
pmid: 28188198
The goal of this review is to highlight key elements underpinning excellent high-stakes summative assessment. This guide is primarily aimed at faculty members with the responsibility of assigning student grades and is intended to be a practical tool to help throughout the process of planning, developing, and deploying tests as well as monitoring their effectiveness. After a brief overview of the criteria for high-quality assessment, the guide runs through best practices for aligning assessment with learning outcomes and compares common testing modalities. Next, the guide discusses the kind of validity evidence needed to support defensible grading of student performance. This review concentrates on how to measure the outcome of student learning; other reviews in this series will expand on the related concepts of formative testing and how to leverage testing for learning.
Physiology, Reliability, Faculty, Validity, Generalizability, Humans, Summative assessment, Educational Measurement, Students, Blueprinting
Physiology, Reliability, Faculty, Validity, Generalizability, Humans, Summative assessment, Educational Measurement, Students, Blueprinting
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 80 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
