The edumetric quality of new modes of assessment: Some issues and prospects

Assessment, Learning and Judgement in Higher Education

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 85-114

  Dochy, Filip ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84866717216     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4020-8905-3_6     Document Type: Chapter

References (100)

1. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education (1985). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: Author.
2. Amrein, A. L.,&Berliner, D. C. (2002). High-stakes testing, uncertainty, and student learning Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(18). Retrieved August 15, 2007, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n18/.
3. Askham, P. (1997). An instrumental response to the instrumental student: assessment for learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 23(4), 299-317. (Pubitemid 127169610)
4. Baartman, L. K. J., Bastiaens, T. J., Kirschner, P. A., & Van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2007). Teachers' opinions on quality criteria for competency assessment programmes. Teaching and Teacher Education. Retrieved August 15, 2007, from http://www.fss.uu.nl/edsci/images/stories/pdffiles/Baartman/ baartman%20et%20al-2006- teachers%20opinions%20on%20quality%20criteria%20for%20caps.pdf
5. Baartman, L. K. J., Bastiaens, T. J., Kirschner, P. A., & Van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2005). The wheel of competency assessment. Presenting quality criteria for competency assessment programmes. Paper presented at the 11th biennial Conference for the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction (EARLI), Nicosia, Cyprus.
6. Bateson, D. (1994). Psychometric and philosophic problems in 'authentic' assessment, performance tasks and portfolios. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 11(2), 233-245.
7. Bennet, Y. (1993). Validity and reliability of assessments and self-assessments of work-based learning assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(2), 83-94.
8. Biggs, J. (1996). Assessing learning quality: Reconciling institutional, staff and educational demands. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 21(1), 5-16. (Pubitemid 126022345)
9. Biggs, J. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning: A role for summative assessment? Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practices, 5, 103-110.
10. Birenbaum, M. (1994). Toward adaptive assessment-The student's angle. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 20, 239-255.
11. Birenbaum, M. (1996). Assessment 2000. In: M. Birenbaum & F. Dochy, (Eds.). Alternatives in assessment of achievement, learning processes and prior knowledge. Boston: Kluwer Academic.
12. Birenbaum, M., & Dochy, F. (Eds.) (1996). Alternatives in assessment of achievement, learning processes and prior knowledge. Boston: Kluwer Academic.
13. Black, P., (1995). Curriculum and assessment in science education: The policy interface. International Journal of Science Education, 17(4), 453-469.
14. Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practices, 5(1), 7-74.
15. Boud, D. (1990). Assessment and the promotion of academic values. Studies in Higher Education, 15(1), 101-111.
16. Boud, D. (1995). Assessment and learning: Contradictory or complementary? In P. Knight (Ed.), Assessment for learning in higher education (pp. 35-48). London: Kogan Page.
17. Brennan, R. L., & Johnson, E. G. (1995). Generalisability of performance assessments. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 11(4), 9-12.
18. Brown, S. (1999). Institutional strategies for assessment. In S. Brown, & A. Glasner (Eds.), Assessment matters in higher education: Choosing and using diverse approaches (pp. 3-13). Buckingham: The Society of Research into Higher Education/Open University Press.
19. Butler, D. L. (1988). A critical evaluation of software for experiment development in research and teaching. Behaviour-Research-Methods, Instruments and Computers, 20, 218-220.
20. Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65(3), 245-281.
21. Cronbach, L. J. (1989). Construct validation after thirty years. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Intelligence: Measurement, theory and public policy (pp. 147-171). Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
22. Cronbach, L. J., Gleser, G. C., Nanda, H. & Rajaratnam, N. (1972). The dependability of behavioral measurements: Theory of generalizability for scores and profiles. New York: Wiley.
23. Cronbach, L. J., Linn, R. L., Brennan, R. L. & Haertel, E. H. (1997). Generalizability analysis for performance assessments of students' achievement or school effectiveness. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57(3), 373-399.
24. Crooks, T. (1988). The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational Research, 58(4), 438-481.
25. Dancer, D., & Kamvounias, P. (2005). Student involvement in assessment: A project designed to assess class participation fairly and reliably. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 30, 445-454. (Pubitemid 40639784)
26. Dierick, S.,&Dochy, F. (2001). New lines in edumetrics: New forms of assessment lead to new assessment criteria. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 27, 307-329. (Pubitemid 33379296)
27. Dierick, S., Dochy, F., & Van de Watering, G. (2001). Assessment in het hoger onderwijs. Over de implicaties van nieuwe toetsvormen voor de edumetrie [Assessment in higher education. About the implications of new test forms for edumetrics]. Tijdschrift voor Hoger Onderwijs, 19, 2-18.
28. Dierick, S., Van de Watering, G., & Muijtjens, A. (2002). De actuele kwaliteit van assessment: Ontwikkelingen in de edumetrie [The actual quality of assessment: Developments in edumetrics]. In F. Dochy, L. Heylen, & H. Van de Mosselaer (Eds.) Assessment in onderwijs: Nieuwe toetsvormen en examinering in studentgericht onderwijs en competentiegericht onderwijs [Assessment in education: New testing formats and examinations in student-centred education and competence based education] (pp. 91-122). Utrecht: Lemma BV.
29. Dochy, F. (1999). Instructietechnologie en innovatie van probleemoplossen: over constructiegericht academisch onderwijs. Utrecht: Lemma.
30. Dochy, F. (2001). A new assessment era: Different needs, new challenges. Research Dialogue in Learning and Instruction, 2(1), 11-20.
31. Dochy, F. (2005). Learning lasting for life and assessment: How far did we progress? Presidential address at the EARLI conference 2005, Nicosia, Cyprus. Retrieved October 18, 2007 from http://perswww.kuleuven.be/-u0015308/ Publications/EARLI2005%20presidential%20address%20FINAL.pdf
32. Dochy, F., & Gijbels, D. (2006). New learning, assessment engineering and edumetrics. In L. Verschaffel, F. Dochy, M. Boekaerts, & S. Vosniadou (Eds.), Instructional psychology: Past, present and future trends. Sixteen essays in honour of Erik De Corte. New York: Elsevier.
33. Dochy, F., & McDowell, L. (1997). Assessment as a tool for learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 23, 279-298.
34. Dochy, F. & Moerkerke, G. (1997). The present, the past and the future of achievement testing and performance assessment. International Journal of Educational Research, 27(5), 415-432.
35. Dochy F., Moerkerke G., & Martens R. (1996). Integrating assessment, learning and instruction: Assessment of domain-specific and domain transcending prior knowledge and progress. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 22(4), 309-339. (Pubitemid 126161703)
36. Dochy, F., Segers, M., Gijbels, D., & Struyven, K. (2006). Breaking down barriers between teaching and learning, and assessment: Assessment engineering. In D. Boud & N. Falchikov (Eds.), Rethinking assessment for future learning. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
37. Dochy, F., Segers, M., & Sluijsmans, D. (1999). The use of self-, peer-and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in Higher Education, 24(3), 331-350.
38. Elton L. R. B., & Laurillard D. M. (1979). Trends in research on student learning. Studies in Higher Education, 4(1), 87-102.
39. Evans, A. W., McKenna, C., & Oliver, M. (2005). Trainees' perspectives on the assessment and self-assessment of surgical skills. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 30, 163-174. (Pubitemid 40132782)
40. Falchikov, N. (1986). Product comparisons and process benefits of collaborative peer group and self-assessments. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 11(2), 146-166.
41. Falchikov, N. (1995). Peer feedback marking: Developing peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Training International, 32(2), 395-430.
42. Fan, X., & Chen, M. (2000). Published studies of interrater reliability often overestimate reliability: computing the correct coefficient. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60(4), 532-542.
43. Farmer, B.,& Eastcott, D. (1995). Making assessment a positive experience. In P. Knight (Ed.), Assessment for learning in higher education (pp. 87-93). London: Kogan Page.
44. Feltovich, P. J., Spiro, R. J. & Coulson, R. L. (1993). Learning, teaching, and testing for complex conceptual understanding. In N. Frederiksen, R. J. Mislevy, & I. I. Bejar (Eds.), Test theory for a new generation of tests. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
45. Firestone, W. A., & Mayrowitz, D. (2000). Rethinking "high stakes": Lessons from the United States and England and Wales. Teachers College Record, 102, 724-749.
46. Frederiksen, J. R., & Collins, A. (1989). A system approach to educational testing. Educational Researcher, 18(9), 27-32.
47. Frederiksen, N. (1984). The real test bias: Influences of testing on teaching and learning. American Psychologist, 39(3), 193-202.
48. Gibbs, G. (1999). Using assessment strategically to change the way students learn, In S. Brown & A. Glasner (Eds.), Assessment matters in higher education: Choosing and using diverse approaches, Buckingham: Open University Press.
49. Gielen, S., Dochy, F., & Dierick, S. (2003). Evaluating the consequential validity of new modes of assessment: The influence of assessment on learning, including pre-, post-, and true assessment effects. In M. S. R. Segers, F. Dochy, & E. Cascallar (Eds.), Optimising new modes of assessment: In search of qualities and standards (pp. 37-54). Dordrecht/Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
50. Gielen, S., Dochy, F., & Dierick, S. (2007). The impact of peer assessment on the consequential validity of assessment. Manuscript submitted for publication.
51. Gielen, S., Tops, L., Dochy, F., Onghena, P.,&Smeets, S. (2007). Peer feedback as a substitute for teacher feedback. Manuscript submitted for publication.
52. Gielen, S., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., Janssens, S., Schelfhout, W., & Decuyper, S. (2007). A complementary role for peer feedback and staff feedback in powerful learning environments. Manuscript submitted for publication.
53. Glaser, R. (1990). Testing and assessment; O Tempora! O Mores! Horace Mann Lecture, University of Pittsburgh, LRDC, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
54. Gulliksen H. (1985). Creating Better Classroom Tests. Educational Testing Service. Opinion papers, Reports-evaluative.
55. Haertel, E. H. (1991). New forms of teacher assessment. Review of Research in Education, 17, 3-29.
56. Harlen, W., & Deakin Crick, R. (2003). Testing and motivation for learning. Assessment in Education, 10(2), 169-207.
57. Heller, J. I., Sheingold, K., & Mayford, C. M. (1998). Reasoning about evidence in portfolios: Cognitive foundations for valid and reliable assessment. Educational Assessment, 5(1), 5-40. (Pubitemid 128110194)
58. Kane,M. (1992). An argument-based approach to validity. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 527-535.
59. Langan, A. M., Wheater, C. P., Shaw, E. M., Haines, B. J., Cullen, W. R., Boyle, J. C., et al. (2005). Peer assessment of oral presentations: Effects of student gender, university affiliation and participation in the development of assessment criteria. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 30, 21-34. (Pubitemid 40106091)
60. Leonard, M, & Davey, C. (2001). Thoughts on the 11 plus. Belfast: Save the Children Fund.
61. Linn, R. L. (1993). Educational assessment: Expanded expectations and challenges. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15(1), 1-16.
62. Linn, R. L., Baker, E., & Dunbar, S. (1991). Complex, performance-based assessment: Expectations and validation criteria. Educational Researcher, 20(8), 15-21.
63. Martens, R., & Dochy, F. (1997). Assessment and feedback as student support devices. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 23(3), 257-273.
64. Marton, F. & Säljö, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning. Outcomes and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 4-11, 115-127.
65. McDowell, L. (1995). The impact of innovative assessment on student learning. Innovations in Education and Training International, 32(4), 302-313. (Pubitemid 126023608)
66. McDowell, L., & Sambell, K. (1999). The experience of innovative assessment: Student perspectives. In S. Brown, & A. Glasner (Eds.), Assessment matters in higher education: Choosing and using diverse approaches (pp. 71-82). Buckingham: The Society of Research into Higher Education/Open University Press.
67. Messick, S. (1989). Meaning and values in test validation: The science and ethics of assessment. Educational Researcher, 18(2), 5-11.
68. Messick, S. (1994). The interplay of evidence and consequences in the validation performance assessments. Educational Researcher, 23(2), 13-22.
69. Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment. Validation of inferences from persons' responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50, 741-749.
70. Nevo, D. (1995). School-based evaluation: A dialogue for school improvement. London: Pergamon.
71. Nijhuis, J., Segers, M. R. S., & Gijselaers, W. (2005). Influence of redesigning a learning environment on student perceptions and learning strategies. Learning Environments Research: An International Journal, 8, 67-93. (Pubitemid 40630812)
72. Norton, L. S., Tilley, A. J., Newstead, S. E., & Franklyn-Stokes, A. (2001). The pressures of assessment in undergraduate courses and their effect on student behaviours. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 26, 269-284. (Pubitemid 33281369)
73. Orsmond, P., Merry, S., & Reiling, K. (2000). The use of student derived marking criteria in peer and self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(1), 23-38.
74. Pond, K., Ui-Haq, R., & Wade, W. (1995). Peer review: A precursor to peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Training International, 32, 314-323. (Pubitemid 126023609)
75. Pope, N. (2001). An examination of the use of peer rating for formative assessment in the context of the theory of consumption values. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 26, 235-246. (Pubitemid 33281366)
76. Pope, N. (2005). The impact of stress in self-and peer assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 30, 51-63.
77. Powers, D., Fowles, M., & Willard, A. (1994). Direct assessment, direct validation? An example from the assessment of writing? Educational Assessment, 2(1), 89-100.
78. Rigsby, L. C., & DeMulder, E. K. (2003). Teachers voices interpreting standards: compromising teachers autonomy or raising expectations and performances. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 11(44), Retrieved August 15, 2007, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v11n44/
79. Sambell, K., McDowell, L., & Brown, S. (1997). But is it fair? An exploratory study of student perceptions of the consequential validity of assessment. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 23(4), 349-371. (Pubitemid 127169613)
80. Scouller, K. (1998). The influence of assessment method on student's learning approaches: Multiple choice question examination versus assignment essay. Higher Education, 35, 453-472.
81. Scouller, K. M., & Prosser, M. (1994). Students' experiences in studying for multiple choice question examinations. Studies in Higher Education, 19(3), 267-279.
82. Segers, M., & Dochy, F. (2001). New assessment forms in problem-based learning: The valueadded of the students' perspective. Studies in Higher Education, 26(3), 327-343. (Pubitemid 33662773)
83. Segers, M. S. R., Dierick, S., & Dochy, F. (2001). Quality standards for new modes of assessment. An exploratory study of the consequential validity of the OverAll Test. European Journal of Psychology of Education, XVI, 569-588. (Pubitemid 33402364)
84. Segers, M., Dochy, F., & Cascallar, E. (2003). Optimizing new modes of assessment: In search for qualities and standards. Boston: Kluwer Academic.
85. Shavelson, R. J. (1994). Guest Editor Preface. International Journal of Educational Research, 21, 235-237.
86. Shavelson, R. J., Webb, N. M. & Rowley, G. L. (1989). Generalizability Theory. American Psychologist, 44(6), 922-932.
87. Shepard, L. (1991). Interview on assessment issues with Lorie Shepard. Educational Researcher, 20(2), 21-23.
88. Sluijsmans, D. M. A. (2002). Student involvement in assessment: The training of peer assessment skills. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Open University, Heerlen, The Netherlands.
89. Starren H. (1998). De toets als hefboom voor meer en beter leren. Academia, Februari, 1998.
90. Struyf, E., Vandenberghe, R., & Lens, W. (2001). The evaluation practice of teachers as a learning opportunity for students. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 27(3), 215-238. (Pubitemid 33377398)
91. Struyven, K., Dochy, F., & Janssens, S. (2005). Students' perceptions about evaluation and assessment in higher education: a review. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(4), 331-347.
92. Struyven, K., Gielen, S., & Dochy, F. (2003). Students' perceptions on new modes of assessment and their influence on student learning: the portfolio case. European Journal of School Psychology, 1(2), 199-226.
93. Suen, H. K., Logan, C. R., Neisworth J. T. & Bagnato, S. (1995). Parent-professional congruence. Is it necessary? Journal of Early Intervention, 19(3), 243-252.
94. Tan, C. M. (1992). An evaluation of continuous assessment in the teaching of physiology. Higher Education, 23(3), 255-272.
95. Thomas, P., & Bain, J. (1984). Contextual dependence of learning approaches: The effects of assessments. Human Learning, 3, 227-240.
96. Thomson, K., & Falchikov, N. (1998). Full on until the sun comes out: The effects of assessment on student approaches to studying. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 23(4), 379-390. (Pubitemid 128158474)
97. Topping, K. (1998). Peer-assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249-276.
98. Trigwell, K., & Prosser, M. (1991a). Improving the quality of student learning: The influence of learning context and student approaches to learning on learning outcomes. Higher Education, 22(3), 251-266.
99. Trigwell, K., & Prosser, M. (1991b). Relating approaches to study and quality of learning outcomes at the course level. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 61(3), 265-275.
100. Vermunt, J. D. H. M. (1992). Qualitative-analysis of the interplay between internal and external regulation of learning in two different learning environments. International Journal of Psychology, 27, 574.