机会均等还是不公平优势?考试场所对高风险评估表现的影响

IF 2.7 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Carmen Vidal Rodeiro, Sylwia Macinska
{"title":"机会均等还是不公平优势?考试场所对高风险评估表现的影响","authors":"Carmen Vidal Rodeiro, Sylwia Macinska","doi":"10.1080/0969594X.2022.2121680","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT There has been controversy around the practice of providing accommodations, with some suggesting that they may give an unfair advantage rather than level the playing field. If that were the case, the assessment results of students with accommodations could be inflated, leading to a detrimental effect on the assessment’s validity. This research investigated this claim by comparing the performance of students who completed high-stakes examinations with and without test accommodations. To account for group differences that could affect performance, students were matched on background characteristics. The results revealed that students with accommodations performed similarly to or slightly worse than students without accommodations, suggesting that, in most cases, the accommodations worked as intended and helped levelling the playing field.","PeriodicalId":51515,"journal":{"name":"Assessment in Education-Principles Policy & Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Equal opportunity or unfair advantage? The impact of test accommodations on performance in high-stakes assessments\",\"authors\":\"Carmen Vidal Rodeiro, Sylwia Macinska\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/0969594X.2022.2121680\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT There has been controversy around the practice of providing accommodations, with some suggesting that they may give an unfair advantage rather than level the playing field. If that were the case, the assessment results of students with accommodations could be inflated, leading to a detrimental effect on the assessment’s validity. This research investigated this claim by comparing the performance of students who completed high-stakes examinations with and without test accommodations. To account for group differences that could affect performance, students were matched on background characteristics. The results revealed that students with accommodations performed similarly to or slightly worse than students without accommodations, suggesting that, in most cases, the accommodations worked as intended and helped levelling the playing field.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51515,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Assessment in Education-Principles Policy & Practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Assessment in Education-Principles Policy & Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2022.2121680\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"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 in Education-Principles Policy & Practice","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2022.2121680","RegionNum":3,"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: 4

摘要

关于提供住宿的做法一直存在争议,一些人认为这可能会提供不公平的优势,而不是公平的竞争环境。如果是这样的话,住宿学生的评估结果可能会被夸大,从而对评估的有效性产生不利影响。这项研究通过比较有和没有考试便利条件完成高风险考试的学生的表现来调查这一说法。为了解释可能影响成绩的群体差异,学生的背景特征被匹配。结果显示,有住宿的学生的表现与没有住宿的学生相似或略差,这表明,在大多数情况下,住宿是预期的,有助于平衡竞争环境。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Equal opportunity or unfair advantage? The impact of test accommodations on performance in high-stakes assessments
ABSTRACT There has been controversy around the practice of providing accommodations, with some suggesting that they may give an unfair advantage rather than level the playing field. If that were the case, the assessment results of students with accommodations could be inflated, leading to a detrimental effect on the assessment’s validity. This research investigated this claim by comparing the performance of students who completed high-stakes examinations with and without test accommodations. To account for group differences that could affect performance, students were matched on background characteristics. The results revealed that students with accommodations performed similarly to or slightly worse than students without accommodations, suggesting that, in most cases, the accommodations worked as intended and helped levelling the playing field.
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 in Education-Principles Policy & Practice
Assessment in Education-Principles Policy & Practice EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
3.10%
发文量
29
期刊介绍: Recent decades have witnessed significant developments in the field of educational assessment. New approaches to the assessment of student achievement have been complemented by the increasing prominence of educational assessment as a policy issue. In particular, there has been a growth of interest in modes of assessment that promote, as well as measure, standards and quality. These have profound implications for individual learners, institutions and the educational system itself. Assessment in Education provides a focus for scholarly output in the field of assessment. The journal is explicitly international in focus and encourages contributions from a wide range of assessment systems and cultures. The journal''s intention is to explore both commonalities and differences in policy and practice.
×
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