Actions Matter: The Case for Indirect Measures in Assessing Higher Education's Progress on the National Education Goals.

Autor/inn/en	Ewell, Peter T.; Jones, Dennis P.
Titel	Actions Matter: The Case for Indirect Measures in Assessing Higher Education's Progress on the National Education Goals.
Quelle	(1991), (55 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Academic Achievement; College Faculty; College Graduates; Communication Skills; Critical Thinking; Data Collection; Educational Assessment; Educational Indicators; Educational Objectives; Evaluation Methods; Higher Education; National Programs; National Surveys; Performance Based Assessment; Problem Solving; Thinking Skills + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Schulleistung; Fakultät; Hochschulabsolvent; Hochschulabsolventin; Kommunikationsstil; Kritisches Denken; Data capture; Datensammlung; Education; assessment; Bewertungssystem; Educational indicato; Bildungsindikator; Educational objective; Bildungsziel; Erziehungsziel; Hochschulbildung; Hochschulsystem; Hochschulwesen; nicht übertragen; Leistungsermittlung; Problemlösen; Denkfähigkeit
Abstract	This paper makes a case for the development of several indirect indicators of national progress in reaching the collegiate attainment objective of the National Education Goals of 1990. These indicators would be developed concurrently with a proposed performance-based assessment to be administered to a national sample of graduating college seniors. Indirect approaches will be easier to develop than direct assessments and will make data available at an earlier point. Specific types of indicators include: (1) institutional curricular and skills requirements for attainment of the baccalaureate; (2) indicators of good instructional practice consistent with the development of critical thinking and communication abilities; (3) national transcript studies; (4) faculty teaching practice surveys; and (5) surveys of current and graduating students. The strengths and weaknesses of these approaches are summarized. Because of the special nature of indirect indicators the standard review questions for these papers do not apply. Two figures illustrate the arguments, and an 18-item list of references is included. An appendix lists several existing survey instruments with potential for measurement in indirect assessment. Comments by R. Calfee, E. M. Greenberg, and M. L. Tenopyr on this paper are provided. (SLD)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC