|
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 (Publisher's DOI)
|
|
|
|
| |
|