在比较高等教育学生表现时克服偏见的实用方法

IF 4.1 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Kai Pastor, Thorsten Schank, O. Troitschanskaia, K. Wälde
{"title":"在比较高等教育学生表现时克服偏见的实用方法","authors":"Kai Pastor, Thorsten Schank, O. Troitschanskaia, K. Wälde","doi":"10.1080/02602938.2022.2134841","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In times of rankings and performance benchmarks, data on average marks of higher education students are very common internationally and are often used as quality indicators in practice. We discuss the principles behind the distribution of average marks of students. These principles need to be taken into account when calculating the percentile of (the average mark of) a student. An informative percentile is obtained only if the average mark is compared to a distribution of averages that have been calculated based on the same number of credit points obtained by the student. We provide an empirical example from a university in Germany, which shows that percentile information can differ considerably when based upon different samples. Our findings indicate that the approach proposed in this study may not only be the most efficient approach for ranking students to be implemented into university practice, but may also contribute to a much more objective and credible grade reporting system for student performance.","PeriodicalId":48267,"journal":{"name":"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education","volume":"48 1","pages":"834 - 846"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A practical approach to overcoming biases in comparing student performance in higher education\",\"authors\":\"Kai Pastor, Thorsten Schank, O. Troitschanskaia, K. Wälde\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02602938.2022.2134841\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract In times of rankings and performance benchmarks, data on average marks of higher education students are very common internationally and are often used as quality indicators in practice. We discuss the principles behind the distribution of average marks of students. These principles need to be taken into account when calculating the percentile of (the average mark of) a student. An informative percentile is obtained only if the average mark is compared to a distribution of averages that have been calculated based on the same number of credit points obtained by the student. We provide an empirical example from a university in Germany, which shows that percentile information can differ considerably when based upon different samples. Our findings indicate that the approach proposed in this study may not only be the most efficient approach for ranking students to be implemented into university practice, but may also contribute to a much more objective and credible grade reporting system for student performance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48267,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education\",\"volume\":\"48 1\",\"pages\":\"834 - 846\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2022.2134841\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2022.2134841","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要在排名和成绩基准时代,高等教育学生的平均成绩数据在国际上非常常见,在实践中经常被用作质量指标。我们讨论了学生平均分数分布背后的原则。在计算学生的百分位(平均分数)时,需要考虑这些原则。只有将平均分数与基于学生获得的相同学分计算的平均值分布进行比较,才能获得信息百分位数。我们提供了一个来自德国一所大学的实证例子,该例子表明,当基于不同的样本时,百分位信息可能会有很大的差异。我们的研究结果表明,本研究中提出的方法不仅可能是将学生排名纳入大学实践的最有效方法,而且可能有助于建立一个更客观、更可信的学生成绩报告系统。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A practical approach to overcoming biases in comparing student performance in higher education
Abstract In times of rankings and performance benchmarks, data on average marks of higher education students are very common internationally and are often used as quality indicators in practice. We discuss the principles behind the distribution of average marks of students. These principles need to be taken into account when calculating the percentile of (the average mark of) a student. An informative percentile is obtained only if the average mark is compared to a distribution of averages that have been calculated based on the same number of credit points obtained by the student. We provide an empirical example from a university in Germany, which shows that percentile information can differ considerably when based upon different samples. Our findings indicate that the approach proposed in this study may not only be the most efficient approach for ranking students to be implemented into university practice, but may also contribute to a much more objective and credible grade reporting system for student performance.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
15.90%
发文量
70
×
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