2. Problematising Assessment
(as if it needed it)
Balloons in this
James Atherton
colour are
11 March 13 additional notes for
the online version
3. This is the outcome
to which the
session relates
3.3: Understand theories, principles and
applications of formal and informal
assessment
4. 3.3: Understand theories, principles and
applications of formal and informal
assessment
And if I were teaching
Ofsted style I should
now recite the
objectives...
5. And for once I will.
At the end of this
session you should
be–
Confused
7. It is frowned
upon for you to
confuse your
students.
Confused
...but at a higher level than before
Probably from Kelley, 1951, but attributed to various sources
8. It is frowned
upon for you to ...which may well
confuse your be the biggest
students. limitation on your
teaching.
Confused
...but at a higher level than before
Probably from Kelley, 1951, but attributed to various sources
12. 1: The Problem of Proxies
...or surrogates, or
substitutes, or
stand-ins for the
real thing
13. 1: The Problem of Proxies
Assessment is rife with
them, and diluted by ...or surrogates, or
their use—but we are substitutes, or
stuck with them stand-ins for the
real thing
14. when
This is the essence of intuitive heuristics:
faced with a difficult question,
we often answer an easier one
instead, usually without noticing the
substitution
Kahneman 2011: 12
Thinking Fast and
Slow, Penguin
15. when
This is the essence of intuitive heuristics:
faced with a difficult question,
we often answer an easier one
instead, usually without noticing the
substitution
Kahneman 2011: 12
And this is exactly what we do in
assessment
28. Purposes
Forms Aspects
• Validity
• Reliability
• Fairness Traditional criteria
for evaluating
• Security assessment
29. Purposes
Forms Aspects
• Criterion-referenced
• Norm-referenced
• Ipsative
30. Purposes
Forms Aspects
• Criterion-referenced
• Norm-referenced
• Ipsative
Judging against fixed
pre-specified criteria
31. Purposes
Forms Aspects
• Criterion-referenced
• Norm-referenced
• Ipsative
Judging against other
people’s performance
32. Purposes
Forms Aspects
• Criterion-referenced
• Norm-referenced
• Ipsative
Judging against your
own prior
performance:
personal best
33. Purposes
• Formative Forms Aspects
• Summative
...etc. I could now
test you on your
knowledge of
assessment, but
34. See what I’ve
done? I’ve reduced
the whole topic to
• 12 items of jargon
35. Validity
• Does it do what it says on the tin?
• Is it really assessing the outcome?
36. What the area
of practice
actually Let’s look at the
requires whole process of
assessment drift.
37. What the area
of practice
actually Let’s look at the
requires whole process of
assessment drift.
Based on the work of
Howard Becker and
Etienne Wenger, among
others
43. What the area
of practice What the course
actually actually does
requires assess
That’s all the
overlap left
44. What the area
of practice What the course
actually actually does
requires assess
And if you
don’t pass
very well...
45. 2: False positives and false
negatives:
the inherent limitations of testing
46. 2: False positives and false
negatives:
the inherent limitations of testing
I got into some trouble in this section!
The maths are correct, but the problem comes with the labelling of
the False Positives (or Type 1 errors) and what happens if you try to
eliminate them simply by making the assessment stricter (rather than
by targeting it more precisely), so to avoid unnecessary extra
confusion, I’ve taken that out of this version.
49. In the real world, 80% are competent at it, and 20% aren’t
50. Not competent
(20%)
Competent (80%)
In the real world, 80% are competent at it, and 20% aren’t
51. But we’re not in the real world—we’re in a college—and we have to devise a
test to determine who can be let loose on the public
52. Inaccurate (20%)
Accurate (80%)
... but tests aren’t always good predictors. You devise the best you can,
but it may be only, say, 80% accurate.
53. Inaccurate (20%)
Not competent
(20%)
Accurate (80%)
Competent (80%)
So the 80% the test passes are not the same as the 80% who are genuinely
competent
55. False +
(4%)
False – (16%)
True –
True + (64%)
16%
These are the “true
positives”—they passed
the test, and so they
should have
56. These are the true
negatives: they
failed and so they
False +
should have done.
(4%)
False – (16%)
True –
True + (64%)
16%
57. These are the
unfortunates: the
test failed them,
but it was+
False wrong.
That is technically
(4%)
False – (16%)
a ‘Type 2’ error.
True –
True + (64%)
16%
58. False +
(4%)
False – (16%)
True –
True + (64%)
16%
These are the ‘Type 1’
errors: they should
have failed, but the
test passed them.
59. This test will always be 20% wrong.
So you can only reduce the False
Positives at the cost of increasing the
False Negatives.
See the notes for more on this.
60. So I hope you are now
confused at a higher level
than before...
61. • Becker H (1963) “Why school is a lousy place to learn anything in”
reprinted in R J Burgess (ed.) Howard Becker on Education
Buckingham; Open University Press, 1998
• Kahneman D (2011) Thinking, fast and slow London; Penguin
• Kay J (2011) Obliquity; why our goals are best achieved indirectly
London; Profile Books
• Wenger E (1998) Communities of Practice; learning, meaning and
identity Cambridge; C.U.P.