Generalizability of Performance Assessments

How can the contributions of raters and tasks to error variance be estimated? Which source of error variance is usually greater? Are interrater coefficients adequate estimates of reliability? What other facets contribute to unreliability in performance assessments?     

Higher education and social change

An agenda for future higher education research is proposed which incorporates four interconnected elements: changing social contexts; their implications for higher education; mechanisms of interaction between higher education and society; higher education’s impact on society. The role of comparative research in investigating these topics is discussed and a set of priorities for future research questions is proposed. This final article draws heavily on the HELF final report published by the European Science Foundation entitled Higher Education Looking Forward: an agenda for future research and written by the author together with Jurgen Enders, Christine Musselin, Ulrich Teichler and Jussi Valimaa. The author acknowledges the contributions of his co-authors of the HELF report to the ideas and words contained in the present article.     

Equitable Classroom Assessment: Promoting Self-Development and Self-Determination

Assessment of students’ learning in school is deeply implicated in teaching for social justice. Yet classroom assessment is neglected relative to other aspects of curriculum and pedagogy in the literature on teaching for social justice. Some books have a relatively clear theory of anti-oppression education at their core but do not provide details about the links between assessment and their anti-oppression theory, while others provide a more detailed view of assessment practices but do not specify precisely how particular assessment strategies either promote or hinder anti-oppression education. This article provides a theoretical framework that spotlights key links between teaching for social justice and classroom assessment. To illustrate these connections, we draw on guided group discussions with ten high school social studies and English teachers, interested in pursuing professional development in this area. We conceptualize assessment as a set of institutional processes with the potential either to inhibit or nurture the development of young people as well as their capacity for self-determination. We analyze: (a) how teachers, through various assessment practices, can attempt to enable equitable relations within and beyond the classroom; and (b) performance standards aimed at helping teachers assess their students’ progress toward becoming more socially responsible and, ultimately, more self-determining. We conclude that even as teachers struggle to enact more socially just assessment practices, they need to communicate clearly with students and parents about what constitutes equitable assessment and what institutional practices, by contrast, sow seeds of self-doubt and lead to destructive labeling, ranking, and gate keeping.     

Political activity in escalation of commitment: Sport facility funding and government decision making in the United States

In the United States, the decision to commit extensive public resources to sport facilities is a contentious topic of debate. Elected officials often commit substantial public resources to sport facility projects amidst contrary empirical evidence and mixed residential approval. This behavior not only implicates the presence of political activity to advance a course of action, but also suggests an escalation of commitment (EoC), the subject of this study. The authors implemented a collective case study approach to examine three municipalities with long-standing histories of subsidizing professional sport facilities. Data collected from influential elected officials and public leaders (N = 13) as well as documents and records revealed (a) political action to be essential in EoC with decisions involving multiple stakeholder groups; (b) the influence and interaction of political action within each EoC determinant; (c) the substantial role of support, resources, power, and influence in efforts to increase and prevent commitment to a failing course of action; and (d) noticeable spillover effects from use of political activity in EoC.