| Nama Pengarang | : | Richard Holeton, Herbert C. Rudman, McCartney, Kathleen, Elizabeth Jordan, Larry Cuban |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 29-32 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | - |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 8-14 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | New conceptions of aptitude, learning, development, and achievement, both cognitive and conative, are identified and some new ideas about their assessment are reviewed. A rough table of these constructs is provided. It is argued that much construct validational research is needed to understand the new constructs and place them in a reasonable and useful network. Also needed is a recognition that different purposes for educational assessment require different levels and models of assessment. A plea for research on teacher understanding and use is included, because no improvements in school level assessment can be reached without it. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 15-20 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | Is the time ripe to develop technologically based versions of cognitive psychological methods and to apply them to problems of educational assessment? In this article, I point to dangers of using one common cognitive psychological method, chronometric analysis, for purposes of educational assessment. I also argue, though, that progress is being made toward developing more accurate diagnostic techniques, and that this progress promises to allow more revealing assessments than are possible with traditional psychometric instruments. Both the problems with chronometric methods and the promise of new approaches are illustrated with examples from recent research. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 3-7 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | The need to develop policies and procedures that do a better job of evaluating educational progress, and especially the extent to which students are learning to perform tasks that require high-level cognitive abilities, is widely recognized. There is not a consensus, however, as to precisely what kinds of tests should be constructed or how they should be used. The contributors to this use of Educational Researcher address several aspects of the dual problem of assessing high-order cognitive functioning and doing so in such a ways as to impact the eduational system positively as a whole. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 21-26 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | This paper focuses first on two questions: (a) Is critical thinking generalizable? and (b) What is a critical thinking disposition? It is argued that the controversial nature of these questions limits the ability to judge the validity of critical thinking testing. Following this discussion, the paper outlines a series of procedures that can help increase the validity of one fundamental aspect of critical thinking testing-multiple-choice testing ofcredibility judgment. The procedures rely on verbal reports of examinees` thinking on items to gain direct evidence on the reasons for their answer choices. It is recognized that multiplechoice tests cannot test all important aspects of critical thinking, but that improving multiplechoice tests where they are applicable can have important practical and scientific implications. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | Collins, Allan, John R. Frederiksen, Norris, Stephen P., Nickerson, Raymond S. , Siegler, Robert S., Richard E. Snow |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 27-32 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | Our concern in this paper is with the validity of educational tests when they are employed as critical measures of educational outcomes within a dynamic system. The problem of validity arises if an educational systems adapts itself to the characteristics of the outcome measures. We introduce the concept of systematically valid tests as ones that induce curricular and instructional changes in education systems (and learning strategy changes in students) that foster the development of the cognitive traits that the tests are designed to measure. We analyze some general characteristics that contribute to or detract from a testing system`s systemic validity, such as the use of direct rather than indirect assessment. We then apply these characteristics in developing a set of design principles for creating testing systems that are systematically valid. Finally, we provide an illustration of the proposed principles, by applying them to the design of a student assessment system. This design example addresses not only specifications for the tests, but also the means of teaching the process of assessment to users of the system. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 11-16 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | Theory and practice in evaluation in particular and in applied social science in general are principally focused on methodological issues and on instrumental conceptions of knowledge use while relegating questions about morals and values to the periphery. Drawing on recent writing in social and political philosophy, particularly the critique of the liberal democratic tradition, the author examines liberalist beliefs and their consequences for contemporary thinking about evaluation. He outlines an argument for restoring moral discourse to the center of our concerns about evaluation practice and examines what such a restoration might entail. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 4-10 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | A new approach to the conceptualization and assessment of human intelligences is described. According to Gardner`s Theory of Multiple Intelligences, each human being is capable of seven relatively independent forms of information processing, with individuals differing from one another in the specific profile of intelligences that they exhibit. The range of human iintelligences is best assessed through contextually based, ``intelligence-fair`` instruments. Three research projects growing out of the theory are described. Preliminary data secured from Project Spectrum, an application in early schildhood, indicate that even 4- and 5-year-old children exhibit distinctive profiles of strengthand weakness. Moreover, measures of the various intelligences are largely independent and tap abilities ather than those measured by standard intelligences tests. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | Linn, Marcia C, Hyde, Janet Shibley, Gardner, Howard, Thomas Hatch, Schwandt, Thomas A. |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 17-27 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | Males have greater access to science and technical fields and greater earning power than females. Many argue that cognitive and psychosocial gender differences explain these career differences. In contrast, evidence from meta-analysis and process analysis indicate indicate that (a) gender differences on cognitive and psychosocial tasks are small and declining, (b) gender differences are not general but specific to cultural and situational contexts, (c) gender differences in cognitive processes often reflect gender differences in course enrollment and training, and (d) gender differences in height, physical strength, career access, and earning power are much larger and more stable than gender differences on cognitive and psychosocial tasks. These trends imply that small gender differences in cognitive and psychosocial domains be deemphasized and instead that learning and earning environments be resigned to promote gender equity. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 11-15 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | The authors examine inferences made by a beginning teacher and illustrate that traditional notions of validity as presented by Cronbach and Cook and Campbell are inadequate for judging their validity. These traditional notions of validity depend on a regularity theory of causation, although Cronbach`s and Cook and Campbell`s particular conceptions are quite different. The relationships between causation and validity are discussed. A different theory of causation, an intentional theory of causation, is explicated. Such a view runs counter to the principles of the regularity sensible in understanding teachers` causal inferences. The authors advocate an expanded, pluralistic conception of validity that allows that inferences made in a variety of ways can be valid. |
Unduh Dokumen Berkas PDF Utama