Publication
Title
Comparative judgement as a promising alternative to score competences
Author
Abstract
To adequately assess students' competences, students are asked to provide proof of a performance. Ideally, open and real-life tasks are used for such performance assessment. However, to augment the reliability of the scores resulting from performance assessment, assessments are mostly standardised. This hampers the validity of the performance assessment. Comparative judgement (CJ) is introduced as an alternative judging method that does not require standardisation of tasks. The CJ method is based on the assumption that people are able to compare two performances more easily and reliable than assigning a score to a single one. This chapter provides insight in the method and elaborates on why this method is promising to generate valid, reliable measures in an efficient way, especially for large-scale summative assessments. Thereby, this chapter brings together the research already conducted in this new assessment domain.
Language
English
Source (book)
Innovative practices for higher education assessment and measurement / Cano, Elena [edit.]; e.a. [edit.]
Publication
Hershey, Pa : IGI Global, 2016
ISBN
978-1-5225-0531-0
Volume/pages
p. 119-138
Full text (Publishers DOI)
UAntwerpen
Faculty/Department
Research group
Publication type
Subject
Affiliation
Publications with a UAntwerp address
External links
Record
Identification
Creation 22.08.2016
Last edited 22.11.2016
To cite this reference