Classroom assessment that tailor instruction and direct learning: A validation study

IF 0.8 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Wai Kei Chan, Li Zhang, E. Oon
{"title":"Classroom assessment that tailor instruction and direct learning: A validation study","authors":"Wai Kei Chan, Li Zhang, E. Oon","doi":"10.21449/ijate.1155679","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We report the validity of a test instrument that assesses the arithmetic ability of primary students by (a) describing the theoretical model of arithmetic ability assessment using Wilson’s (2004) four building blocks of constructing measures and (b) providing empirical evidence for the validation study. The instrument consists of 21 multiple-choice questions that hierarchically evaluate arithmetic intended learning outcomes (ILOs) on arithmetic ability, hierarchically, based on Bloom’s cognitive taxonomy for 138 primary three grade students. The theoretical model describes students’ arithmetic ability on three distinct levels: solid, developing, and basic. At each level, the model describes the characteristics of the tasks that the students can answer correctly. The analysis shows that the difficulty of the items followed the expected order in the theoretical construct map, where the difficulty of each designed item aligned with the cognitive level of the student, the item difficulty distribution aligned with the structure of the person construct map, and word problems required higher cognitive abilities than the calculation problems did. The findings, however, pointed out that more difficult items can be added to better differentiate students with different ability levels, and an item should be revised to enhance the reliability and validity of the research. We conclude that the conceptualizations of such formative assessments provide meaningful information for teachers to support learning and tailoring instruction.","PeriodicalId":42417,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.1155679","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We report the validity of a test instrument that assesses the arithmetic ability of primary students by (a) describing the theoretical model of arithmetic ability assessment using Wilson’s (2004) four building blocks of constructing measures and (b) providing empirical evidence for the validation study. The instrument consists of 21 multiple-choice questions that hierarchically evaluate arithmetic intended learning outcomes (ILOs) on arithmetic ability, hierarchically, based on Bloom’s cognitive taxonomy for 138 primary three grade students. The theoretical model describes students’ arithmetic ability on three distinct levels: solid, developing, and basic. At each level, the model describes the characteristics of the tasks that the students can answer correctly. The analysis shows that the difficulty of the items followed the expected order in the theoretical construct map, where the difficulty of each designed item aligned with the cognitive level of the student, the item difficulty distribution aligned with the structure of the person construct map, and word problems required higher cognitive abilities than the calculation problems did. The findings, however, pointed out that more difficult items can be added to better differentiate students with different ability levels, and an item should be revised to enhance the reliability and validity of the research. We conclude that the conceptualizations of such formative assessments provide meaningful information for teachers to support learning and tailoring instruction.
量身定制教学和直接学习的课堂评估:一项验证研究
我们报告了一种评估小学生算术能力的测试工具的有效性,该工具通过(a)使用Wilson(2004)的四个构建度量的构建块描述算术能力评估的理论模型,以及(b)为验证研究提供经验证据。该工具由21道选择题组成,根据Bloom的认知分类法,对138名小学三年级学生的算术能力进行分层评估。该理论模型从三个不同的层面描述了学生的算术能力:扎实、发展和基础。在每一个层次上,该模型都描述了学生能够正确回答的任务的特征。分析表明,在理论结构图中,项目的难度遵循预期顺序,其中每个设计项目的难度与学生的认知水平一致,项目难度分布与人结构图的结构一致,单词问题比计算问题需要更高的认知能力。然而,研究结果指出,可以添加更难的项目,以更好地区分不同能力水平的学生,并且应该修改一个项目,以提高研究的可靠性和有效性。我们得出的结论是,这种形成性评估的概念为教师提供了有意义的信息,以支持学习和定制教学。
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
International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education
International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
自引率
11.10%
发文量
40
×
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