|
| << vorige |
Tijdschrift beschrijving
Alle jaargangen van het bijbehorende tijdschrift
Alle afleveringen van het bijbehorende jaargang
Alle artikelen van de bijbehorende aflevering
Details van artikel 3 van 3 gevonden artikelen
| Titel: |
Reasoning About Evidence in Portfolios: Cognitive Foundations for Valid and Reliable Assessment |
| Auteur: |
Heller, Joan I. Sheingold, Karen Myford, Carol M. |
| Verschenen in: |
Educational assessment |
| Paginering: | Jaargang 5 (1998) nr. 1 pagina's 5-40 |
| Jaar: |
1998-01-01 |
| Inhoud: |
Analyses of 10 raters' reasoning during think-aloud interviews provided evidence supporting a model of the fundamental processes involved in rating standards-based, nonprescriptive portfolios. Raters cycled iteratively among component processes and among subprocesses within them rather than following a linear sequence. This process model for portfolio rating provides a framework within which to conceptualize sound rater reasoning and to distinguish between acceptable variations and those that distort the meaning of scores. Score validity was threatened when raters omitted one of the major processes, evaluated portfolios without consideration of important criteria in the rating guide, or applied extraneous assessment criteria The 3 raters who exhibited these kinds of behaviors in their rating rationales generated ratings at a portfolio reading that were unacceptably inconsistent and unreliable. Furthermore, raters with identical patterns of problematic psychometric results were found to reason in substantially different ways: Indicating that quantitative information alone is insufficient to detect and diagnose rating problems. |
| Uitgever: |
Routledge |
| Bronbestand: |
Elektronische Wetenschappelijke Tijdschriften |
Details van artikel 3 van 3 gevonden artikelen
| << vorige |