Online; 2016; 21():29522. PubMed ID: 26838331 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Using a constructivist approach with online concept maps: relationship between theory and nursing education. Conceição SC; Taylor LD Nurs Educ Perspect; 2007; 28(5):268-75. PubMed ID: 17944263 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The Effects of Writing Anxiety and Motivation on EFL College Students' Self-Evaluative Judgments of Corrective Feedback. Tsao JJ; Tseng WT; Wang C Psychol Rep; 2017 Apr; 120(2):219-241. PubMed ID: 28558625 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Knowledge maps: a tool for online assessment with automated feedback. Ho VW; Harris PG; Kumar RK; Velan GM Med Educ Online; 2018 Dec; 23(1):1457394. PubMed ID: 29608133 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Testing of a Program to Automatically Analyze Students' Concept Maps. Hubal R; Bobbitt L; Garfinkle S; Harris SC; Powell BD; Oxley MS; Anksorus HN; Chen KY Pharmacy (Basel); 2020 Nov; 8(4):. PubMed ID: 33171850 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Pharmacy Students' Utilization of an Online Tool for Immediate Formative Feedback on Reflective Writing Tasks. Lucas C; Gibson A; Shum SB Am J Pharm Educ; 2019 Aug; 83(6):6800. PubMed ID: 31507274 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Methods for evaluating educational programs: does Writing Center participation affect student achievement? Bredtmann J; Crede CJ; Otten S Eval Program Plann; 2013 Feb; 36(1):115-23. PubMed ID: 23070048 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Collecting evidence of validity for an assessment tool for Norwegian medical students' non-technical skills (NorMS-NTS): usability and reliability when used by novice raters. Prydz K; Dieckmann P; Fagertun H; Musson D; Wisborg T BMC Med Educ; 2023 Nov; 23(1):865. PubMed ID: 37968662 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]