08 Chapter 2sss

7/30/2019 08 Chapter 2sss

1/21

CHAPTER 11

SURVEY OF RELATED LITERATURE

---ethods of EvaluationFactors in Internal AssessmentPeer EvaluationSelf-EvaluationParent Opinions on Student EvaluationConclusionReferences


2/21

CHAPTER l lSURVEY OF RELATED LITERATURE

The sunley of related literature implies, locating, studying andevaluating reports of researches relevant to the topic under investigation.This enables the investigator to have a clear picture of the problem area.Again, it performs certain other functions such as avoiding the risk ofduplication and contributing to the general scholarship of the investigator. "Itis a crucial step which invariably m~nimises he risk of dead ends, rejectedtopics, rejected studies, wasted effort, trial and error activity oriented towardsapproaches already discarded by previous investigators, and even moreimportant erroneous findings based on a faulty research design" (Mouly,1963).

It can be noted that Crit~calDictionary of Education (1982), sayson the terms like Evaluation, Measurement and Testing, "educationaldiscourse has many words that related to the broad task of judging the worthof a person, including 'evaluating, 'assessing', 'examining', 'testing', 'marking','grading', and 'scoring'. Such words are often confused; one person's'testing', is another person's 'assessing', and 'marking' in one country may be'grading' in another". 'Assessing ' and 'appraising' are general terms that mayindicate a variety of ideas and activit~es. On various occasions, both thesewords have been used as synonymous for very different terms: 'measuring'on one hand, or 'evaluating' on the other.


3/21

25-- Survey of Related LiteratureEvaluation by teachers through teacher made and standardised

tests, observation and other techniques are called internal assessment, i.e.,assessment done internally by the teachers teaching in the same institution.External examination or assessment is organised and conducted by anexternal agency other than the institution. Internal assessment rectifies amajor defect of the external examination. In place of depending on the resultsof the assessment at any one time or at a particular time, internal assessmentcan be continuous as desired.

As in the case of general evaluation, the field of educationalevaluation in lndia is still in its infancy. There is still no clear recognition onthe part of many educational researchers in lndia that some strong andimmediate steps must be taken to improve the methodology of educationalevaluation if it is to have a respectable future. Most educational evaluationshave failed to tackle the problems of conceptualisation, measurement,sampling and generalisability.

Saskatchewan Department of Education, published a handbook,Student Evaluation (1991) The guiding principles of this handbook are thatevaluation should be treated as an ongoing and comprehensive process thatis pervaded by careful planning and systematic implementation. Evaluation isconsidered to be a critical element that influences teacher's decision-makingand guides student learn~ng.


4/21

26 Survey of Related Literature

Deitz (1995) in his work, summarises examples of assessmentstrategies put forth by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics in"Assessment Standards for School Mathematics". Strategies include teacherobservation of student behaviour, problem-solving projects that involve one ormore students, and having student's right responses to problems inmathematics.

In the following sections, the investigator reviews the mostimportant studies related to the area of Internal Assessment in educationalinstitutions These studies are grouped in the following categories:

(i) Methods of Evaluation(ii) Teacher Evaluation(iii) Peer Evaluation and(iv) Self-Evaluation

2.1 METHODS OF EVALUATION

Research in educational evaluation and examination in thecontext of India is somewhat widespread.

Rao and Bharathi (1989) made an attempt on the ContinuousEvaluation System (CES) of examination in Kendriya Vidyalayas by studyingthe effects of such continuous evaluations on the final performance of thestudents. Their major findings were the following:


5/21

27 Suwey of Related Literature

(1 ) The marks scored in the continuous evaluation procedure were addedwith the marks of the final examination.

(2) Those students who were not able to score good marks in the internalassessment (continuous internal evaluation) were affected as theycould score less marks in aggregate when compared with the otherstudents. The findings of the study led to the following conclusions:

The general pattern of internal evaluation is identical in arts,commerce and science colleges.

A trend of decrease in the weightage given to the internal evaluation inarts, commerce and science colleges, and an increase of weightage inthe training colleges was shown.

The internal evaluation increased the administrative and clerical workfor the Principals, Teachers and college offices and also increased theexpenditure.

The teachers and the principals are not in favour of the discontinuationof the internal evaluation.

Though there was a moderately significant positive correlationbetween internal assessment marks and the university examinationmarks, no significant correlation was found between tutorial marks andcollege test marks.


6/21

28Survey of Related Literature

The mean scores of tutorial marks were found to be significantlyhigher than those of the university examination marks, i.e., college testmarks.

Raina (1974) in the study on the relationship between theexternal examination marks and internal assessment of M.Ed. studentsattempted to provide a comparison between the conventional system, wherethere is only external examination and the other system where there is acontinuous internal evaluation procedure adopted for postgraduate teachers,and teachers of colleges affiliated to the University of Rajasthan. The majorfindings of the study were the following:

(1) There was no significant relationship between the externalexamination marks and the sessional work marks of the samplestudents taken into consideration separately and also when sessionand dissertation marks were taken into consideration conjointly.

(2) The weaker students in the external examinations benefited morefrom sessional work than the students who have better performanceto their credit in the external examination.

Kamat (1974) In a study on the Internal and ExternalAssessments analysed and compared the two kinds of assessment andexamined the effects of the introduction of the scheme of external assessmenton the results of the Pre-degree examination of the University of Poona.


7/21

29- Survey of Related LiteratureThe study revealed that the coefficient of correlation between

the internal and external assessment was not high; it was smaller in respect ofthe arts subjects than the science subjects and it was smaller in the collegesin the mofussil areas than in the colleges in Poona city. The dispersion of theinternal assessment was generally greater, especially in arts subjects, thanthe dispersion of the external assessment.

Rao (1974) studied the systems of tests and Examinations, bothinternal and external, in the secondary schools of Tamil Nadu, to makereforms in the examinations.

The major purpose of the investigation was to study the presentsystem of tests and examinations in the secondary schools of Tamil Naduwith special reference to the present practice followed in conducting internaland external examination in the secondary schools of Tamil Nadu as well assome problems arising out of the introduction of internal assessment.

The values of correlation coefficients between the external andthe internal assessment were found to be greater in the language subjects ascompared to other subjects. The findings showed an indication that thestudents were suspicious about trend of teachers who were engaged in theprocess of assessing students internally.

Taneja and Ahluwalla (1966), compiled abstracts of M.Ed.Dissertations which Investigated the internal assessment procedures inTraining Colleges of Punjab. The study tried to find out the variations in


8/21


procedures and practices in respect of internal assessment of studentteachers (B.Ed.) as well as to discover the various difficulties and defects inthe implementation of the system of internal assessment in the trainingcolleges of Punjab.

The major findings of the study highlight that:(1) Though there was considerable agreement among the Principals of

Training Colleges to continue the system of internal assessment,there was no consensus as to its retention.

(2) Internal assessment in respect of theory papers, community activityand craft work varied widely with respect to the nature of evaluationfrequency and weightages given by different colleges.

2.2 FACTORS IN INTERNAL ASSESSMENT

Sylvia (1991) in her study, explains student achievement atvarious levels. The students are informed about the various criteria used forassessing them internally The findings of the study point towards the factthat if the students have got a sound understanding about the system ofinternal assessment, they will behave and react positively.

Fradd et a1 (1994) in the book, "Instructional Assessment",meets a critical assessment need, which is the need to develop legally andeducationally defensible assessment procedures for use with non-Englishlanguage background students who are still in the process of learning English.


9/21

- . Survey of Related Literature

The purpose of this text is to provide educators the information in respect tothe tools and the techniques that may be used in assessing the effectiveeducational decisions and the knowledge and insight to enable them to non-English language background students, internally and apply this information inboth theoretical and practical contexts.2.2.1 Factors i n Student Assessment

Alberta Department of Education, Edmonton (1994), in the studyon Evaluating Students' Learning and Communication, presents diagnosticteaching units for grade 7 science and grade 14 science. The studentactivities of the diagnostic teaching units in the handbook have been designedto engage students in the six learning and communication processes,exploring, narrating, imagining, empathising, abstracting and monitoringdescribed in the companion handbook. Each unit includes a generaldescription of the various methods for each lesson. As per the narration inthe handbook, the students are expected to have a comprehension of thevarious teaching-learning activities and that performance would be assessedcorrespondingly with the regular session. They will be given reasonableweightage when the final progress is estimated.

Beck et al. (1995) in their article, evaluating studentperformance, proposes that to assess students; preparedness to deliverpharmaceutical care; pharmacy schools have experimental evaluationsystems consisting of multiple assessment methods, guidelines for optimal


10/21


use, and procedures to promote faculty-student communication aboutperformance. Objec tive structured clinical exam inations, collaborativelyproduced, and examinations consisting of extended matching items arerecomm ended as evaluation instruments. These evaluation instruments arebeing practised on the students by giving reasonable weightage. Theircorresponding performance is thus assessed frequently and continuously.

Aikenhead and Dufee (1992) in their article on studentevaluation, provides an analysis of data collected in a study of six teachersreflecting upon their evaluation practices as they contemplated implanting aScience-Technology-Society curriculum. The authors concluded that teacherevaluation methods are dependent upon personal understandings of theassessment process developed from teaching experiences, personalevaluations, family influences and interactions with colleagues. They were ofthe strong opinion that the students were to be rated and assessed on thebasis of their various potentialities along with the academic performance; thedeserving candidates should be given ample weightage and consideration.

Pike and Kasworm (1994) through one of their studies,examined pattern of coursework of 1099 adult students' academicperformance appraised by teaching personnel. Results suggest thattraditional mo dels are inappropriate to this large and growing proportion of thecollege student population. More importance is given to conventional


11/21


methods of evaluating students still even though criteria for student evaluationhave been changed nowadays.

Riner (1993) in a study evaluated both a university studentteaching programme and the procedures used to evaluate individual student,and suggested that these evaluat~onprocedures need the application ofvarious criteria used for internal assessment on a scientific basis.

Bodle (1994) in a research paper on "Student Evaluations", usedcandid interviews with journalism educators regarding negative studentevaluations. Here, he discusses an understanding on student evaluations;handling rejection; learning from the process; the shortcomings of evaluations;and keeping all students under the internal evaluation procedure by absorbingthe major criteria adopted for assessing them internally.

Donmoyer (1993) discusses fairness in student evaluation,focussing procedures of internal evaluation, criteria adopted for the same, i.e.,participation in seminars, class attendance, submission of assignments,projects etc. and points towards the reluctance of some students to do thesame. He is of the clear opinion that if the above mentioned aspects areobserved on a scientific basis, the internal evaluation can be performedsatisfactorily.

Platt (1993) through his study on student evaluations assertsthat standardised teacher evaluation form belittle students by blending theminto an anonymous mass and emphasise that writing is not so important. The


12/21

34- Survey of Related Literaturestudy consolidated that rather than increasing students' efficiencies, teacherevaluation enhanced administrator's power and posed a danger to intellectualfreedom. So, all such practices have a negative influence on students withrespect of internal evaluation.

Russel and Rothman (1993) analysed, a method of studentevaluation of preclerkship clinical medical teaching used at the University ofToronto (Canada). The findings were that a high response rate had yieldeddata on individual teacher effectiveness and had been accepted to students.2.3 PEER EVALUATION

Cadiz and Levi (1998) in their study examined one of the biggestproblems students face in team projects in social loafing, a situation in whichthe students may view team projects as a free ride. This research examinedthe performance of students grading other student team members on a groupproject. Team members' evaluations were part of the grade. All evaluationswere confidential; and other students never saw the evaluations. Abehaviourally anchored scale was designed and used to discharge ratingsbased merely on personality. 'The scale developed for this study was basedon student opinions about the important task and social behaviours inteamwork. Ratings by students did make sense and the correlations betweenthe behaviourally anchored scales and the overall team's ratings weresignificant. Student ratings of teamwork were different and independent fromtheir project grades.


13/21


S~mkin nd Marcoulides (1991) through their publication, madeuse of a prepared evaluation from generalizability theory to judge the reliabilityof student grading of their peer's papers. Findings suggested that studentscan be consistent and fair in their assessments. Student practice in peerevaluation will help to develop the management skill of employee evaluation.

Morgan and Gliner (1997) in their study explained that studentsoften have difficulty in evaluating the validity of a study, as they are unawareof the various techniques for conducting internal evaluation.

A conceptually and linguistically meaningful framework forevaluating peers is proposed that is based on the discussion of internal andexternal validity of Cook and Campbell (1979). The proposal includes six keydimensions; three related to internal validity (instrument reliability andstatistics, equ~valence f participant characteristics and control of experience Ienvironment variables) and three related to external validity (operations andinstrument validity, population validity and ecological validity). The usage ofthese scales is illustrated through a study by J.A. Gliner and P. ample (1996)in which the purpose was to increase the quality of evaluation tool used forassessing peers internally in effective manners. Results suggested that peer

evaluation helped to play vital role in internal assessment of pupils.Sherrard et al. (1994) through their empirical study, states that

grades in a university classroom were based on peer evaluation and facultyassessments. Demographics of peer evaluators were found to introduce little


14/21

SurVey of Related Literature

bias into the peer evaluation process, although the response of women wasmuch higher than men. Students harboured considerable concern aboutbeing evaluated by their classmates2.4 SELF-EVALUATION

Boersma et al. (1995) in their report on Improving Student Self-Evaluation descr~beda series of curricular modifications made an effort toincrease students' ability to self-assess and set goals. Problems with self-evaluation and goal setting were documented through parent, teacher andstudent surveys Observations made on instructional methods revealed anabsence of possible alternative strategies and an overemphasis on teacher-dependent assessment of students The corresponding findings showed aninclination towards the fact that even though there is the practice of internalevaluation, the students should be given reasonable freedom to project theirvarious potentialities.

Klenowsk~ (1995) in the study on student self-evaluationprocesses, reports a research in student self-evaluation processes. Studentself-evaluation requires judgement of the 'worth' of one's performance and theidentification of strengths and weaknesses with a view to improving learning

outcomes. Analysis of both types of self-evaluation identified severalelements: use of criteria, teacher-student interactive dialogue and ascriptionof a grade The ~ntended learning outcomes for students includedindependence in their learning, responsibility for decision making related to


15/21


assignments, pro-activity and creativity in taking charge of their own work.The findings of the research indicated that despite all the constraints in thepassage, it was possible to see an empowering impact on students.

Twale, Shannon and Moore (1997) through their study,compared self-ratings and undergraduate student ratings of graduate teachingassistants (GTAs) on nine factors of teaching effectiveness, examiningmathematics and science GTAs who speak English as their native language(NGTAs) differ from their international counterparts (IGTAs). Overall, self-ratings were consistently higher than student ratings. Rating differencesdepended on specific teaching effectiveness factors and ratings source.

Lenski et al. (1996) in their study, discuss student-led parentconferences at Metcalf Laboratory School. It was found that students canlearn how to reflect on their learning, evaluate their progress, andcommunicate this information to their parents in a conference situation.Conclusion is that students were empowered and that student-ledconferences were a good way to use guided participation to create acommunity of learners capable of self-evaluation.

Haswell (1993) in a work on Student Self-Evaluations andDevelopmental Change, examined the connections between college studentself-evaluat~on and student development; it is proposed that such self-evaluation by actively emphasising on specific aspects of cognitive,


16/21

38~ Survey of Related Literature

psychological and soc~al evelopment can integrate their experience of self-evaluation

Moore and Hunter (1993) through their study, describes thatcollege student self-evaluations can assist in institutional outcomesassessment by helping educators understand the content, context andprocess of learning at both individual and institutional levels, and from theperspective of either research or assessment. Currently, self-assessment isused primarily in evaluating broad learning outcomes and individualdevelopment

Kusnic and Finely (1993) in their publication, describes that self-evaluation is a learning strategy that can help college students, particularlynon-traditional students, build coherence through their educationalexperiences. Faculty need to approach students' reflective, self-evaluativewriting as learners listening to what students say and using it as a guide to aidstudent development.

Wilson and Wright (1993) in a study on The Predictive Validity ofStudent self-Evaluations, examined 301 students in grades 8 through 12 in 4rural Appalachian schools, the abrlity of several school-related variables(including self-evaluations, teachers' evaluations and grades) to predictperformance on 2 scales of the Differential Aptitude Test was studied.Teacher perceptions and student self-evaluation are moderately validpredictors.


17/21

39~

Survey of Related Literature

Barnes and Barnes (1993) had explained in a study in oneprivate university classified four academic disciplines to compare studentevaluations of courses for organisation, breadth of coverage, groupinteraction, enthus iasm, grading and individual support. Results suggest asingle eva luation form may not be a ppropriate for all disciplines.

Poirot (1993) in an article, the fourth in a series on workconducted at the Texas Center for Educational Technology and the Universityof Texas, discusses evaluative measures nee ded to access the improvementsthat educational technology may have on students' problem solving, criticalthinking an d content-leve l abilities. It is an indication that all these as pectsshould have a bearing in the curricular and co-curricular activities that mayhelp them disclose the various capacities and abil ities already they have withthem.2.5 PARENT OPINIONS O N STUDENT EVALU ATION

Greene (1991) conducted a study to determine the methods ofstudent evaluation that th e parents felt most effective in helping them to assisttheir child's effort to develop skills and understand their child's performance inschool. It was found that most parents thought confere nces were the mostinformative kind of evaluation in terms of help that may be given to theirchildren. Developmen tal checklists we re the second ch oice of parents of firstgrade students, while letter grades and conferences were th e first choices offourth grad ers' parents.


18/21

40-. Survey of R elated Literature

2.6 CONCLUSIONThe foregoing review of related studies throws light on the

nature of work done relating to the problem under study. It helped theinvestigator a lot in defining the problem, limiting the scope and formulatinghypotheses.

Some useful suggestions have been given while pointing out theneed for overhauling the system of internal assessment in the light of thechanging social demands. Training of teacher educators in the techniques ofevaluation is the need of the hour. The quality of colleges, staff, equipmentand library may be improved. Evaluation procedures may be strengthened,updated and made systematic and scientific.


19/21


ReferencesAlberta Department of Education, Edmonton, Student Evaluation Branch(1993). Evaluating students' learning and communicationprocesses. Handbook 3-Diagnostic teaching units: Socialstudies. Alberta: Alberta Department of Education, p.320.Barnes, Laura L. and Barnes, Michael W. (1993). Academic disciplineand generalisability of student evaluations of instruction.

California: ERlC Document Reproduction Service, p.42.Beck, Diana E (1995). Evaluating student performance in the

experimental setting with conference. American Journal ofPharmaceutical Education, Vol. 111 22-34.Bodle, John V. (1994). Evaluating student evaluations. The searchfor perspective. Illinois: ERlC Document Reproduction Service,p.55Boersma. Gloria (1995). Improving student evaluation through

authentic assessment. Illinois: ERlC Document ReproductionS e ~ ~ c e ,.138.Cook, T.D. and Campbell, D.T. (1979). Helping students evaluate thereliability of a research study. Colorado: ERlC Document

Reproduction Service, p.20.Dietz, Charles (1995). The new standards: Evaluating studentprogress. Ontario: ERlC Document Reproduction Service, p.40.Donmoyer, Robert (1993). Art criticism as a guide to studentevaluation. Ontario: ERlC Document Reproduction Service, p.55.Duffee, L. and Aikenhead, G . (1992). Curriculum change, StudentEvaluation and Teacher Practical Knowledge. Ontario: ERlC

Document Reproduction Service, p.160.Eliner, J .A. , and Sample, P. (1996). Creating local norms to evaluatestudents in a State-wide testing program. Hawaii: ERlCDocument Reproduction Service, p.56.Fradd, Sandra Homlar (1994). Instructional assessment: Anintegrative approach to evaluating student performance.

Florida ERlC Document Reproduction Service, p.509.Haswell. Richard H. (1993). Student self-evaluations anddevelopment change. Louisiana: ERlC Document Reproduction

Service, p4 0


20/21


13. Kamat, A.R. (1974). The internal and external assessments. A surveyof research in education. Baroda: Centre of Advanced Studies inEducation, p.390.

14. Kasworm, Carol E .. & Pike, Gary R. (1994). Adult undergraduatestudent: Evaluating appropriateness of a traditional model ofacademic performance. New Brunton: ERlC DocumentReproduction Service, p.30

15. Klenowsk~, Val (1995). Student self-evaluation processes:Empowering students in learner-centred contexts. London:ERlC Document Reproduction Service, p.22.

16. Kusnic, Edith and Finley, Mary Lou (1993). Student self-evaluation: Anintroduction and rationale. Louisiana: ERIC DocumentReproduction Service, p.40.

17. Lensk~, usan Davis (1996). Honouring student self-evaluating in theclassroom community. New York: ERlC Document ReproductionService, p.24.18. Levi, Daniel and Cadiz, Dav~d 1998). Evaluating team work onstudent projects. The use of behaviourally anchored scales toevaluate student performance. California: ERlC DocumentReproduction Service, p.1119. Marcoulides, George and Simkin, Mark G. (1991). Evaluating studentpapers. The case of peer review. California: ERlC Document

Reproduction Service, p.28.20. Moore, William S. and Hunter, Steve (1993). Beyondmi ldly interestingfacts. Student self-evaluations and outcomes assessment.

Ohio: ERlC Document Reproduction Service, p.60.21. Morgan, George A. and Gliner, Jeffrey A. (1997). Helping studentsevaluate the validity of a research study. Colorado: ERlC

Document Reproduction Service, p.20.22. Mouly, George J. (1963). The science of educational research. New

York: American Book Company.23. Platt, Michael (1993). What student evaluation teach? Alberta: ERlCDocument Reproduction Service, p.20.24 . Poirot, James L. (1993). Assessing and evaluating student gains.Ontario: ERlC Document Reproduction Service, p.45.25. Raina, T N (1974). Relationship between external examination marks

and internal assessment of M.Ed. students, Basic Teachers' TrainingCollege. Sardarshar. In M.B. Buch (ed.). A survey of research ineducation. Baroda: Centre of Advanced Studies in Education,p.407


21/21

43-. Survey of Related Literature

26. Rao, R.S. and Bharathi, M. (1974). An investigation into the presentsystems of tests and examinations. In M.B. uch (ed.). A survey ofresearch in education. Baroda: Centre of Advanced Studies inEducation, p.408.27 Riner, Philip S. (1993). Evaluating student teaching by multiple linesof evidence. Brunton: ERlC Document Reproduction Service, pp.220-225.

28. Rowntree, Derek (1982). A critical dictionary of education. London:Harper and Row Publishers,29. Russel, M Lynn and Rothman, Arthur (1993). Consensus evaluation: Amethod of student evaluation yielding a high retrieval rate andranking scores. California: ERlC Document Reproduction Service,p.15.30. Saskatchewan Department of Education (1991). Student evaluation: Ateacher handbook. Ottawa: Saskatchewan, p.130.31. Sherrard, William R. (1994). An empirical study of peer bias inevaluations: Students rating students. California: ERlCDocument Reproduction Service, p.120.32. Sylvia. Larter (1991). Benchmarks: The development of a newapproach to student evaluation. Ontario: Toronto Board ofEducation. p.122.33. Taneja, V.B. and Ahluwalia, S.P. (1966). The systems of internalassessment. In M.B. Buch (ed.). A survey of research in

education. Baroda: Centre of Advanced Studies in Education,p.28034 Twale, Daria; Shannon David, M; and Moore, Mathew, S. (1997). NGTAand IGTA training experience comparisons between self-ratingand undergraduate student evaluations. South Carolina: ERlCDocument Reproduction Service, p.38.35. Wilson, Jean and Wright, Claudia, R. (1993). The predictive validity of

student self-evaluations, teachers' assessments, and grades forperformance on the verbal reasoning and numerical abilityscales of the differential aptitude test for a sample of secondaryschool students attending rural Appalachia schools. Ohio:ERlC Document Reproduction Service, p.35.

08 Chapter 2sss

Documents

Transcript of 08 Chapter 2sss