The evaluation of the performance;La evaluación del desempeño

Papeles del Psicologo

Volumn 31, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 85-96

  Arias, Rosario Martínez ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD COMPLUTENSE DE MADRID   (Spain)

Author keywords

Assessment centers; Evidences of validity; Generalizability; Performance assessment; Scoring rubrics

Indexed keywords

EID: 77950209636     PISSN: 02147823     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (83)

1. Abad, F.J., Ponsoda, V. y Revuelta, J. (2006). Modelos politómicos de respuesta al ítem. Madrid: La Muralla.
2. Ackerman, T.A., Gierl, M.J. y Walker, C.M. (2003). An NCME instructional module on using multidimensional item response theory to evaluate educational and psychological tests. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 22, 37-53.
3. Adams, R. J., Wilson, M. R., & Wang, W. (1997). The multidimensional random coefficients multinomial logit model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21, 1-23.
4. Arora, A., Foy, P., Martin, M.O. y Mullis,I.V.S. (Eds.) (2009). TIMSS Advanced 2008: technical report. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.
5. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association & National Council on Measurement in Education (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: AERA.
6. Arter, J. y McTighe, J. (2001). Scoring rubrics in the classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: CorwinPress.
7. Arthur, W., Day, E.A., NcNelly, T.L. y Edens, P.S. (2003). A meta-analysis of the criterion-related validity of assessment center dimension. Personnel Psychology, 56, 125-154.
8. Ayala, C.C., Shavelson, R.J., Yue, Y., y Schultz, S.E. (2002). Reasoning dimensions underlying science achievement: the case of performance assessment. Educational Assessment, 8, 101-121.
9. Bennett, R.E. (2004). Moving the field forward: Some thoughts on validity and automated scoring (ETS RM 04-01). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
10. Bock, R.D., Muraki, E., & Pfeiffenberger, W. (1988). Item pool maintenance in the presence of item parameter drift. Journal of Educational Measurement, 25, 275-285.
11. Brennan, R. L. (2000a). Generalizability theory. New York: Springer-Verlag.
12. Brennan, R. (2000b). Performance assessment from the perspective of the generalizability theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24, 339-353.
13. Briggs, D. C., Alonzo, A. C., Schwab, C., & Wilson, M. (2006). Diagnostic assessment with ordered multiplechoice items. Educational Assessment, 11, 33-63.
14. Brummel, B.J., Rupp, D.E. & Spain, S.M. (2009). Constructing parallel simulation exercises for assessment centers and other forms of behavioral assessment. Personnel Psychology, 62, 137-170.
15. Clauser, B. (2000). Recurrent issues and recent advances in scoring performance assessments. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24(4), 310-324.
16. Cohen, A. y Wollack, J. (2006). Test administration, security, scoring and reporting. En R. Brennan (Ed.), Educational Measurement (4th ed., pp. 355-386). Wesport, CT: American Council on Education/Praeger.
17. Cole, N.S. y Moss, P.A. (1989). Bias in test use. En R.L. Linn (Ed.), Educational Measurement (3rd ed., pp. 201-220).
18. Cronbach, L. J., Gleser, G. C., Nanda, H., & Rajaratnam, N. (1972). The dependability of behavioural measurements: Theory of generalizability for scores and profiles. New York: Wiley.
19. Cronbach, L., Linn, R., Brennan, R., & Haertel, E. (1997). Generalizability analysis for performance assessments of student achievement or school effectiveness. Educational and Psychological Measurement 57, 373-399.
20. DeMars, C. (2000). Test stakes and item format interactions. Applied Measurement in Education, 13, 55-77.
21. Dorans, N.J., Pommerich, M. y Holland, P.W. (Eds.). (2007). Linking and aligning scores and scales. New York: Springer.
22. Drasgow, F., Luecht, R.M. y Bennett, R.E. (2006). Technology and testing. En R.L. Brennan (Ed.), Educational Measurement. Pp.471-515.
23. Embretson, S. E. (1998). A cognitive design system approach to generating valid tests: Application to abstract reasoning. Psychological Methods, 3, 300-396.
24. Engelhard, G., Gordon, B., Walker, E.V y Gabrielson, S. (1994). Writing tasks and gender: Influences on writing quality of black and white students. Journal of Educational Research, 87, 197-209.
25. Fischer, G. H. (1973). Linear logistic test model as an instrument in educational research. Acta Psychologica, 37, 359-374.
26. Fitzpatrick, R., Ercikan, K., Yen, W.M. y Ferrara, S. (1998). The consistency between raters scoring in different test years. Applied Measurement in Education, 11, 95-208.
27. Fitzpatrick, R., & Morrison, E. (1971). Performance and product evaluation. In R. Thorndike (Ed.), Educational measurement (pp. 237-270). Washington, DC: American Council of Education.
28. Frederiksen, J.R. y Collins, A. (1989). A systems approach to educational testing. Educational Researcher, 18, 27-32.
29. Gibbons, R. D., Bock, R. D., Hedeker, D., Weiss, D. J., Segawa, E., Bhaumik, D., Kupfer, D. J., Frank, E., Grochocinski, V. J., & Stover, A. (2007a). Full-information item bifactor analysis of graded response data. Applied Psychological Measurement, 31, 4-19.
30. Gómez-Benito, J., Hidalgo, M.D. y Guilera, G. (2010). El sesgo de los instrumentos de medida. Tests justos. Papeles del Psicólogo, 31 (1), 75-84.
31. Gorin, J.S. y Embretson, S.E. (2006). Item difficulty modeling of paragraph comprehension ítems. Applied Psychological Measurement, 30, 394-411.
32. Hambleton, R.K. (1996). Advances in assessment models, methods, and practices. In D.C. Berliner. and R.C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology (pp. 899-925). New York:Macmillan.
33. Hambleton, R.K. (2000). Advances in performance assessment methodology. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24, 291-293.
34. International Taskforce on Assessment Center Guideliness (2000). Guideliness and ethical considerations for assessment center operations. Public Personnel Management, 29, 315-331.
35. Johnson, R.L., Penny, J.A. y Gordon, B. (2009). Assessing performance: designing, scoring, and validating performance tasks. New York: Guilford Press.
36. Kane, M.T. (2004). Certification testing as an illustration of argument-based validation. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 2, 13-170
37. Kane, M. T., Crooks, T., & Cohen, A. (1999). Validating measures of performance. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 18 (2), 5-17.
38. Kolen, M.J. y Brennan, R.L. (2004). Test equating, linking, and scaling: Methods and practices (2nd Ed.). New York: Springer.
39. Lance, C.E. (2008). Why assessment centers do not work the way they are supposed. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 1, 84-97.
40. Lane, S., Parke, C.S. y Stone, C.A. (2002). The impact of a state performance-based assessment and accountability program on mathematics instruction and student learning: Evidence from survey data and school performance. Educational Assessment, 8, 279-315.
41. Lane, S. y Stone, C.A. (2006). Performance assessment. En Brennan (Ed), Educational Measurement, (4th ed., pp. 387-431). Westport, CT: American Council on Education and Praeger.
42. Linn, R.L. (1993a). Educational assessment: Expanded expectations and challenges. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15, 1-16.
43. Linn, R. L. (1993b). Linking results of distinct assessments. Applied Measurement in Education, 6, 83-102.
44. Linn, R.L., Baker, E. L. y Dunbar, S.B. (1991). Complex, performance-based assessment: expectations and validation criteria. Educational Researcher, 20 (8), 15-21.
45. Livingston, S.A. (2009). Constructed-response test questions: Why we use them; how to score them. (R & D Connections, no 11). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
46. Livingston, S.A. y Rupp, S.L. (2004). Performance of men and women on multiple-choice and constructed-response tests for beginning techers. (ETS Research Report No.RR.04-48). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
47. Martínez Arias, R., Hernández Lloreda, MV y Hernández Lloreda, MJ. (2006). Psicometría. Madrid: Alianza.
48. Madaus, G., & O'Dwyer, L. (1999). A short history of performance assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(9), 688-695.
49. Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement, (3rd ed., pp. 13-103). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
50. Messick, S. (1994). The interplay of evidence and consequence in the validation of performance assessments. Educational Researcher, 23(2), 13-23.
51. Messick, S. (1996). Validity of performance assessments. In G. Phillips (Ed.), Technical issues in large-scale performance assessment (pp. 1-18). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
52. Miller, D.M. y Linn, R.L. (2000). Validation of performance assessments. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24, 367-378.
53. Mislevy, R.J. (2006). Cognitive psychology and educational assessment. En R.L. Brennan (Ed.), Educational Measurement, pp. 257-305.
54. Mislevy, R., Steinberg, L., & Almond, R. (2002). Design and analysis in task-based language assessment. Language Testing, 19(4), 477-496.
55. Mislevy, R., Wilson, M., Ercikan, K., & Chudowsky, N. (2003). Psychometric principles in student assessment. In T. Kellaghan & D. Stufflebeam (Eds.), International handbook of educational evaluation (pp. 489-532). Boston: Kluwer Academic.
56. National Research Council (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
57. Muñiz, J. (2010). Las teorías de los tests: Teoría Clásica y Teoría de la Respuesta a los Ítems. Papeles del Psicólogo, 31
58. Muraki, E., Hombo, C.M. y Lee, Y.W. (2000). Equating and linking of performance assessments. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24, 325-33.
59. National Conference of Bar Examiners (NCBE) y American Bar Association (ABA). (2005). Bar admission requirements. Disponibleen http://www.ncnex.org/tests.htm. ECD (2007). PISA 2006 Science Competencies for Tomorrow's World. París: OECD.
60. O'Neil, H.F., Subgure, E. y Baker, E.L. (1996). Effects of motivational interventions on the National Assessment of Educational Progress Mathematics Performance. Educational Assessment, 3, 135-157.
61. Palm, T. (2008). Performance assessment and authentic assessment: A conceptual analysis of the literature. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 13, no 4. Disponible en http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=13&n=4
62. Parke, C.S., Lane, S. y Stone, C.A. (2006). Impact of a state performance assessment program in reading and writing. Educational Research and Evaluation, 12, 239-269
63. Patz, R.J. (2006). Building NCLB science assessments: Psychometric and practical considerations. Measurement, 4,199-239.
64. Penfield, R.D. y Lamm, T.C.M. (2000). Assessing differential item functioning in performance assessment: Review and recommendations. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practices, 19, 5-15.
65. Prieto, G. y Delgado, A.R. (2010). Fiabilidad y validez. Papeles del Psicólogo, 31
66. Reckase, M.D. (1997). The past and future of multidimensional item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21, 25-36.
67. Reckase, M.D. (2009). Multidimensional ítem response theory. New York: Springer.
68. Rupp, D. E., Gibbons, A.M., Baldwin, A. M., Snyder, L. A., Spain, S. M., Woo, S. E., et al. (2006). An initial validation of developmental assessment centers as accurate assessments and effective training interventions. Psychologist-Manager Journal, 9, 171-200. upp, D.E, Thorton, G.C. y Gibbons, A.M. (2008). The construct validity of the assessment center method and usefulness of dimensions as focal constructs. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 116-120.
69. Ryan, T. (2006). Performance assessment: Critics, criticism, and controversy. International Journal of Testing, 6(1), 97-104.
70. Ryan, J. M., y DeMark, S. (2002). Variation in achievement scores related to gender, item format and content area tested. En G. Tindal & T. M. Haladyna (Eds.), Large scale assessment programs for all students: validity, technical adequacy, and implementations issues, (pp. 67-88). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
71. Salgado, J.F. y Moscoso, S. (2008). Selección de personal en la empresa y las AAPP: de la visión tradicional a la visión estratégica. Papeles del Psicólogo, 29, 16-24. http://www.cop.es/papeles
72. Shavelson, R.J., Baxter, G.P. y Gao, X. (1993). Sampling Variability of performance assessments. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30, 215-232.
73. Stecher, B., Klein, S., Solano-Flores, G., McCaffrey, D.M. Robyn, A., Shavelson, R. y col. (2000). The effects of content, format and inquiry level on science performance assessment scores. Applied Measurement in Education, 13, 139-160.
74. Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (2003). Principles for the validation and use of personnel selection procedures (4th ed.). Bowling Green, OH: Author.
75. Stiggins, R. (1987). Design and development of performance assessments. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practices, 6(3), 33-42.
76. Thorton, G.C. y Rupp, D.E. (2006). Assessment centers in human resource management. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
77. United States Medical Licensure Examination (2009). Examinations. Disponible en http://www.usmle.org/examinations/index.html
78. Van der Vleuten, C. y Swanson, D. (1990). Assessment of clinical skills with standardized patients: State of the art. Teaching and learning in Medicine, 2, 58-76.
79. Welch, C. (2006). Item and prompt development in performance testing. In S. Downing y T. Haladyna (Eds.), Handbook of test development (pp. 303-327). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
80. Wiggins, G. (1989). A true test: Toward more authentic and equitable assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 70, 703-713.
81. Williamson, D.M., Mislevy, R.J. y Bejar, I.I. (Eds.) (2006). Automated scoring of complex tasks in computer based testing. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
82. Wilson, M. (2005). Constructing measures: An item response modeling approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
83. Zenisky, A.L. y Sireci, S.G. (2002). Technological innovations in large-scale assessment. Applied Measurement in Education, 15, 337-362.