Abstract
Critical features important for transforming large-scale educational assessment into effective policy research are examined. These include a developmental orientation to time-ordered data, empirically-grounded construct interpretations of measures and relationships, speculative inquiry into the role of diverse contributing factors, and appraisal of alternative perspectives on both the questions and the findings.
Résumé
L’auteur examine les aspects les plus importants à prendre en considération pour que l’évaluation pédagogique à grande échelle conduise à des résultats utilisables dans la détermination d’une politique d’éducation. Les conditions à réaliser seraient les suivantes: examiner d’un point de vue développemental des données recueillies séquentiellement, adopter à l’égard des mesures retenues et de leurs relations des corps d’interprétations fondées empiriquement, s’interroger sur le rôle des différents facteurs à considérer, et enfin, évaluer l’intérêt d’autres perspectives possibles, relatives aussi bien aux questions posées qu’aux résultats obtenus.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Baratz, J. C., & Duran, R. (1987).The educational progress of language minority students: Findings from the 1983–84 NAEP reading survey. Princeton, NJ: National Assessment of Educational Progress.
Churchman, C. W. (1971).The design of inquiring systems: Basic concepts of systems and organization. New York: Basic Books.
Heller, K. A., Holtzman, W. H., & Messick, S. (Eds.). (1982).Placing children in special education: A strategy for equity. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Kaplan, A. (1964).The conduct of inquiry: Methodology for behavioral science. San Francisco: Chandler.
Lerner, D., & Lasswell, H. D. (1951).The policy sciences: Recent developments in scope and method. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Lee, V. (1986).1983–84 NAEP reading proficiency: Catholic school results and national averages. Report to the National Catholic Education Association.
Lockheed, M. E. (1986).Determinants of student computer use: An analysis of data from the 1984 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Princeton, NJ: National Assessment of Educational Progress.
Lord, F. M. (1980).Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
Merton, R. K., & Lerner, D. (1951). Social scientists and research policy. In D. Lerner & H. D. Lasswell (Eds.),The policy sciences: Recent developments in scope and method. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Messick, S. (1980). Test validity and the ethics of assessment.American Psychologist, 35, 1012–1027.
Messick, S. (1984a). Assessment in context: Appraising student performance in relation to instructional quality.Educational Researcher, 13 (3), 3–8.
Messick, S. (1984b). The psychology of educational measurement.Journal of Educational Measurement, 21, 215–237.
Messick, S. (1985). Response to changing assessment needs: Redesign of the National Assessment of Educational Progress.American Journal of Education, 94, 90–105.
Messick, S., Beaton, A., & Lord, F. (1983).National Assessment of Educational Progress reconsidered: A new design for a new era (NAEP Report no. 83-1). Princeton, NJ: National Assessment of Educational Progress.
The reading report card: Progress toward excellence in our schools (NAEP Report No. 15-R-01). Princeton, NJ: National Assessment of Educational Progress.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
A somewhat abbreviated version of this paper was presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, April, 1986. A longer version was presented at the 21st International Congress of Applied Psychology, Jerusalem, July, 1986.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Messick, S. Large-scale educational assessment as policy research: Aspirations and limitations. Eur J Psychol Educ 2, 157–165 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03172645
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03172645