A case study in principled assessment design: Designing assessments to measure and support the development of argumentative reading and writing skills

IF 1.7 3区 心理学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Paul Deane , Yi Song
{"title":"A case study in principled assessment design: Designing assessments to measure and support the development of argumentative reading and writing skills","authors":"Paul Deane ,&nbsp;Yi Song","doi":"10.1016/j.pse.2014.10.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper presents a principled approach to assessment design in which major design decisions are structured to support teaching and learning. This approach, developed as part of a long-term research initiative at ETS, Cognitively Based Assessments <em>of</em>, <em>for</em> and <em>as</em> Learning (CBAL), draws upon the learning and cognitive science literatures to create richly-structured assessments that simultaneously measure critical component skills and model effective strategies for applying those skills to complex performance tasks. To illustrate our approach, we focus on an important literacy practice: argumentation. Our model seeks to measure qualitative shifts in the development of critical argumentation skills by postulating argumentation learning progressions informed by the developmental literature. These learning progressions play a critical role in guiding assessment design decisions (selecting targeted skills, developing items to measure those skills, and determining task sequences) and may have the potential to support teachers’ instructional decisions that effectively scaffold the development of students’ argumentation skills.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45361,"journal":{"name":"Psicologia Educativa","volume":"20 2","pages":"Pages 99-108"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2014-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.pse.2014.10.001","citationCount":"62","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psicologia Educativa","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1135755X1400013X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 62

Abstract

This paper presents a principled approach to assessment design in which major design decisions are structured to support teaching and learning. This approach, developed as part of a long-term research initiative at ETS, Cognitively Based Assessments of, for and as Learning (CBAL), draws upon the learning and cognitive science literatures to create richly-structured assessments that simultaneously measure critical component skills and model effective strategies for applying those skills to complex performance tasks. To illustrate our approach, we focus on an important literacy practice: argumentation. Our model seeks to measure qualitative shifts in the development of critical argumentation skills by postulating argumentation learning progressions informed by the developmental literature. These learning progressions play a critical role in guiding assessment design decisions (selecting targeted skills, developing items to measure those skills, and determining task sequences) and may have the potential to support teachers’ instructional decisions that effectively scaffold the development of students’ argumentation skills.

原则性评估设计的案例研究:设计评估来衡量和支持议论文阅读和写作技能的发展
本文提出了一种评估设计的原则方法,其中主要的设计决策是结构化的,以支持教与学。这种方法是ETS长期研究项目“基于学习的认知评估”(cognitive Based Assessments of, for and as Learning, CBAL)的一部分,它借鉴了学习和认知科学的文献,创建了结构丰富的评估,同时测量了关键的组成技能,并为将这些技能应用于复杂的绩效任务建立了有效的策略模型。为了说明我们的方法,我们将重点放在一个重要的读写练习上:论证。我们的模型试图通过假设由发展文献提供的论证学习进展来衡量批判性论证技能发展中的质的转变。这些学习进度在指导评估设计决策(选择目标技能,开发项目来衡量这些技能,以及确定任务顺序)方面发挥着关键作用,并且可能有潜力支持教师的教学决策,有效地支撑学生论证技能的发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
29 weeks
期刊介绍: La Revista Psicología Educativa es una revista científico-profesional española, de carácter multidisciplinar, que promueve tanto la aportación teórica como la investigación experimental y profesional del psicólogo y profesiones afines en el ámbito educativo. Su objetivo es compartir temas de común interés en procesos cognitivos, afectivos y culturales en la adquisición de conocimiento, como en áreas de intervención e innovación educativa. Por ello invita a investigadores relacionados con el ámbito educativo (psicólogos, antropólogos, sociólogos, tecnólogos educativos, TCs) a educadores y orientadores en diversos ámbitos, a psicólogos educativos, a evaluadores, a técnicos de computación y tecnologías de la información aplicadas a la educación a enviar sus trabajos a esta revista. Psicología Educativa acepta manuscritos inéditos y originales de interés para los psicólogos y que sean una contribución al conocimiento correspondiente al ámbito de la Psicología de la Educación. Psicología Educativa publica principalmente en castellano, pero admite contribuciones originales en inglés. Revista Psicología Educativa publica principalmente en castellano, pero admite igualmente contribuciones originales en inglés. La revista admite originales libres y también puede solicitar trabajos específicos a autores relevantes. Los manuscritos originales recibidos en castellano o inglés serán sometidos al proceso de revisión externa por expertos, anónima por pares doble ciego (Peer Review). En función de las valoraciones de los expertos, el equipo directivo de la revista tomará la decisión sobre los artículos que podrán ser aceptados, rechazados o solicitadas modificaciones para la mejora de los mismos y la aceptación o rechazo definitivos. Los autores que envían su trabajo a la revista, nunca lo deben postular simultáneamente a otras publicaciones.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信