Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Why school based assessment is not a universal feature of high stakes assessment systems?

  • Published:
Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 12 November 2009

An Erratum to this article was published on 12 November 2009

Abstract

Accepting that school based assessment may have the potential to bring additional reliability to the assessment outcomes of an educational system, this research uses Generalizability Theory to address the question “why school based assessment is not a universal feature of high stakes assessment systems”? Three major issues are identified: (a) there is a conflict between the psychometric model and classroom assessment practice; (b) different schools are not equally effective; and, (c) teachers’ judgments are frequently accused of being biased. The role of public examination boards is discussed in this context.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms, goals, structures and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261–271. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.84.3.261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arkes, H. R. (1986). Impediments to accurate clinical judgement and possible ways to minimise their impact. In H. R. Arkes & K. R. Hammond (Eds.), Judgement and decision making: An inter disciplinary reader (pp. 582–592). Cambridge: Cambridge U.P.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bangert-Drowns, R., Kulik, J., & Kulik, C. (1991). Effects of frequent classroom testing. The Journal of Educational Research, 85(2), 89–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron, J. (1994). Thinking and decision making (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge U.P.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, H. (1993). Taking a closer look. Key ideas in diagnostic assessment. Edinburgh: The Scottish Council for Research in Education. Reached at http://www.scre.ac.uk/pdf/taking/key.pdf on 11 May 2003.

  • Black, P. (2001). Dreams, strategies and systems: Portraits of assessment past, present and future. Assessment in Education, 8(1), 65–85. doi:10.1080/09695940120033261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7–74. doi:10.1080/0969595980050102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, R. L. (2001). Generalizability theory. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, R. L. (2003). Coefficients and Indices in Generalizability Theory. Center for Advanced Studies in Measurement and Assessment, CASMA Research Report, Number 1.

  • Broadfoot, P. (1996). Liberating the learner through assessment. In G. L. Claxton, T. Atkinson, M. Osborn & M. Wallace (Eds.), Liberating the Learner: Lessons for professional development in education (pp. 32–44). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brookhart, S. M. (1993). Teachers’grading practices: Meaning and values. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30, 123–142. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.1993.tb01070.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. Washington: United States Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J., Gleser, G. C., Nanda, H., & Rajaratnam, N. (1972). Theory of generalizability for scores and profiles. The dependability of behavioral measurements. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davison, C. (2004). The contradictory culture of teacher-based assessment: ESL teacher assessment practices in Australian and Hong Kong secondary schools. Language Testing, 21(3), 305–334. doi:10.1191/0265532204lt286oa.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self theories: Their role in motivation, personality and development. Philadelphia. Philadelphia: Psychology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Einhorn, H. J. (2000). Expert judgement: some necessary conditions and an example. In T. Connolly, H. R. Arkes & K. R. Hammond (Eds.), Judgement and decision making: An interdisciplinary reader (2nd ed., pp. 324–335). Cambridge: Cambridge U. P.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elander, J., & Hardman, D. (2002). An application of judgement analysis to examination marking in psychology. British Journal of Psychology, 93, 303–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feiler, A., & Webster, A. (1999). Teacher predictions of young children’s literacy success or failure. Assessment in Education, 6(3), 341–356. doi:10.1080/09695949992784.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Filer, A., & Pollard, A. (2000). The social world of pupil assessment: Processes and contexts of primary schooling. London: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Filer, A. (ed). (2000). Assessment: Social practice and social product. London: Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gipps, C. V., Brown, M., Mccallum, B., & Mcalister, S. (1995). Intuition or evidence?. Buckingham: Open University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, K., & Harding, A. (2002). Level descriptions and teacher assessment in England: Towards a community of assessment practice. Educational Research, 44(1), 1–15. doi:10.1080/00131880110081071.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, A. (2001). Department improvement and school improvement: A missing link?. British Educational Research Journal, 27(4), 477–486. doi:10.1080/01411920120071470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, P. W. (1998). Shaking the foundations: Research driven school reform. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9, 419–436. doi:10.1080/0924345980090404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, M. (1998). Change and tradition in education: The loss of community. In A. Hargreaves, A. Lieberman, M. Fullan and D. Hopkins (Eds.) International Handbook of Educational Change (p. 242–246) Dordrecht; Kluwer A.P.

  • Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1982). On the psychology of prediction. In D. Kahneman, P. Siovic & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 48–61). Cambridge: Cambridge U.P.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellaghan, T., & Greaney, V.(1992). Using Examinations to Improve Education: a Study of Fourteen African Countries. World Bank Technical Paper Number 165. The World Bank; Washington, D. C.

  • Kluger, A. N., & Denisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254–284. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H., Chessor, D., Craven, R., & Roche, L. (1995). The effects of gifted and talented programmes on academic self-concept: The big fish strikes again. American Educational Research Journal, 32(2), 285–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mcmillan, J. H., Myran, S., & Workman, D. (2002). Elementary teachers’ classroom assessment and grading practices. The Journal of Educational Research, 95(4), 203–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • QCA.(2002). Assessment and reporting arrangements: key stage I, 2002. London.

  • Queensland Board of Senior Secondary School Studies.(2003). Moderation of achievements in school-based assessments. Reached at http://www.qsa.qld.edu.au/publications/senior/files/ModerationOfAchievements.pdf reached at 10 May 2003.

  • Raveaud, M. (2004). Assessment in French and English infant schools: Assessing the work, the child or the culture? Assessment in Education: Principles. Policy & Practice, 11(2), 193–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rea-Dickins, P., & Gardner, S. (2000). Snares or silver bullets: Disentangling the construct of formative assessment. Language Testing, 17(2), 215–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeves, D. J., Boyle, W. F., & Christie, T. (2001). The relationship between Teacher Assessments and Pupil Attainments in Standard Test Tasks at Key Stage 2, 1996–1998. British Educational Research Journal, 27(2), 141–160. doi:10.1080/01411920120037108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, J. A., Rolheiser, C., & Hogaboam-Gray, A. (2002). Influences on student cognitions about evaluation. Assessment in Education, 9(1), 81–95. doi:10.1080/09695940220119201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheerens, J. (2001). Monitoring school effectiveness in developing countries. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 12(4), 359–384. doi:10.1076/sesi.12.4.359.3447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smyth, J., & Hattam, R. (2002). Early school leaving and the cultural geography of High Schools. British Educational Research Journal, 28(3), 375–398. doi:10.1080/01411920220137458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teasdale, A., & Leung, C. (2000). Teacher assessment and psychometric theory: A case of paradigm crossing? Language Testing, 17(2), 163–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thrupp, M. (2001). Recent school effectiveness counter-critiques: Problems and possibilities. British Educational Research Journal, 27(4), 443–459. doi:10.1080/01411920120071452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torrance, H., & Pryor, J. (2001). Developing formative assessment in the classroom: Using action research to explore and modify theory. British Educational Research Journal, 27(5), 615–632. doi:10.1080/01411920120095780.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woods, P. A., & Levacic, R. (2002). Raising school performance in the league tables (Part 2): barriers to responsiveness in three disadvantaged schools. British Educational Research Journal, 28(2), 227–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yung, B. H. W. (2002). Same assessment, different practice: professional consciousness as a determinant of teacher's practice in a school-based assessment scheme. Assessment in Education, 9(1), 97–117. doi:10.1080/09695940220119210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK

    Iasonas Lamprianou

  2. Department of Education Sciences, European University-Cyprus, P.O. Box 22006, Nicosia, 1516, Cyprus

    Iasonas Lamprianou

  3. Aga Khan University Examination Board, Karachi, Sindh, Pakistan

    Thomas Christie

Authors
  1. Iasonas Lamprianou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas Christie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Iasonas Lamprianou.

Additional information

An erratum to this article can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11092-009-9088-9

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lamprianou, I., Christie, T. Why school based assessment is not a universal feature of high stakes assessment systems?. Educ Asse Eval Acc 21, 329–345 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-009-9083-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-009-9083-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation