MEASUREMENT AND EVALUATION - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation
Title:

MEASUREMENT AND EVALUATION

Description:

measurement and evaluation importance and purpose of measurement and evaluation in human performance definitions measurement - collection of information on which a ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:657
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 33
Provided by: Departm78
Learn more at: https://www.sjsu.edu
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: MEASUREMENT AND EVALUATION


1
MEASUREMENT AND EVALUATION
2
IMPORTANCE AND PURPOSE OF MEASUREMENT AND
EVALUATION IN HUMAN PERFORMANCE
3
(No Transcript)
4
(No Transcript)
5
(No Transcript)
6
DEFINITIONS
  • MEASUREMENT - COLLECTION OF INFORMATION ON WHICH
    A DECISION IS BASED
  • EVALUATION - THE USE OF MEASUREMENT IN MAKING
    DECISIONS

7
  • INTERDEPENDENT CONCEPTS AS EVALUATION IS A
    PROCESS THAT USES MEASUREMENTS AND THE PURPOSE OF
    MEASUREMENT IS TO ACCURATELY COLLECT INFORMATION
    USING TESTS FOR EVALUATION
  • IMPROVED MEASUREMENT LEADS TO ACCURATE
    EVALUATION
  • GARBAGE IN, GARBAGE OUT

8
OBJECTIVE VERSUS SUBJECTIVE TEST CONTINUUM
  • OBJECTIVE TEST - 2 OR MORE PEOPLE SCORE THE SAME
    TEST AND ASSIGN A SIMILAR GRADE
  • DEFINED SCORING SYSTEM AND TRAINED TESTERS
    INCREASES OBJECTIVITY
  • HIGHLY SUBJECTIVE TEST LACKS A STANDARDIZED
    SCORING SYSTEM

9
EVALUATION
  • COLLECT SUITABLE DATA (MEASUREMENT)
  • JUDGE THE VALUE OF THE DATA ACCORDING TO SOME
    STANDARD
  • (I.E., CRITERION-REFERENCED STANDARD OR
    NORM-REFERENCED STANDARD)
  • MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON THE DATA

10
FUNCTIONS OF MEASUREMENT AND EVALUATION
11
  • PLACEMENT in classes/programs or grouping based
    on ability
  • DIAGNOSIS of weaknesses
  • EVALUATION OF ACHIEVEMENT to determine if
    individuals have reached important objectives

12
  • PREDICTION of an individuals level of
    achievement in future activities or predict one
    measure from another measure
  • PROGRAM EVALUATION
  • MOTIVATION

13
FORMATIVE AND SUMMATIVE EVALUATION
14
FORMATIVE EVALUATION
  • JUDGMENT OF ACHIEVEMENT DURING THE PROCESS OF
    LEARNING OR TRAINING
  • PROVIDES FEEDBACK DURING THE PROCESS TO BOTH THE
    LEARNER/ATHLETE AND TEACHER/COACH
  • WHAT IS SUCCESSFUL AND WHAT NEEDS IMPROVEMENT

15
SUMMATIVE EVALUATION
  • JUDGMENT OF ACHIEVEMENT AT THE END OF AN
    INSTRUCTIONAL UNIT OR PROGRAM
  • TYPICALLY INVOLVES TEST ADMINISTRATION AT THE END
    OF AN INSTRUCTIONAL UNIT OR TRAINING PERIOD
  • USED TO DECIDE IF BROAD OBJECTIVES HAVE BEEN
    ACHIEVED

16
(No Transcript)
17
STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION
18
EVALUATION IS THE PROCESS OF GIVING MEANING TO A
MEASUREMENT BY JUDGING IT AGAINST SOME STANDARD
19
  • CRITERION-REFERENCED (C-R) STANDARD IS USED TO
    DETERMINE IF SOMEONE HAS ATTAINED A SPECIFIED
    STANDARD
  • NORM-REFERENCE (N-R) STANDARD IS USED TO JUDGE AN
    INDIVIDUALS PERFORMANCE IN RELATION TO THE
    PERFORMANCES OF OTHER MEMBERS OF A WELL-DEFINED
    GROUP

20
  • CRITERION-REFERENCED (C-R) STANDARDS ARE USEFUL
    FOR SETTING PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR ALL
  • NORM-REFERENCED (N-R) STANDARDS ARE VALUABLE FOR
    COMPARISONS AMONG INDIVIDUALS WHEN THE SITUATION
    REQUIRES A DEGREE OF SENSITIVITY OR
    DISCRIMINATION IN ABILITY

21
  • NORM-REFERENCED STANDARDS
  • - DEVELOPED BY TESTING A LARGE GROUP OF
    PEOPLE
  • - USING DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS TO DEVELOP
    STANDARDS
  • - PERCENTILE RANKS ARE A COMMON NORMING
    METHOD
  • MAJOR CONCERN - GROUP
  • CHARACTERISTICS USED TO DEVELOP NORMS MAY NOT
    RESULT IN DESIRABLE NORMS EXAMPLES WITH BODY
    COMPOSTION AND BLOOD CHOLESTEROL LEVELS WERE
    AVERAGE MAY NOT BE DESIRABLE

22
  • CRITERION-REFERENCED STANDARDS
  • - PREDETERMINED STANDARD OF PERFORMANCE SHOWS
    THE INDIVIDUAL HAS ACHIEVED A DESIRED LEVEL
    OF PERFORMANCE
  • - PERFORMANCE OF INDIVIDUAL IS NOT COMPARED
    WITH THAT OF OTHER INDIVIDUALS
  • COMMON PRACTICE TO APPLY A CRITERION-REFERENCED
    STANDARD TO A NORM-REFERENCED TEST

23
DETERMINING ACCURACY OF CRITERION-REFERENCED
(C-R) STANDARDS
  • ACCURACY EXAMINED BY USING A 2 X 2 CONTIGENCY
    TABLE
  • C-R TEST RELIABILITY EXAMINES THE CONSISTENCY OF
    CLASSIFICATION

24
(No Transcript)
25
LIMITATIONS OF CRITERION-REFERENCED (C-R)
STANDARDS
  • NOT ALWAYS POSSIBLE TO FIND A CRITERION THAT
    EXPLICITLY DEFINES MASTERY, PARTICULARLY IN SOME
    SKILLS

26
(No Transcript)
27
LIMITATIONS OF CRITERION-REFERENCED (C-R)
STANDARDS
  • ACCURACY OF C-R TEST VARIES WITH THE POPULATION
    BEING TESTED

28
  • EXAMPLE
  • ACCURACY OF EXERCISE STRESS TEST VARIES WITH THE
    DISEASE PREVALENCE IN THE GROUP STUDIED (I.E.,
    PERCENTAGE OF PATIENTS WHO TRULY HAVE CORNOARY
    ARTERY DISEASE

29
MODELS OF EVALUATION
30
EDUCATIONAL MODEL
31
ADULT FITNESS MODEL
32
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS??
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com