The presentation will highlight changing demands (from a sharp focus on access to concerns about throughput) and responses related to admission to higher education, and the research underpinning such responses. Beginning in the late 1980s, the paper traces the development of assessment procedures n the ‘dynamic’ testing tradition (responding to the need to test for ‘potential’ and widen access). The paper ends with a discussion of the National Benchmark Tests Project (responding the need to places students in appropriate curricula and improve throughput), focusing on the research and approaches underlying these tests as well as the findings and some implications both for schooling and higher education.
Presented by A/Prof. Nan Yeld & Robert Prince
Changing issues, changing questions, changing approaches: An overview of research in the Alternative Admission Research Project
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6. ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF THE SCAFFOLDING APPROACH Questionnaire evidence from pilot groups suggests that candidates found the new test to be more ‘user-friendly’. Correlations between first-year academic (UCT) performance and the selection tests strengthened. Stronger candidates use preparatory tasks whereas weaker candidates do not see the connections between tasks (such tasks therefore help to widen the gap). Based on scores from the same tasks (summary, short description and one page essay), the range of scores increased. Candidate perceptions Predictive validity Task preparation study Range of scores
25. ACADEMIC LITERACY (overall) N = 12,202 Participating institutions: Mangosuthu, Rhodes, Stellenbosch, UCT, UKZN, UWC, Wits. Serious learning challenges – long term, pre-tertiary intervention needed. Challenges identified such that it is predicted that academic progress will be adversely affected. If admitted, students’ educational needs should be met in a way deemed appropriate by the institution (eg extended or augmented programmes, special skills provision) Performance such that academic performance will not be affected. If admitted, students should be placed on regular programmes of study. 851 5571 5780 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 Total ACADEMIC LITERACY NBT Benchmark Levels, February 2009 Basic Intermediate Proficient
Brief explanation the differences between CTT and IRT
Briefly explain IRT: 3 parameter model b = item difficulty; a = item discrimination and c = pseudoguessing parameters Item Characteristic Curves Test Characteristic Curve Test Information Function Equating