Bandingkan metode
Tinjau metode pilihan Anda berdampingan; baris yang berbeda akan disorot.
| Portfolio Assessment× | Many-Facet Rasch Measurement× | |
|---|---|---|
| Bidang | Education | Education |
| Keluarga≠ | Process / pipeline | Latent structure |
| Tahun asal≠ | 1992 | 1989 |
| Pencetus≠ | Performance-assessment tradition (Arter & Spandel; Koretz; Vermont/Kentucky programs) | John Michael Linacre |
| Tipe≠ | Assessment based on a purposeful collection of student work over time | Rasch model extension adding rater and other facets to person and item |
| Sumber perintis≠ | Arter, J. A., & Spandel, V. (1992). Using portfolios of student work in instruction and assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 11(1), 36–44. DOI ↗ | Linacre, J. M. (1989). Many-Facet Rasch Measurement. MESA Press. ISBN: 9780941938020 |
| Alias | Educational Portfolio Assessment, Student Portfolio Evaluation, Showcase / Working Portfolio Assessment, Portfolio-Based Assessment | MFRM, Many-Faceted Rasch Model, Facets Model, Linacre Facets Model |
| Terkait | 4 | 4 |
| Ringkasan≠ | Portfolio assessment evaluates learning through a purposeful collection of a student's work assembled over time rather than through a single test. The portfolio may showcase best work, document growth, or demonstrate mastery against standards, and typically includes student selection and reflection. Articulated for education by Arter and Spandel and stress-tested in large-scale programs analyzed by Koretz, it captures authentic, complex performance that on-demand testing misses, while raising distinctive challenges for the reliability and comparability of scores. | Many-facet Rasch measurement (MFRM) extends the basic Rasch model to assessments mediated by raters. Beyond examinee ability and item difficulty, it adds explicit parameters for rater severity and for any other facet of the rating situation — task, occasion, rating criterion — placing them all on one common logit scale. Developed by John Michael Linacre, MFRM lets analysts estimate and adjust for the fact that some raters are systematically harsh and others lenient, producing 'fair' ability estimates that do not penalize an examinee for happening to draw a severe judge. |
| ScholarGateSet data ↗ |
|
|