MEASUREMENT AND EVALUATION IMPORTANCE AND PURPOSE OF MEASUREMENT

MEASUREMENT AND EVALUATION

IMPORTANCE AND PURPOSE OF MEASUREMENT AND EVALUATION IN HUMAN PERFORMANCE

DEFINITIONS • MEASUREMENT - COLLECTION OF INFORMATION ON WHICH A DECISION IS BASED • EVALUATION - THE USE OF MEASUREMENT IN MAKING DECISIONS

• 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”

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

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

FUNCTIONS OF MEASUREMENT AND EVALUATION

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

• PREDICTION of an individual’s level of achievement in future activities or predict one measure from another measure • PROGRAM EVALUATION • MOTIVATION

FORMATIVE AND SUMMATIVE EVALUATION

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”

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

STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION

“EVALUATION IS THE PROCESS OF GIVING MEANING TO A MEASUREMENT BY JUDGING IT AGAINST SOME STANDARD”

• 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 INDIVIDUAL’S PERFORMANCE IN RELATION TO THE PERFORMANCES OF OTHER MEMBERS OF A WELL-DEFINED GROUP

• 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

• 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

• 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”

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

LIMITATIONS OF CRITERIONREFERENCED (C-R) STANDARDS • NOT ALWAYS POSSIBLE TO FIND A CRITERION THAT EXPLICITLY DEFINES MASTERY, PARTICULARLY IN SOME SKILLS

LIMITATIONS OF CRITERIONREFERENCED (C-R) STANDARDS • ACCURACY OF C-R TEST VARIES WITH THE POPULATION BEING TESTED

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

MODELS OF EVALUATION

EDUCATIONAL MODEL

ADULT FITNESS MODEL

QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? ?