How to Do Things With Words

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.

Standards for educational and psychological testing

The change of very first chart on page 91 was quite impressive and made me interest of the concept of maximizing data ink ratio. Today, unlike the period of 1980s, we have great quad processing computer that can do all the graphical designs using its own GPU which results in realistic visual on 3Ds. Even though I agree this theory of maximizing data ink ratio, I think some decoration is quite necessary to emphasize the data you are retrieving.

The Visual Display of Quantitative Information

Many people in "literate" societies, when asked to define literacy, almost always do so in terms of reading
and writing abilities This narrow interpretation of literacy, an
offspring of reductionist psychology, has reigned supreme in many academic and educational contexts for decades, greatly shaping literacy theories and classroom practices Within the past ten years, however, a large body of multidisciplinary
research has begun to undermine the authority of this
perspective by situating literacy in larger social practices

Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourses.

In Antiracist Writing Assessment Ecologies: Teaching and Assessing Writing for a Socially Just Future, Asao Inoue provides both theoretical framework and practical discussion to help implement antiracist writing assessment practices in individual classrooms. In so doing, classroom instructors can better realize their goals and commitments to social justice rather than evaluating student writing in ways that privilege a white, monolingual embodiment of language. Inoue resists engaging with the psychometric language consistent with assessment research from other fields. His discussion of assessment focuses on individual instructors in individual classrooms, advocating what might be seen as a “building block” approach to changing programmatic and institutional assessment practices. While his concerns are less about teaching labor than student labor, the pedagogical tactics he advocates, such as contract grading to value labor over quality and to decenter the teacher’s authority in the classroom, may help alleviate some of the material realities of nontenured and adjunct instructors in addition to reframing ideas of success in first-year composition (FYC) classrooms. Antiracist Writing Assessment Ecologies is divided into five chapters that develop Inoue’s argument for more just forms of assessment in composition classrooms. He begins with background framework for why antiracist writing assessment ecologies are needed. From this background, he delves into race as a topic missing from current writing assessment work to account for why minority students do not achieve the same success as their white peers. By not discussing race explicitly, the field of writing assessment reinforces what Inoue calls the “white racial habitus,” embodied by the “objective standard” of writing assessments. Individuals new to writing assessment research will find his work informative and valuable as he challenges the existing research while also building on it. From this discussion, he builds on the implications of existing scholarship’s erasure of race by articulating what an antiracist writing assessment ecology is by engaging with Freirean, Buddhist, and Marxist theories. He articulates seven aspects to this framework: power, parts, purposes, people, processes, products, and places. The ecological framework he advocates will allow students and instructors to consider how their interconnectedness affects their writing and reading practices. An example here may be helpful: a composition instructor elects to use portfolio grading. The instructor, his or her students, and the department-level administrators are all people in this writing assessment ecology. The portfolio is a part of the ecology, written for specific purposes that might vary depending on the people involved. An instructor who works in antiracist ways might explain that he or she sees assessing writing as a process, and in this discussion the instructor helps negotiate power in his or her classroom, which is one place in this assessment ecology. The products are the results of the processes in the ecology, like the judgment made about the portfolio. In the ecology Inoue

Antiracist Writing Assessment Ecologies: Teaching and Assessing Writing for a Socially Just Future

Race and Writing Assessment

ABSTRACT In this article, we propose a justice-oriented, antiracist validity framework designed to disrupt assessment practices that continue to (re)produce racism through the uncritical promotion of white supremist hegemonic practices. Using anti-Blackness as illustration, we highlight the ways in which racism is introduced, or ignored, in current assessment and validation processes and how an antiracist approach can be enacted. To start our description of the framework, we outline the foundational theories and practices (e.g., critical race theory & antiracist assessment) and justice-based framings, which serve as the base for our framework. We then focus on Kane’s interpretive use argument and Mislevy’s sociocognitive approach and suggest extending them to include an antiracist perspective. To this end, we propose a set of heuristics organized around a validity argument that holds justice-oriented, antiracist theories and practices at its core.

Disrupting White Supremacy in Assessment: Toward a Justice-Oriented, Antiracist Validity Framework

In this article, we investigate disparate impact analysis as a validation tool for understanding the local effects of writing assessment on diverse groups of students Using a case study data set from a university that we call Brick City University, we explain how Brick City’s writing program undertook a self-study of its placement exam using the disparate impact process followed by the Office for Civil Rights of the US Department of Education This three-step process includes analyzing placement rates through (1) a threshold statistical analysis, (2) a contextualized inquiry to determine whether the placement exam meets an important educational objective, and (3) a consideration of less discriminatory assessment alternatives By employing such a process, Brick City re-conceptualized the role of placement testing and basic writing at the university in a way that was less discriminatory for Brick City’s diverse student population

The Legal and the Local: Using Disparate Impact Analysis to Understand the Consequences of Writing Assessment

As is true for engineering communication programs nationwide, at MIT curricular and pedagogical reforms have been driven by changes in the kinds of problems that engineers solve and the associated skill sets that engineers must now have in communication and teamwork. This article presents three case studies from communication-intensive classes at MIT that intend to help students develop the advanced communication skills required of professional engineers today. Highlighting classes in biological engineering, aeronautics/astronautics engineering, and biomedical engineering, we explore the following questions: What does it mean for educational practice if professional communication competencies and tasks are the goals? How can students and technical faculty best create the conditions for students to learn to be skilled team members? How can engineering students move from mere display of data to making skilled visual arguments based on those data? The importance of helping students meet the target competencies of professional practice, of teaching effective teamwork and collaboration, and of teaching students to understand and argue with visual data are recognized as widespread needs, and these case studies attest to the possibilities and challenges in meeting those needs.

Innovation Across the Curriculum: Three Case Studies in Teaching Science and Engineering Communication

Author(s): Poe, Mya; Cogan, John Aloysius, Jr. | Abstract: The Civil Rights Act of 1964 has served as an influential legal framework for addressing intentional (disparate treatment) and unintentional (disparate impact) discrimination. While philosophical and methodological discussions of Title VI and Title VII are well articulated in the legal scholarship, the disparate impact approach--a method for evaluating unintended racialized differences in outcomes resulting from facially neutral policies or practices--remains an underutilized conceptual and methodological framework in assessment literature. In this article, we argue that the burden-shifting heuristic used by entities such as the Office for Civil Rights to redress disparate impact is a valuable approach in evaluating fairness of writing assessment practices. In demonstrating an application of the burden-shifting approach at one university writing program, we discuss the value of the proposed integrative framework and point to remaining questions regarding sampling concerns--group identification, group stability, and intersectionality.

/pdf/civil-rights-and-writing-assessment-using-the-disparate-n3rck4uzd1.pdf

Civil Rights and Writing Assessment: Using the Disparate Impact Approach as a Fairness Methodology to Evaluate Social Impact

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Mya Poe

Author Tools

Chat about Author