scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Robin D. Anderson

Bio: Robin D. Anderson is an academic researcher. The author has contributed to research in topics: Stereotype threat & Item analysis. The author has an hindex of 2, co-authored 3 publications receiving 35 citations.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper propose a protocol for administering general education tests under low-stakes conditions and describe simple proctor strategies that engender effort and inhibit inattention, which may not motivate students to perform optimally if they know the test results will not represent them personally.
Abstract: 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.

37 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper examined whether collecting gender information before general education assessments affects the performance of subjects for whom a negative domain performance stereotype exists, and found that inquiry is not a sufficient priming stimulus to trigger stereotype threat in low-stakes assessments, yet its removal may increase motivation and performance.
Abstract: This study examines whether collecting gender information before general education assessments affects the performance of subjects for whom a negative domain performance stereotype exists. Results show that inquiry is not a sufficient priming stimulus to trigger stereotype threat in low-stakes assessments, yet its removal may increase motivation and performance.

Cited by
More filters
01 Jan 2006
TL;DR: For example, Standardi pružaju okvir koje ukazuju na ucinkovitost kvalitetnih instrumenata u onim situacijama u kojima je njihovo koristenje potkrijepljeno validacijskim podacima.
Abstract: 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.

3,905 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, a 19 item cost scale with four dimensions: task effort, outside effort cost, loss of valued alternatives cost, and emotional cost is proposed to understand student motivation.

309 citations

01 Jan 2013
TL;DR: A 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 as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: 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.

66 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors explored the complex relationship between expectancy, value, test-taking effort, and test performance using data from a large-scale educational assessment study of German ninth-graders.

58 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article found that the instruction increased examinees' self-reported test-taking motivation by.89 standard deviations (SDs) and test scores by.63 SDs, and that students receiving the instruction spent an average of 14 more seconds on an item than students in the control group.
Abstract: 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...

54 citations