A Second Dystopia in Education: Validity Issues in Authentic Assessment Practices

Hathcoat, John D.; Penn, Jeremy D.; Barnes, Laura L.; Comer, Jonathan C.

doi:10.1007/s11162-016-9407-1

Cited by 14 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on Dwyer (2017) and Hathcoat et al (2016), the articles were grouped into two categories: domain-general (35 articles) and domain-specific (116 articles). Construction of the concept of critical thinking as being domain-specific or domain-general is directly related to integration of development of critical thinking into higher education programmes (Tiruneh et al, 2016).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What critical thinking and for what?

Indrašienė

Jegelevičienė

Penkauskienė

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>The article discusses the construction of the critical thinking concept in higher education and its change in scientific publications between 1993 and 2017. Based on a systematic literature review, the following research questions are raised: <em>how does construction of critical thinking concept change in the context of higher education during time? How are personal, interpersonal, and social aspects expressed in the concept of critical thinking in the context of higher education? </em>The systematic literature review revealed significant grow of publications starting from 1998. It is also disclosed slight change in treating critical thinking as purely general or domain-specific competence. The authors of the researched articles do not make clear division between critical thinking as a general and as a domain-specific competence. Researchers in different fields tend to associate critical thinking with the development of a person’s cognitive and intellectual capacities, including skills and attitudes. However, some authors reveal also interpersonal and social aspects of critical thinking. Alas, there are not so many publications in favour of such comprehensive approach. But there is still some hope that critical thinking will be treated and nurtured as personal, interpersonal and social competence.</p>

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What critical thinking and for what?

Indrašienė

Jegelevičienė

Penkauskienė

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although a low percentile of loweffort participants was observed in this sample, a significant correlation was found between time spent on test and student achievement. When combined with other literature, this suggests supports the recommendation for developing domain-specific assessments for literacy and numeracy skills [33].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

Cognitive Skills Development Among Undergraduate Engineering Students

Smith¹,

Frank²

2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research paper addresses assessment of numeracy and literacy among engineering students, which are core to problem solving and critical thinking, but challenging to consistently measure. The Essential Adult Skills Initiative (EASI) was a research project involving 20 Canadian postsecondary institutions, designed to measure the literacy, numeracy, and problem-solving skills of incoming and graduating college and university students the Education and Skills Online Assessment (ESO). At one participating institution, the ESO was administered over a two-year window in a cross-sectional approach to 112 first year and 65 fourth year engineering students. Statistically significant improvements were observed from first to fourth year in numeracy (W = 2634 , p < 0.05), and in literacy (W = 2743, p > 0.05). Of the fourth year participants, 38% received scores associated with trouble consistently performing critical written analysis, and 49% received scores associated with trouble consistently performing critical numerical analysis. Time spent on test was found to be correlated to final score (r = 0.35, p < 0.001). These results raise questions concerning the baseline skill level of some graduating engineering undergraduates, and when combined with prior literature also question adequacy of low-stakes standardized tests for measuring complex cognitive skills.

show abstract

“…While other influences, such as student aptitude, may also contribute to the discordance of student marks, the fact remains that SA approaches are limited by marker bias (Hathcoat et al, 2016). Automated assessment technology is clearly superior to human grading for written assessment tasks (Heit & Donaldson, 2016;Horn, 2009).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Objective versus subjective methods to assess discipline-specific knowledge: a case for Extended Matching Questions (EMQs)

Slattery¹

2017

Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Higher Education Advances

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Second Dystopia in Education: Validity Issues in Authentic Assessment Practices

Cited by 14 publications

References 18 publications

What critical thinking and for what?

What critical thinking and for what?

Cognitive Skills Development Among Undergraduate Engineering Students

Objective versus subjective methods to assess discipline-specific knowledge: a case for Extended Matching Questions (EMQs)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About