Upload
meryl-bennett
View
214
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Unit 3Estimating Student Achievement
Challenges of making reliable and objective judgements
Graduate Certificate in the Assessment of Student Learning
2
Reliable & objective judgement challenges
Reliable - dependable, consistent, trustworthy
Objective – impartial, detached, unbiased
Awareness of potential biases or judgement ‘errors’
3
Common ‘errors’ Pre-judging Confusing achievement with effort Different standards different students Cultural stereotyping Gender stereotyping ‘halo’ effect ‘proximity’ error ‘central tendency’ error ‘severity/leniency’ error
4
Prejudging
Letting expectation rule over actual evidence of learning when
A student exceeds our expectations Doesn’t demonstrate the capacity we
expect
To minimise potential to prejudgeAssess each piece of evidence of learning on
its own merits.
5
Confusing achievement with effortEffort does not always equate to ability bigger/longer is not necessarily better Appearance may not match response
quality
To minimise potential to confuse achievement with effort
Assess each piece of evidence of learning on its own merits.
6
Different standards different studentsBuilding tolerance standards applied
‘More able’ students +/- 6mm ‘Average’ students +/- 8mm ‘Less able’ students +/- 10mm
Potentially fraught difference.Might preclude some students meeting
highest standard.
7
Cultural stereotyping
Extensive research available
Klenowski & Gertz (2009) culture fair assessment
Kraiger & Ford (1985) 74 studies race effect, bias to own race
Baker (2005) Potential cultural group sabotage
Perry & Delpit (1998) Potential to dismiss legitimate responses
8
Gender stereotyping Assuming girls and boys will perform at
higher/lower levels than each other
Gender effect on rating
Performance effect due to gender mix
Review items demonstrating gender diff.
9
Other common ‘errors’ Halo effect
◦ One aspect of performance influences rating on another aspect
Proximity error◦ Tendency to give similar rating to criteria located
near each other
‘central tendency’ error◦ Rarely award very high or very low ratings
10
Severity or leniency
Comparability/reliability impacted
Tendency to be hard or easy marker
Congdon & McQueen (2000)
To minimise potential to be severe or lenient assessorAccess to: work samples across levels; moderation;
and, professional dialogue.
11
Common ‘errors’ Pre-judging Confusing achievement with effort Different standards different students Cultural stereotyping Gender stereotyping ‘halo’ effect ‘proximity’ error ‘central tendency’ error ‘severity/leniency’ error
12
Ensure fair and equitable assessment practices
Learning to be established by the evidence
Assessment mantra
13
Participant requirements summary Note potential biases that may exist in your context Consider ways to expose biases Consider ways to minimise biases/ ‘errors’
Share examples of best practice.Initiate and build discussion, explore issues related to
providing fair and equitable assessment and assessment results.
See participant requirements for further details.