Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2000 16:24:41 +1100
To: voced-coord@rite.ed.qut.edu.au
From: Janine Bowes <jbowes@ozemail.com.au>
Subject: Enhancing validity of assessments

Good afternoon all

As part of yesterday's guest posting, Shelley stated

"....We go further than that, we argue that the major purpose of CBA is the prediction of workplace performance...." On page 71 of the guidelines, we offer some suggestions of how to enhance validity, including predictive validity. Your feedback on the practicalities of implementing these strategies would be most welcome. It may also be a good opportunity to start the discussions

(De Bono black hat declared in which the weaknesses of a proposal are noted)
I want to declare a De Bono Black Hat and suggest that it is unrealistic to expect that teachers would be able to satisfy all these requirements for all students across all competencies for a given course. Particularly when assessing VET is probably not what they do all the time. In the teacher guidelines there are 9 recommendations about enhancing validity, 7 about reliability, 6 about fairness, and 4 about flexibility - that is 26 features in all that every single assessment must have!

It's no wonder there is industry mistrust of teachers as assessors when it is not what they are doing all the time.

I challenge and invite arguments/ support for this suggestion - that the goal posts are too high for teachers to reach.

Janine

previous message · message index · next message

First published February 8, 2000. Last modified February 24, 2000.