Communication strategies for enhancing qualification users' understanding of educational assessment: Recommendations from other public interest fields

Oxford Review of Education

Volumn 39, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 114-127

  Chamberlain, Suzanne ^a  

^a Centre for Education Research and Policy   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

assessment; communication strategies; public understanding; qualification users; reliability

Indexed keywords

EID: 84874505702     PISSN: 03054985     EISSN: 14653915     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/03054985.2013.764757     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association and National Council on Measurement in Education. 1999. Standards for educational and psychological testing, Washington: American Educational Research Association.
2. Baird, J., Béguin, A., Black, P., Pollitt, A. and Stanley, G. 2012. "The reliability programme: final report of the technical advisory group". In Ofqual's reliability compendium, Edited by: Opposs, D. and He, Q. 771-838. Coventry: Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation.
3. Becker, D.E., Wise, L.L., Hardoin, M.M. and Watters, C., eds. 2011. Independent evaluation of the California High School Exit Examination: 2011 evaluation report, Virginia: Human Resources Research Organisation.
4. Bellaby, P. 2003. Communication and miscommunication of risk: understanding UK parents' attitudes to combined MMR vaccination. British Medical Journal, 327: 725-728.
5. Betebenner, D., Shang, Y., Xiang, Y., Zhao, Y. and Yue, X. 2008. The impact of performance level misclassification on the accuracy and precision of percent at performance level measures. Journal of Educational Measurement, 45(2): 119-137.
6. Boyle, A., Opposs, D. and Kinsella, A. 2012. "No news is good news? Talking to the public about the reliability of assessment". In Ofqual's reliability compendium, Edited by: Opposs, D. and He, Q. 653-664. Coventry: Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation.
7. Bramley, T. and Dhawan, V. 2012. "Estimates of reliability of qualifications". In Ofqual's reliability compendium, Edited by: Opposs, D. and He, Q. 217-319. Coventry: Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation.
8. Burkeman, O. (2003, 4 March). Memo exposes Bush's new green strategy. The Guardian.
9. Burslem, S. 2012. "The reliability programme: final report of the policy advisory group". In Ofqual's reliability compendium, Edited by: Opposs, D. and He, Q. 839-851. Coventry: Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation.
10. Campbell, R., Starkey, F., Holliday, J., Audrey, S., Bloor, M., Parry-Langdon, N., Hughes, R. and Moore, L. 2008. An informal school-based peer-led intervention for smoking prevention in adolescence (ASSIST): a cluster randomised trial. Lancet, 371: 1595-1602.
11. Chamberlain, S. 2012a. "Public perceptions of reliability". In Ofqual's reliability compendium, Edited by: Opposs, D. and He, Q. 691-725. Coventry: Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation.
12. Chamberlain, S. 2012b. 'Maybe I'm not as good as I think I am'. How qualification users interpret their examination results. Educational Research, 54(1): 39-49.
13. Dale, G. 2008. 'Green shift': an analysis of corporate responses to climate change. International Journal of Management Concepts and Philosophy, 3(2): 134-155.
14. Department of Energy and Climate Change (2012). News: the Clean Energy Ministerial. Available online at: http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/news/cem3/cem3.aspx (accessed 5 April 2012).
15. Fisher, K. (1997). Locating frames in the discursive universe. Sociological Research Online, 2(3). Available online at: http://www.socresonline.org.uk/2/3/4.html (accessed 5 April 2012).
16. Giddens, A. 1990. The consequences of modernity, Cambridge: Polity Press.
17. Goodman, D.P. and Hambleton, R.K. 2004. Student test score reports and interpretive guides: review of current practices and suggestions for future research. Applied Measurement in Education, 17(2): 145-220.
18. Gregory, J. (2001). Public understanding of science: lessons from the UK experience. Science and Development Network. Available online at: http://www.scidev.net/en/features/public-understanding-of-science-lessons-fromthe.html (accessed 20 February 2012).
19. Harlen, W. 1994. Developing public understanding of education: a role for educational researchers. British Educational Research Journal, 20(1): 3-16.
20. Hattie, J. (May, 2010). Visibly learning from reports: the validity of score reports. Online Educational Research Journal. Available online at: http://www.oerj.org/View?action=viewPDF&paper=6 (accessed 30 January 2012).
21. He, Q., Opposs, D. and Boyle, A. 2012. "A quantitative investigation into public perceptions of reliability in examination results in England". In Ofqual's reliability compendium, Edited by: Opposs, D. and He, Q. 727-767. Coventry: Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation.
22. House of Lords (2000). Science and technology-third report. Available online at: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199900/ldselect/ldsctech/38/3801.htm (accessed 5 February 2012).
23. Johnson, S. and Johnson, R. 2012. "Conceptualising and interpreting reliability". In Ofqual's reliability compendium, Edited by: Opposs, D. and He, Q. 459-521. Coventry: Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation.
24. Johnson, F., Burrough, N., Ziff, A. and Collins, B. 2012. "Public perceptions of reliability in examinations". In Ofqual's reliability compendium, Edited by: Opposs, D. and He, Q. 667-689. Coventry: Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation.
25. Murphy, R. 2004. Grades of uncertainty. Reviewing the uses and misuses of examination grades, London: Association of Teachers and Lecturers.
26. Newton, P.E. 2005. The public understanding of measurement inaccuracy. British Educational Research Journal, 31(4): 419-442.
27. Newton, P.E. 2007. Clarifying the purposes of educational assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 14(2): 149-170.
28. Nisbet, M.C. 2009. Communicating climate change: why frames matter for public engagement. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 51(2): 12-23.
29. Nisbet, M.C. and Kotcher, J. 2009. A two-step flow of influence? Opinion-leader campaigns on climate change. Science Communication, 30(3): 328-354.
30. Nordhaus, T. and Schellenberger, M. 2007. Break through: from the death of environmentalism to the politics of possibility, New York, NY: Houghton Miffli.
31. Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation. 2009. What is Ofqual's reliability programme?, Coventry: Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation.
32. Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation (2012). The assessment validity programme. Available online at: http://www.ofqual.gov.uk/standards/validity/ (accessed online 11 April 2012).
33. Offit, P.A. and Coffin, S.E. 2003. Communicating science to the public: MMR vaccine and autism. Vaccine, 22: 1-6.
34. O'Neill, O. 2002. A question of trust: the BBC Reith Lectures 2002, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
35. Opposs, D. and He, Q., eds. 2012a. Ofqual's reliability compendium, Coventry: Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation.
36. Opposs, D. and He, Q. 2012b. "The reliability programme: final report". In Ofqual's reliability compendium, Edited by: Opposs, D. and He, Q. 853-898. Coventry: Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation.
37. Petts, J. and Niemeyer, S. 2004. Health risk communication and amplification: learning from the MMR vaccination controversy. Health, Risk & Society, 6(1): 7-23.
38. Phelps, R.P., Zenisky, A., Hambleton, R.K. and Sireci, S.G. 2012. "On the reporting of measurement uncertainty and reliability for U.S. Educational and Licensure Tests". In Ofqual's reliability compendium, Edited by: Opposs, D. and He, Q. 605-641. Coventry: Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation.
39. Riesch, H. and Spiegelhalter, D. 2011. 'Careless pork costs lives': risk stories from science to press release to media. Health, Risk & Society, 13(1): 47-64.
40. The Royal Society. 1985. The public understanding of science, London: The Royal Society.
41. Salvagno, M. and Teglasi, H. 1987. Teacher perceptions of different types of information in psychological reports. Journal of School Psychology, 25: 415-424.
42. Tufte, E. R. (2001). The visual display of quantitative information (2nd edn.). Connecticut, Graphics Press.
43. Wakefield, A.J., Murch, S.H., Anthony, A., Linnell, J., Casson, D.M.Malik, M. 1998. Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children. Lancet, 351: 637-641.
44. Warmington, P. and Murphy, R. 2004. Could do better? Media depictions of UK educational assessment results. Journal of Education Policy, 19(3): 285-299.
45. Warmington, P. and Murphy, R. 2007. 'Read all about it!' UK news media coverage of A-level results. Policy Futures in Education, 5(1): 70-83.
46. Wheadon, C. & Stockford, I. (2012). Classification accuracy and consistency in GCSE and A-level examinations offered by the Assessment and Qualifications Alliance (AQA) November 2008 to June 2009. in: D. Opposs & Q. He (Eds) Ofqual's reliability compendium. Coventry, Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation, 107-139.
47. Wheadon, C., Whitehouse, C., Spalding, V., Tremain, K. and Charman, M. 2009. Principles and practice of on-demand testing, Coventry: Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation.