Comparison of Standardized Assessment Methods: Logistics, Costs, Incentives and Use of Data

Autor/inn/en	Simper, Natalie; Frank, Brian; Kaupp, Jake; Mulligan, Nerissa; Scott, Jill
Titel	Comparison of Standardized Assessment Methods: Logistics, Costs, Incentives and Use of Data
Quelle	In: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44 (2019) 6, S.821-834 (14 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0260-2938
DOI	10.1080/02602938.2018.1533519
Schlagwörter	Foreign Countries; Student Evaluation; Standardized Tests; Undergraduate Students; Critical Thinking; Cognitive Tests; Thinking Skills; Incentives; Computer Assisted Testing; Preferences; Test Results; Costs; Alignment (Education); Comparative Analysis; Usability; Computer Centers; Canada + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Ausland; Schulnote; Studentische Bewertung; Standadised tests; Standardisierter Test; Kritisches Denken; Kognitiver Fähigkeitstest; Denkfähigkeit; Anreiz; Cost; Kosten; Kanada
Abstract	Critical thinking, problem solving and communication are fundamental elements of undergraduate education, but methods for assessing these skills across an institution are susceptible to logistical, motivational and financial issues. Queen's University conducted two research studies investigating the use of standardised tests to assess cognitive skill development across the institution. Synthesis of results from implementing the Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA+), the Critical Thinking Assessment Test (CAT), and the HEIghten[superscript TM] test found that student test effort was a significant factor, and effort level correlated with performance at r = 0.33. Test incentives were also a significant factor; effort levels for the $25 financial incentive group were one standard deviation higher than effort for the in-class test group. A dedicated computer lab was the preferred option for computer-based testing. A paper-based test was found to be much simpler to administer, but test results were not available for a long time, therefore limiting the usefulness of data. The true cost of tests was greater than the price of the instrument; recruitment, training, proctoring and marking costs need to be included in the calculation. Generally speaking, alignment of test objectives with student or course objectives, and timeliness of data, were key for participation and motivation. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01