Comparative Judgement as a Promising Alternative to Score Competences

View Sample PDF

Author(s): Marije Lesterhuis (University of Antwerp, Belgium), San Verhavert (University of Antwerp, Belgium), Liesje Coertjens (University of Antwerp, Belgium), Vincent Donche (University of Antwerp, Belgium)and Sven De Maeyer (University of Antwerp, Belgium)
Copyright: 2017
Pages: 20
Source title: Innovative Practices for Higher Education Assessment and Measurement
Source Author(s)/Editor(s): Elena Cano (University of Barcelona, Spain)and Georgeta Ion (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain)
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-0531-0.ch007

Keywords: Education / Higher Education / Information Science Reference / Learning Assessment and Measurement

Purchase

View Comparative Judgement as a Promising Alternative to Score Competences on the publisher's website for pricing and purchasing information.

Abstract

To adequately assess students' competences, students are asked to provide proof of a performance. Ideally, open and real-life tasks are used for such performance assessment. However, to augment the reliability of the scores resulting from performance assessment, assessments are mostly standardised. This hampers the validity of the performance assessment. Comparative judgement (CJ) is introduced as an alternative judging method that does not require standardisation of tasks. The CJ method is based on the assumption that people are able to compare two performances more easily and reliable than assigning a score to a single one. This chapter provides insight in the method and elaborates on why this method is promising to generate valid, reliable measures in an efficient way, especially for large-scale summative assessments. Thereby, this chapter brings together the research already conducted in this new assessment domain.

The IRMA Community

Research IRM

Comparative Judgement as a Promising Alternative to Score Competences

Purchase

Abstract

Related Content

IRMA Sponsors