Accountability and Assessment
Assessment involves measuring the quality of learning that has occurred. The selection of an assessment method becomes a compromise between five somewhat conflicting purposes:
accountability, learning, selection, quality control and cost control.
Accountability
Considering the cost, time and effort involved, trainees and employers require evidence that training programs are effective in meeting their objectives. Records of assessment are also necessary to meet regulatory requirements regarding training and may be useful in countering possible claims of incompetence on the part of an advisor or negligence on the part of an employer. Assessment records can be used to demonstrate that an employer has taken pains to check employees competency and address any problems.
Learning
To learn most effectively, trainees need fast accurate feedback as to performance. The feedback provided by effective assessment strategies can, on the one hand, build confidence and boost morale, while on the other hand identifying misconceptions so they can be addressed by further learning.
The results of assessment designed with prediction of performance in mind may be used to select suitable candidates for certain projects or further training.
Quality control
Suitable assessment strategies are crucial for maintaining course standards, improving the effectiveness of the learning environment and ensuring fairness.
Cost control
Selection of assessment strategies is always influenced by the availability of resources, principally:
- time for development and assessment
- availability of expert assessors
- trainee time
- money
The trade off
The selection of any assessment instrument involves a trade-off between objectives. Project work, for example, provides excellent opportunities for in-depth assessment of a range of skills and knowledge. Performance on a training project similar to a job-related task can adequately predict future job performance.
However, this type of assessment has a number of serious disadvantages: It is easy for students to cheat. Assessors need to be subject-matter experts and good trainers (hence their time is expensive) Projects involve hours of trainee time, during which trainees are unable to pursue other goals, learn material not directly involved in the project or perform productive work The delay between the performance of the assessment task and the receipt of feedback renders the assessment almost useless for facilitating learning.
It is difficult (given the usual cost constraints) for course providers to ensure fairness. Where
more than one assessor is concerned it is difficult to ensure that each is marking to the same standard. It is also difficult to ensure the standard (and hence the value of the course) remains constant year by year (particularly if there is course provider staff turnover.) In this case, satisfying objectives of selection and cost control involves sacrificing the goals of accountability, quality control and learning.
Quality control can be satisfied by introducing combinations of procedures such as blindmarking, double marking, statistical analysis and moderation or consensus moderation. However these tend to blow out costs and further delay feedback.
|
