Title
Comparative judgement as a promising alternative to score competences Comparative judgement as a promising alternative to score competences
Author
Faculty/Department
Faculty of Social Sciences. Instructional and Educational Sciences
Publication type
bookPart
Publication
Hershey, Pa :IGI Global, [*]
Subject
Educational sciences
Source (book)
Innovative practices for higher education assessment and measurement / Cano, Elena [edit.]; e.a. [edit.]
ISBN - Hoofdstuk
978-1-5225-0531-0
Carrier
E
Target language
English (eng)
Full text (Publishers DOI)
Affiliation
University of Antwerp
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.
Handle