This is the second
post in a series on the topic of validity in educational
assessment. In my first post, I described the traditional
characterization of content-related, criterion-related, and construct-related evidence
as they are relevant to educators and credentialing innovators who use and
design assessments. This post summarizes traditional characterizations of “consequential
validity.” This aspect of validity concerns
the broader consequences of administering assessments to learners and using the
resulting scores. It is a complex idea that is really crucial to many
assessment and credentialing innovators (because broader change is their goal).
Many measurement professionals have long argued that it an
"unsanctioned" aspect of validity. Before I write about how
that is changing, I want to describe how consequential validity has
traditionally been written about and why I have long disagreed.
Wednesday, July 27, 2016
Monday, July 4, 2016
Traditional Approaches to Validity in Classroom Assessment and Innovative Credentialing (Part 1)
By Daniel Hickey
In my work with the Participatory Assessment Lab at Indiana
University and in my graduate education courses, I spend a lot of time helping
people understand validity in the context of educational assessment. In this post, I describe validity as it has traditionally been presented to educators. I summarize what one leading textbook has long
said educators should know about validity when assessing learning in their
own classes, and I extend that to credentialing innovators who are developing
digital badge systems, micro-credentials, and competency-based educational
programs. In subsequent posts, I will explore traditional views of “face validity” and “consequential validity.” Together, these posts will lay the groundwork for a final post that will explore several new developments in
validity theory that I believe are important for these two communities.
Sunday, May 15, 2016
2016 AAEEBL Midwest Meeting Keynote: Open Badges + ePortfolios: Searching for and Supporting Synergy
By Dan Hickey
Keynote Address at AAEEBL Midwest Regional Meeting at Notre Dame |
Once I get this post up I will get to the several dozen emails awaiting me in my inbox with headers suggesting that we have indeed made some progress towards increased synergy.
Wednesday, April 27, 2016
A Situative "Roadmap" for Synergy in Motivating Family STEM Engagement
By Dan Hickey
This is the third post about my collaboration with
Iridescent Inc., a science education non-profit in LA. This new post describes how
a key assumption in newer "situative" theories of motivation can
resolve the tensions between prior empiricist and constructivist approaches. When
combined with Design Based Research methods, this assumption can result in a
coherent "roadmap" towards synergy across the three approaches. I
contend that such a roadmap can help Iridescent and other informal STEM
innovators find a route that takes them from current levels of engagement to much
higher levels of engagement, both in terms of quantity and quality.
This post could use some work and some trimming but I need to get it up for my class and colleagues and get on to other things. Will try to clean it up soon
Sunday, April 24, 2016
Motivating STEM Engagement in Children, Families, and Communities
By Daniel Hickey
Friday, April 22, 2016
The Data of Learning: A Response to Martin Kurzweil's "Responsible Use of Student Data"
by James Willis
In mid-April, Stanford University hosted the "Learning Summit 2016: Inventing the Future of Higher Education." For those of us who study how the newer processes and protocols of using student data have ethical and legal consequences, one session in particular should be of interest: Marco Molinaro (UC Davis) moderated a panel on the "Responsible Use of Student Data for Individual and Organizational Improvement" which included speakers Martin Kurzweil (ITHAKA S+R), Mitchell Stevens (Stanford), and Kent Wada (UCLA). Kurzweil provided a recent blog posting summarizing the panel discussion, raising some important points.
In mid-April, Stanford University hosted the "Learning Summit 2016: Inventing the Future of Higher Education." For those of us who study how the newer processes and protocols of using student data have ethical and legal consequences, one session in particular should be of interest: Marco Molinaro (UC Davis) moderated a panel on the "Responsible Use of Student Data for Individual and Organizational Improvement" which included speakers Martin Kurzweil (ITHAKA S+R), Mitchell Stevens (Stanford), and Kent Wada (UCLA). Kurzweil provided a recent blog posting summarizing the panel discussion, raising some important points.
Thursday, April 21, 2016
Engaging Children and Families in Informal Science Learning
In this post, I share some things I have learned about the
design of "semi-formal" science learning environments that I learned
working with a remarkable science education non-profit in Los Angeles called Iridescent.
Friday, April 1, 2016
AERA and Open Digital Badges
by James Willis
The 2016 conference of the American Educational Research Association (AERA) will happen next week (April 8 - April 12) in Washington, D.C. There are some events related to open digital badges, so I'll discuss them briefly along with links to additional information. There is also an interesting disparity between the growing embrace of badges and the relatively little coverage at AERA.
The 2016 conference of the American Educational Research Association (AERA) will happen next week (April 8 - April 12) in Washington, D.C. There are some events related to open digital badges, so I'll discuss them briefly along with links to additional information. There is also an interesting disparity between the growing embrace of badges and the relatively little coverage at AERA.
Saturday, March 26, 2016
Recognizing, Assessing, and Motivating Entrepreneurial Mindsets
By Dan Hickey
In this longer post, I explore some of the issues around recognizing and motivating an entrepreneurial "mindset" using digital badges. I am collaborating with Rebecca DeVasher at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology and Helen Chen at Stanford University. They and their colleagues are working with the Kern Entrepreneurial Engineering Network (KEEN) on programs to help engineering students develop the dispositions needed to be a successful entrepreneur alongside their more conventional technical skills and problem solving ability.
In this longer post, I explore some of the issues around recognizing and motivating an entrepreneurial "mindset" using digital badges. I am collaborating with Rebecca DeVasher at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology and Helen Chen at Stanford University. They and their colleagues are working with the Kern Entrepreneurial Engineering Network (KEEN) on programs to help engineering students develop the dispositions needed to be a successful entrepreneur alongside their more conventional technical skills and problem solving ability.
Monday, February 8, 2016
2016 Developments at the Badge Alliance
by James Willis and Dan Hickey in conjunction with Nate Otto
At the end of 2015 and beginning of 2016, there have been a number of changes at the Badge Alliance. In a recent blog posting, Nate Otto, Director of the Badge Alliance, sets out an ambitious agenda for 2016. Beyond the on-going work of supporting productive and evidence-rich badging projects, the Badge Alliance is also concentrating efforts on communicating across the various communities and providing technical support to the ecosystem. We summarize some of those initiatives here.
At the end of 2015 and beginning of 2016, there have been a number of changes at the Badge Alliance. In a recent blog posting, Nate Otto, Director of the Badge Alliance, sets out an ambitious agenda for 2016. Beyond the on-going work of supporting productive and evidence-rich badging projects, the Badge Alliance is also concentrating efforts on communicating across the various communities and providing technical support to the ecosystem. We summarize some of those initiatives here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)