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 NORM-REFERENCED 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 CRITERION-REFERENCED (C-R) STANDARDS

• NOT ALWAYS POSSIBLE TO FIND A CRITERION THAT EXPLICITLY DEFINES MASTERY, PARTICULARLY IN SOME SKILLS

LIMITATIONS OF CRITERION-REFERENCED (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??