Suppr超能文献

不进行限时测试的四个基于实证的理由。

Four Empirically Based Reasons Not to Administer Time-Limited Tests.

作者信息

Gernsbacher Morton Ann, Soicher Raechel N, Becker-Blease Kathryn A

机构信息

Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison.

School of Psychological Science, Oregon State University.

出版信息

Transl Issues Psychol Sci. 2020 Jun;6(2):175-190. doi: 10.1037/tps0000232.

Abstract

For more than a century, measurement experts have distinguished between time-limited tests and untimed power tests, which are administered without time limits or with time limits so generous that all students are assured of completing all items. On untimed power tests, students can differ in their propensity to correctly respond to every item, and items should differ in how many correct responses they elicit. However, differences among students' speed of responding do not confound untimed power tests; therefore, untimed power tests ensure more accurate assessment. In this article, we present four empirically based reasons to administer untimed power tests rather than time-limited tests in educational settings. (1) Time-limited tests are less valid; students' test-taking pace is not a valid reflection of their knowledge and mastery. (2) Time-limited tests are less reliable; estimates of time-limited tests' reliability are artificially inflated due to artifactual consistency in students' rate of work rather than authentic consistency in students' level of knowledge. (3) Time-limited tests are less inclusive; time-limited tests exclude students with documented disabilities who, because they are legally allowed additional test-taking time, are often literally excluded from test-taking classrooms. (4) Time-limited tests are less equitable; in addition to excluding students with documented disabilities, time-limited tests can also impede students who are learning English, students from underrepresented backgrounds, students who are older than average, and students with disabilities who encounter barriers (e.g., stigma and financial expense) in obtaining disability documentation and legally mandated accommodations. We conclude by offering recommendations for avoiding time-limited testing in higher educational assessment.

摘要

一个多世纪以来,测量专家们一直区分限时测试和不限时的能力测试,后者在没有时间限制的情况下进行,或者时间限制非常宽松,确保所有学生都能完成所有题目。在不限时的能力测试中,学生对每道题正确作答的倾向可能不同,题目所引发的正确回答数量也应有所不同。然而,学生作答速度的差异并不会影响不限时的能力测试;因此,不限时的能力测试能确保更准确的评估。在本文中,我们提出了四个基于实证的理由,即在教育环境中应采用不限时的能力测试而非限时测试。(1)限时测试的效度较低;学生的应试速度并不能有效反映他们的知识和掌握程度。(2)限时测试的信度较低;限时测试信度的估计因学生工作速度的人为一致性而被人为夸大,而非学生知识水平的真实一致性。(3)限时测试的包容性较差;限时测试将有文件证明残疾的学生排除在外,因为他们依法被允许额外的应试时间,往往实际上被排除在应试教室之外。(4)限时测试的公平性较差;除了排除有文件证明残疾的学生外,限时测试还可能阻碍正在学习英语的学生、来自代表性不足背景的学生、年龄偏大的学生以及在获取残疾证明和法定便利措施时遇到障碍(如耻辱感和经济费用)的残疾学生。我们最后针对在高等教育评估中避免限时测试提出了建议。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

1
Diverse Brains.多样化的大脑。
Gen Psychol. 2015 Apr;49(2):29-37.
2
The University Experiences of Students with Learning Disabilities.有学习障碍学生的大学经历。
Learn Disabil Res Pract. 2016 May;31(2):90-102. doi: 10.1111/ldrp.12102. Epub 2016 May 17.
3
Why internet-based education?为何选择网络教育?
Front Psychol. 2015 Jan 21;5:1530. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01530. eCollection 2014.
10
Disability, race/ethnicity and gender: themes of cultural oppression, acts of individual resistance.
Am J Community Psychol. 2007 Mar;39(1-2):145-61. doi: 10.1007/s10464-007-9094-3.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验