Pedagosko i psiholosko testiranje i procjenjivanje spadaju među najvažnije doprinose znanosti o ponasanju nasem drustvu i pružaju temeljna i znacajna poboljsanja u odnosu na ranije postupke. Iako se ne može ustvrditi da su svi testovi dovoljno usavrseni niti da su sva testiranja razborita i korisna, postoji velika kolicina informacija koje ukazuju na ucinkovitost kvalitetnih instrumenata u onim situacijama u kojima je njihovo koristenje potkrijepljeno validacijskim podacima. Pravilna upotreba testova može dovesti do boljih odluka o pojedincima i programima nego sto bi to bio slucaj bez njihovog koristenja, a također i ukazati na put za siri i pravedniji pristup obrazovanju i zaposljavanju. Međutim, losa upotreba testova može dovesti do zamjetne stete nanesene ispitanicima i drugim sudionicima u procesu donosenja odluka na temelju testovnih podataka. Cilj Standarda je promoviranje kvalitetne i eticne upotrebe testova te uspostavljanje osnovice za ocjenu kvalitete postupaka testiranja. Svrha objavljivanja Standarda je uspostavljanje kriterija za evaluaciju testova, provedbe testiranja i posljedica upotrebe testova. Iako bi evaluacija prikladnosti testa ili njegove primjene trebala ovisiti prvenstveno o strucnim misljenjima, Standardi pružaju okvir koji osigurava obuhvacanje svih relevantnih pitanja. Bilo bi poželjno da svi autori, sponzori, nakladnici i korisnici profesionalnih testova usvoje Standarde te da poticu druge da ih također prihvate.

Standards for educational and psychological testing

Examinee effort can impact the validity of scores on higher education assessments. Many studies of examinee effort have briefly noted gender differences, but gender differences in test-taking effort have not been a primary focus of research. This review of the literature brings together gender-related findings regarding three measures of examinee motivation: attendance at the assigned testing session, time spent on each test item, and self-reported effort. Evidence from the literature is summarized, with some new results presented. Generally, female examinees exert more effort, with differences mostly at very low levels of effort—the levels at which effort is most likely to impact test scores. Examinee effort is positively correlated with conscientiousness and agreeableness, and negatively correlated with workavoidance. The gender differences in these constructs may account for some of the gender differences in test-taking effort. Limitations and implications for higher education assessment practice are discussed.

/pdf/the-role-of-gender-in-test-taking-motivation-under-low-4chjah8e8a.pdf

The Role of Gender in Test-Taking Motivation under Low-Stakes Conditions.

Is it all about value? Bringing back the expectancy component to the assessment of test-taking motivation

Assessments of student learning outcomes (SLO) have been widely used in higher education for accreditation, accountability, and strategic planning purposes. Although important to institutions, the assessment results typically bear no consequence for individual students. It is important to clarify the relationship between motivation and test performance and identify practical strategies to boost students' motivation in test taking. This study designed an experiment to examine the effectiveness of a motivational instruction. The instruction increased examinees' self-reported test-taking motivation by .89 standard deviations (SDs) and test scores by .63 SDs. Students receiving the instruction spent an average of 14 more seconds on an item than students in the control group. Score difference between experimental and control groups narrowed to .23 SDs after unmotivated students identified by low response time were removed from the analyses. The findings provide important implications for higher education insti...

The Effects of Motivational Instruction on College Students' Performance on Low-Stakes Assessment

Usually, it is assumed that achievement tests measure maximum performance. However, test performance is not only associated with ability but also with motivational and emotional aspects of test-taking. These aspects are influenced by individual success probability, which in turn depends on the ratio of individual ability to item difficulty (ability-difficulty fit). The impact of abilitydifficulty fit on test-taking motivation and emotion is unknown and rarely considered when interpreting test results. N = 9,452 ninth-graders in Germany (PISA 2006) completed a mathematics test and a questionnaire on test-taking effort (motivation) and boredom/daydreaming (emotion). Overall, mean item difficulty exceeded individual ability. Ability-difficulty fit was positively linear related with effort and boredom/daydreaming. The results suggest that low ability students may not show maximum performance in a sequential achievement test. Thus, test score interpretation for this subsample may be invalid. As a solution to this problem the application of computerized adaptive testing is discussed.

Too hard, too easy, or just right? The relationship between effort or boredom and ability-difficulty fit

General education program assessment involves low-stakes testing, but students may not be motivated to perform optimally if they know the test results will not represent them personally. We propose a protocol for administering general education tests under low-stakes conditions and describe simple proctor strategies that engender effort and inhibit inattention.

Peter J. Swerdzewski

Papers

Proctors Matter: Strategies for Increasing Examinee Effort on General Education Program Assessments