Rebuilding Public Confidence in Educational Assessment

Abstract

List of figures and tables viiiAcknowledgements ix List of abbreviations xi Glossary xii Introduction to confidence issues in educational assessment 1 1 Understanding discourse about education and assessment 8 2 Public understanding of assessment 25 3 Assessment and the value of education 45 4 Student experiences of assessment 64 5 Depicting assessment in public places 81 6 Introducing assessment literacy 99 7 A new road map for assessment? References Index viii List of figures and tables xii Glossary Throughout this book, the following definitions are used:educational assessment an overarching term to describe gathering evidence and reviewing this in line with criteria, in order to make a judgement or a decision about student learning; it includes all methods of assessment -from examinations to classroom tests, observations and so on formative assessment any assessment that collects data which can be used to support and direct learning, most commonly from teachers in a classroom setting at any level high-stakes testing summative tests that relate to certification and selection; their results will influence the choices and opportunities for the taker of the test summative assessment any assessment taken at the end of a course of study that generally results in a grade, most commonly in the form of examinations or tests newgenprepdf

Evolution or revolution to programmatic assessment: Considering unintended consequences of assessment change

“…One of the authors noted, in their context, that narrative comments from learning advisors were limited when the aim was to include them in progress decisions but became more valued for learning when not used as a basis for the ultimate pass/ fail decision. High-stakes exams build trust in a system, and conversely, lack of high stakes exams can undermine trust (Lyons, 2017;Richardson, 2022). Policies that introduce a range of lower stake assessments have the potential unintended consequence of stakeholders perceiving a compromise of standards.…”

Building public trust in national assessment: The example of China'sNAEQ

“…Given that the NAEQ is a new assessment, a sense of certainty or predictability (Van de Walle, 2017) was provided by linking the NAEQ to a well-known and trusted international assessment, PISA, and reminding the public of the objectivity of the assessment. Maintaining that the NAEQ is an objective measure reinforces the general sense that standardised assessments are considered scientific, fair, and comparable over time (Richardson, 2022). In China, the belief in assessment objectivity is embedded in a testing culture and a history of exam-oriented education (Feng, 2020).…”

“…Science is often communicated as the “ objective arbiter of truth ” (Smith, 2014, p. 13). Quantitative data is frequently seen as more scientific and subsequently more objective, rigorous, and fair, while data based on seemingly subjective evaluations, such as marks given by teachers, are considered less trustworthy (Richardson, 2022). The belief that test scores represent fair and genuine levels of student performance is bolstered by a conviction in meritocracy (Benavot & Smith, 2020).…”