How ‘Testing’ Has Become ‘Programmatic Assessment for Learning’

Lambert W.T. Schuwirth , Cees P.M. van der Vleuten
{"title":"How ‘Testing’ Has Become ‘Programmatic Assessment for Learning’","authors":"Lambert W.T. Schuwirth ,&nbsp;Cees P.M. van der Vleuten","doi":"10.1016/j.hpe.2018.06.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Programmatic assessment for learning is a fundamentally different approach to assessment than the more traditional methods. Yet, it is a logical next step given the history of assessment. In this narrative and subjective review we describe our view on the historical developments in assessment and how they have logically led to the development of programmatic assessment for learning.</p><p>The early stages of assessment focussed on measurement of competence with an aim to develop the single best method for each aspect of competence. With the development of competencies the notion of integration and more meaningful assessment emerged but still reductionist issues remained. Programmatic assessment for learning currently seeks to assess students more holistically and meaningfully with rigorous attention to trustworthiness and credibility of the whole assessment process. As such, it may be a revolutionary development but it strongly builds on previous research and insights in the field.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":93562,"journal":{"name":"Health professions education","volume":"5 3","pages":"Pages 177-184"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.hpe.2018.06.005","citationCount":"24","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health professions education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452301118301172","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 24

Abstract

Programmatic assessment for learning is a fundamentally different approach to assessment than the more traditional methods. Yet, it is a logical next step given the history of assessment. In this narrative and subjective review we describe our view on the historical developments in assessment and how they have logically led to the development of programmatic assessment for learning.

The early stages of assessment focussed on measurement of competence with an aim to develop the single best method for each aspect of competence. With the development of competencies the notion of integration and more meaningful assessment emerged but still reductionist issues remained. Programmatic assessment for learning currently seeks to assess students more holistically and meaningfully with rigorous attention to trustworthiness and credibility of the whole assessment process. As such, it may be a revolutionary development but it strongly builds on previous research and insights in the field.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“测试”如何成为“程序化的学习评估”
程序性学习评估是一种与传统方法根本不同的评估方法。然而,考虑到评估的历史,这是一个合乎逻辑的下一步。在这个叙述和主观回顾中,我们描述了我们对评估的历史发展的看法,以及它们如何在逻辑上导致了学习的程序化评估的发展。评估的早期阶段侧重于能力的测量,目的是为能力的每个方面制定单一的最佳方法。随着能力的发展,出现了整合和更有意义的评估的概念,但仍然存在简化问题。目前,程序性学习评估旨在更全面、更有意义地评估学生,并严格关注整个评估过程的可信度和可信度。因此,它可能是一个革命性的发展,但它在很大程度上建立在该领域以前的研究和见解之上。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
38 weeks
期刊最新文献
Learning Harmony: Medical Student Reflections on the Intersection of the Arts & Humanities and Medicine, A Mixed Methods Study. Faculty Perceptions of Health Professional Students' Hybrid-Online Learning Strategies: A Multi-Center Qualitative Study The Effect of Online Learning on Students' Practical Assessment Results During the COVID-19 Lockdown Period Classroom Versus Online Team-based Learning: Effects on Students’ Learning and Performance Students’ Perceptions and Insights Towards Online Learning During Covid-19 Crises
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1