What do we know about the assessment of educational performance? Psychometric features and problems in performance assessments;¿quÉ sabemos de la medida de las competencias? caracterÍsticas y problemas psicomÉtricos en la evaluaciÓn de competencias

Bordon

Volumn 63, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 109-123

  Morera, María Castro ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD COMPLUTENSE DE MADRID   (Spain)

Author keywords

Educational Assessment; Generalizability; Inter rater Reliability; Multidimensional Item Response Theory; Partial Credit Items; Performance Assessment

Indexed keywords

EID: 85011599926     PISSN: 02105934     EISSN: 23406577     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. AMERICAN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH A SSOCIATION, AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION Y NATIONAL COUNCIL ON MEASUREMENTE IN EDUCATION (1999). Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington, DC: AERA.
2. ARTHUR, W.; DAY, E. A.; NCNELLY, T. L. y ED ENS, P. S. (2003). A meta-Analysis of the criterion-related validity of assessment center dimension. Personnel Psychology, 56, 125-154.
3. BERK, R. A. (1986). Preface. En R. A. BERK (ed.), Performance asses sment: Methods & applications. Baltimore, Maryland, John Hopkins University Press, ix-xiv.
4. BOND, L.; MOSS, P. y CARR, P. (1996). Fairness In large-scale performance assessment. En G. PHILLIPS (ed.), Technical i ssues in large-scale performance assessment. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, 117-140.
5. BRENNAN, R. (2000). Performance assessment from the perspective of the Genralizability theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24, 339-353.
6. CAMPBELL, D. T. y FISKE, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitraitmultimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81-105.
7. CRONBACH, L. J.; GLESER, G. C.; NANDA, H. y RAJARATNAM, N. (1972). The dependability of behavioural measurements: theory of generalizability for scores and profiles. New York: Willey.
8. DUNB AR, S.; KORETZ, D. y HOOVER, H. (1991). Quality control in the development and use of performance assessments. Applied Measurement in Education, 4 (4), 289-303.
9. FREDERIKSEN, J. R. y COLLINS, A. (198 9). A systems approach to educational testing. Educational Researcher, 18, 27-32.
10. GIBBONS, R. D.; BOCK, R. D.; HEDEKER, D.; WEISS, D. J.; SEGAWA, E.; BHAUMIK, D.; KUPFER, D. J.; FRANK, E.; GROCHOCINSKY, V. J. y STOVER, A. (2007). Full-information item bifactor analysis of graded response data. Applied Psychological Measurement, 31, 4-19
11. HAERTEL, E. y LINN, R. (1996). Comparability. En G. PHILLIPS (ed.), Technical issues in large-scale performance assessment. Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics, 59-78.
12. HAMBELTON, R. K. (2000). Advances in assessment performance assessment methodology. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24, 291-293.
13. HEMKER, B. T.; SIJTSMA, K.; MOLENAAR, I. W. y JUNKER, B. W . (1997). Stochastic ordering using the latent trait and the sum score in polytomous IRT models. Psychometrika, 62, 331-347.
14. HOSKIN, K. (1979). The examination, disciplinary power and rational schoo ling. En History of Education. London: Taylor y Francis, vol. 8, 135-146.
15. JOHNSON, R. L.; PENNY, J. A. y GORDON, B. (2009). Assessing performance: designing, scoring and validating performance tasks. New York: Guilford Press.
16. KANE, M. T. (2004). Certification testing as an illustration of argument-based validation. Measurement: Interdiciplinary Research and Perspectives, 2, 13-170.
17. LANE, S. y STONE, C. A. (2006). Performance assessment. En R. BRENNAN (ed.), Educational Measurement (4th Edition). Westport, CT: American Council on Education and Praeger, 387-431.
18. LANE, S.; PARKE, C. S. y ST ONE, 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.
19. LINN, R. L. (1993). Linking results of distinct assessment. Applied Measurement in Education, 6, 83-102
20. MADAUS, G. y O'DWYER, L. (1999). A short history of performance ass essment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80 (9), 688-695.
21. MARTÍNEZ ARIAS, R. (1995). Psicometría: Teoría de los test psicológicos y educativos. Madrid: Síntesis.
22. MARTÍNEZ ARIAS, R. (2010). La evaluación del desempeño. Papeles del Psicólogo, 31 (1), 85-96.
23. MARTÍNEZ ARIAS, R.; HERNÁNDEZ LLOREDA, M. V. y HERNÁNDEZ LLOREDA, M. J. (2006). Psicometría. Madrid: Alianza.
24. MASTER, G. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 42 (2), 149-174.
25. MESSICK, S. (1980). Test validity and the ethics of assessment. American Psychologist, 35, 1012-1027.
26. MESSICK, S. (1989). Validity. En R. LINN (ed.), Educational Measurement (3rd ed). Washington, DC: American Council on Education, 13-103.
27. 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.
28. M ESSICK, S. (1996). Validity of performance assessments. En G. PHILLIPS (ed.), Technical issues in large-scale performance assessment. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, 1-18.
29. MILL ER, D. M. y LINN, R. L. (2000). Validation of performance assessments. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24, 367-378.
30. MISLEVY, R. J. (1992). Scaling procedures. En E. G. JOHNSON y N. L. ALLEN (eds.), The NAEP 1990 technical report (Report No. 21-TR-20). Washington DC: National Center for Education Statistics, 199-213.
31. MISLEVY, R. J. (2006). Cognitive psychology and educational assessment. En R. BRENNAN (ed.), Educational Measurement (4th Edition). Westport, CT: American Council on Education and Praeger, 257-305.
32. MISLEVY, R. J.; STEINBERG, l. y ALMOND, R. (2002). Design and analysis in task-base d language assessment. Language Testing, 19(4), 477-496.
33. MISLEVY, R. J.; WILSON, M.; ERCIKAN, K. y CHUDOWSKY, N. (2003). Psychometric principles in student assessment. En T. KELLAHAN y D. STUFFLEBEAM (ed s.), International handbook of educational evaluation. Boston: Kluwer Academic, 489-532.
34. NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL (2001). Knowing what students know: the science and design of educational assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
35. NITKO, A. J. (1996). Educational assessment of students (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall.
36. OFFICE OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, U.S. Congre ss (1992). Testing in american schools: Asking the right questions (OTA-SET-519). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
37. OOSTERHOF, A. (1994). Classroom applications of educational measurement (2 nd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
38. PALM, T. (2008). Performance Assessment and authentic assessment: a conceptual analysis of the literature. Practical Assessment, Reseach and Evaluation, 13 (4). Disponible en http://pareonline.net/pdf/v13n4.pdf.
39. 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.
40. PATZ, R. J. (2006). Building NCLB science assessment: psychometric and practical considerations. Measurement 4 (4), 199-239.
41. PAYNE, D. A. (1997). Applied educational measurement. Belmont CA: Wadsworth.
42. RECKASE, M. D. (2009). Multidimensional item response theory. New York: Springer.
43. RUIZ-PRIMO, A. y SHAVELSON, R. J. (1996). Rhetoric and reality in science performance assessment: an update. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33 (10), 1045-1063.
44. RYAN, T. (2006). Performance assessment: critics, criticim, and controversy. Internacional Journal of Testing, 6(1), 97-104.
45. 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.
46. SAX, G. (1997). Principles of educational and psychological measurement and evaluation (4th ed.). Belmont CA: Wadsworth.
47. SHAVELSON, R. J.; BAXTER, G. P. y GAO, X. (1993). Sampling variability of performance assessments. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30, 215-232.
48. SHAVELSON, R. J.; SOLANO-FLÓREZ, G. y RUIZ-PRIMO, A. (1998). Toward a science performance assessment technology. Evaluation and Program Planning, 21 (2), 129-144.
49. SOCIETY FOR INDUSTRIAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY, INC. (2004). Principles fo r the validation and use of personnel selection procedures (4a Edición). Disponible en www.siop.org.
50. STIGGINS, R. (1987). Design and development of performance assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practi ces, 6 (3), 33-42.
51. THORTON, G. C. y RUPP, D. E. (2006). Assessment centers in human resource management. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
52. UNITED STATES MEDICAL LICENSURE EXAMINATION (2009). Examinations . Disponible en http://www.usmle.org/examinations/index.html.
53. VAN DER VLEUTEN, C. y SWANSON, D. (1990). Assessment of clinical skills with standarized patines: State of the art. Teaching and learning in Medicine, 2, 58-76.
54. VISWESVARAN, C. (2001). Assessment of individual job performance: a review of the past century and a look ahead. En N. ANDERSON; D. S. ONES; H. K. SINANGIL y C. VISWESVARAN (ed.). Handbook of indust rial and organizational psychology. 1. London: Sage, 110-126.
55. WIGGINS, G. (1989). A true test. Toward more authentic and equitable assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 70, 703-713.
56. WIGGINS, G. (1993). Assessment: Authenticity, context, and validity. Phi Delta Kappan, 75(3), 200-214.
57. WU, M. L.; ADAMS, R. J. y WILSON, M. R. (1998). ACER ConQuest: Generalized it em response modeling software [Computer program].Melbourne: ACER Press.
58. ZÚNIGA MOLINA, L. y GAVIRIA, J. L. (2010). Challenges and Opportunities for the Further Development of the ENLACE Assessment for Evaluation and Tea cher Incentives in Mexico. OECD Working Paper for the Cooperation Agreement between the OECD and the Government of Mexico.