Search

Assessment and evaluation at all levels of educational systems have become policy priorities for many countries. Two common reasons for this are student learning expectations and accountability. Although much effort has been put into the creation and refinement of content standards, standardized tests, and methods for using testing results, there has been less attention paid to the development of performance standards (proficiency levels) that greatly affect policy decision making. The present study investigates the Objective Standard Setting Model (OSS) as an improved criterion-referenced method for setting multilevel performance standards. To demonstrate how OSS can be employed for performance standard setting, our study used data from preservice teachers completing an assessment literacy test in a pre- and posttest environment. Using OSS, performance standard levels of proficient and excellent were established with clear content-related descriptions of growth in student content mastery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Expectations and how they are communicated influence employees’ motivation, effort, goals, efficacy and performance. This study examined faculty performance evaluation standards and processes of 60 academic departments in research universities for motivationally relevant elements. Characteristics were systematically analysed to understand their content and motivational implications. They were examined for features influential on employee engagement, effort, persistence, innovation and organizational commitment, in an iterative, qualitative process. The researchers distilled eight key features of performance standards with influential, research-based motivational implications and analysed how they are demonstrated in the standards. These eight motivationally positive components were evident, but not consistent across these standards. Findings suggest that higher education institutions re-examine their faculty performance standards, consider their motivational messages and implications. Further research on faculty performance standards is also indicated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While a large body of research has focused on the effects of teachers' educational standards and/or expectations of different types of pupils related to pupils' ability, race/ethnicity, gender, and/or social class, there has been much less research on how such standards/expectations are formed by teachers' institutional structure. Previous research on the impact of institutional factors on teachers' pedagogy and curriculum has suggested the usefulness of a particular embedded, ecological model in studying the development of teachers' standards/expectations of pupils. This article uses ethnographic data gathered from one Belgian (Flemish) multicultural vocational and technical education school to illustrate the usefulness of this conceptual framework for studying the development of teachers' standards of assessment of pupils. The conclusion discusses implications for future research on the development of teachers' standards and/or expectations of pupils. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Teacher quality is widely recognized as influencing student achievement and success in school. In this article, we consider various approaches to the assessment of teacher quality, including process-product observational measures, evaluation checklists, professional standards, large-scale surveys, and commercially available observation systems. We present examples of each from the special education literature, consider teacher education research genres for which each is appropriate, and evaluate each using a set of criteria that incorporates both practical and technical considerations. We advocate for multimethod approaches to teacher quality research and for more research relating what teachers know and do to what students learn, and we note that a stronger link between teachers and learners would allow for more rigorous evaluations of teacher preparation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The idea of program evaluation is both simple and appealing. Program outcomes are measured and compared to some minimum performance standard or threshold. In practice, however, evaluation is difficult. Two fundamental problems of outcome measurement must be addressed. The first, which we call the problem of auxiliary outcomes, is that we do not observe outcome of interest. The second, which we call the problem of counterfactual outcomes, is that we do not observe the threshold standard. This article examines how performance standards should be set and applied in the face of these problems in measuring outcomes. The central message is that the proper way to implement standards varies with the prior information an evaluator can credibly bring to bear to compensate for incomplete outcome data. By combining available data with credible assumptions on treatments and outcomes, the performance of a program may be deemed acceptable, unacceptable, or indeterminate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]