Examination Reform in Central and Eastern Europe: Issues and trends

This paper surveys some of the reforms that are being proposed and implemented in countries of Central and Eastern Europe. This term is taken to mean the former USSR and socialist countries of Europe. The paper is based on experience but, as much as possible, this experience has been supplemented by reference to documents written locally and by international project teams. In some cases (Slovenia, the Baltics and Bulgaria), reforms have already been implemented. In others (Romania, Poland, Lithuania, Hungary, and Moldova), internationally funded reforms are under way. In yet others (Latvia, Albania and FYR-Macedonia), assessment/examination reforms are under discussion. Farther to the east, the Russian Federation, Ukraine and Georgia are also planning reforms to their assessment systems, in particular at the secondary/higher education interface. Two major trends are evident: (1) towards the definition of national standards; and (2) towards competence-based (as distinct from knowledge-based) assessment. These are discussed with reference to similar trends in other parts of the world.     

The Development and Psychometric Evaluation of a Multidimensional Measurement Instrument of Professional Expertise

The aim of the present study was to determine the nature of the knowledge and skills related to professional expertise, and to develop means by which such expertise may be individually measured. An instrument was developed consisting of five different scales (with contents ranging from 12 to 19 items each), each reflecting one of five dimensions: knowledge, meta-cognitive knowledge, skills, social recognition, growth and flexibility. Participants were two different, but relevant, groups of raters: individual employees (N = 558) and their immediate supervisors (N = 454). The item-sets for both groups are nominally identical, except that the wording was adapted when necessary to suit one group or the other. The reliabilities of the developed scales were high with Cronbach's alpha ranging from 0.83 to 0.94, for both the self-ratings and the supervisor ratings. All five scales are homogeneous and distinctive as corroborated by Multitrait-Multimethod and LISREL analyses. Background and construction of the instrument are discussed at length and the instrument is appended in two versions: the original Dutch questionnaire and an English version.