Measurement evaluation and assessment pdf
File Name: measurement evaluation and assessment .zip
- Definition of testing, assessment, and evaluation
- Difference Between Measurement and Evaluation
- Compiled by Measurement, Assessment, and Evaluation in Education
- Educational assessment
Definition of testing, assessment, and evaluation
Download Full PDF. Organization and Navigation through the Guide. Description of the Behavioral Epidemiology Framework. Definitions and Terminology. Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior Guidelines. Uniqueness of Assessment in Children and Adolescents. Principles of Measurement and Evaluation. Understanding Reliability and Validity. Advanced Concepts in Measurement Research.
Summary of Assessment Tools. Activity Outcomes. Research Type. Decision Confirmation. Background on Accelerometry-Based Activity Monitors. Newer Monitoring Technologies and Methods. Background on Sedentary Behavior. Assessments of Sedentary Behavior. This section describes key concepts in research and statistical inference with special emphasis on assessing physical activity.
The issues raised in this section are important regardless of the specific physical activity assessment protocol chosen. Specific attention will then be given to distinctions between reliability and validity so that viewers can effectively interpret tools summarized in the Measures Registry.
Brief coverage of advanced concepts of measurement research concludes this section but detailed summaries are beyond the scope of the Guide. The three items are often used interchangeably; however, they have very distinct meanings and interpretations. Measurement involves collecting specific information about an object or event and it typically results in the assignment of a number to that observation.
Assessment is a broader term that refers to an appraisal or judgment about a situation or a scenario. Evaluation involves attributing a meaningful value to the information that is collected. The values can be compared to a reference population i.
Note, with both measures, a value is placed on what the individual has achieved. The key point is that the three words each have different meaning and cannot be used interchangeably. In the context of physical activity, the measure could be a set of responses obtained through a recall tool e.
Another important distinction in measurement and evaluation is that of sample vs. It is certainly unrealistic to obtain information from every single member of a population, so a sample is typically used to reflect the population of interest.
The distinction between sample and population is analogous to the inherent differences between a measure and an estimate. In essence, we are attempting to measure behaviors of a population with estimates obtained from a sample of individuals. This process is defined as inferential statistics and it consists of replication of the population parameters of unknown distributions by examining the distributions in a subset of individuals who were randomly selected and are part of the population of interest.
Random sampling is a condition that is often not satisfied, so our inferences are typically based on convenience samples i. It is important that the sample drawn randomly represents the population to which one desires to generalize the results. Another fundamental measurement consideration in physical activity research is that of calibration.
As previously described, not all the dimensions of physical activity behavior can be directly measured, so assessment procedures typically necessitate a calibration process to obtain desired variables such as behavior type, VO 2 or energy expenditure.
Monitor-based measures, for example, produce raw indicators of movement e. However, research has demonstrated that simple relationships are inadequate to capture the array of different activities performed under free-living conditions.
The use of multiple equations or more complex pattern recognition approaches are now increasingly common for calibration purposes, but applying these methods requires additional expertise because the methods are not built directly into the software. Some examples of more advanced methods will be introduced in later sections of this Guide see Section 9 to facilitate additional exploration, but it is important to first have a basic understanding of the calibration process and associated statistics because these values are reported in papers highlighted in the Measures Registry.
Common statistical indicators used to evaluate the resultant accuracy of calibrated physical activity measures include the test of mean differences e. However, a detailed review of these terms is beyond the scope of the Guide. Regardless of the instrument or method used to assess physical activity behaviors or movement, users are often and must be concerned with the reliability consistency and validity truthfulness of the obtained measures.
The distinctions of these two indicators are described along with statistics used to express them. Reliability refers to the consistency with which something is measured but it can be examined in several ways. For example, one might consider consistency of a response at a given point in time e. This would be analogous to having a person complete a physical activity questionnaire twice with a minute interval in between. The comparison of the scores would reveal the extent to which the physical activity measure can provide similar and consistent information about activity levels.
Reliability in this context is rarely assessed in physical activity assessment research because any short gap between two assessments will be confounded by memory.
In other words, individuals are likely to remember what they answered and replicate their responses when asked to respond to the same questions. Alternatively, one can think of reliability across a longer period of time e. This latter reliability, often referred to as stability reliability, provides information about the stability of the measure across a longer period of time.
It is relatively easy to interpret the stability of a measure assessing a relatively stable trait , characteristic but it is challenging to evaluate and interpret in the context of physical activity assessment.
The assumption of stability reliability in measuring physical activity is confounded by changes in physical activity patterns that occur from day to day, morning vs. As described in Section 3 , children and youth have very particular movement patterns and, therefore, any measure is highly susceptible to low stability reliability indices.
This has considerable implications because a low index of stability reliability is more likely to reflect variability in behavior rather than the properties of the assessment tool. Thus, it can prove difficult to separate out the reliability of the assessment tool from the reliability of the behavior. Reliability is evaluated using interclass comparisons based on the Pearson Product Moment correlation or intraclass comparisons based on analysis of variance.
Using the interclass reliability is somewhat restrictive because it is limited to two points in time and does not take into account changes across time. It is important to note that the interclass reliability coefficient can be perfect even if the measures being compared are constantly changing. For example, if all participants increase their self-reported physical activity by about 30 minutes a day, the stability reliability for a full week would be very high.
However, this example does not actually show stability i. The intraclass method is more robust and can examine consistency across multiple measures or over multiple days.
The intraclass alpha coefficient reliability permits a more accurate estimate of the reliability. The intraclass reliability coefficient also is used to estimate the internal consistency reliability of a questionnaire or survey.
The internal consistency reliability does not mean that the instrument is necessary reliable consistent across time. Rather, it means that the items on the instrument generally tap the same construct i. This type of reliability is also very popular in social sciences but may have limited utility in the context of physical activity assessment. Again, consider the example of a questionnaire that asks about activity in different contexts e.
Activity levels at each of these settings will vary and it is possible that a child would report low levels of physical activity at recess and after-school but indicate high amounts of physical activity at physical education. These various scores across different contexts and items would result in low internal consistency and indicate that the items do not assess the same construct when, in fact, they do.
Depending on the measure being tested, the general use of reliability in physical activity research is more useful to assess variability in physical activity behavior and not the ability of the specific measure to provide consistent scores. For example, the agreement between two observers when coding observed physical activity behavior would be an important test of inter-rater reliability for the observation method and would indicate consistency of scores across testers or coders.
Regardless of the type of reliability coefficient calculated, the range of possible reliabilities is zero to 1. The Standard Error of Measurement SEM is often reported to reflect the degree to which a score might vary due to measurement error. Validity refers to the truthfulness of the measure obtained.
A measurement tool can result in reliable information but the data may not truthfully reflect the reported amount of physical activity behavior or movement. Validation of physical activity measures is typically accomplished with concurrent procedures in which a field or surrogate measure is compared with another more established or criterion measure.
As shown in Figure 3 , criterion measures are often used to calibrate monitor-based measures and these, in turn, are often used to calibrate report-based measures. From a validity perspective, the self-report physical activity measures are compared to this criterion to provide evidence of the truthfulness of the reported physical activity behaviors. These issues are discussed in Section 5. The Standard Error of Estimate SEE is often reported to reflect the degree to which an estimated value might vary due to measurement error.
Reading and interpreting the reliability and validity results in research reports can be difficult. Therefore, it is important to carefully review the procedures used to support reliability or validity of a specific measurement tool or process.
The Measures Registry provides brief summaries of reliability and validity statistics but it is important to carefully review the actual study before determining whether it will have utility for a specific application. A number of different indicators are used to report reliability and validity; however, for the aforementioned reasons we will focus on the most popular indicators for validity.
Table 1 provides a summary of common research statistics used to evaluate and report validity. Most would also be useful to determine reliability but the types of statistics will depend on whether the measures are continuous scores e.
When evaluating research findings on different physical activity methods, it is important to carefully consider the actual strength of the associations and not simply the statistical significance. To avoid over-interpreting findings, it is important to evaluate the absolute agreement and outcome measures rather than just the statistical significance.
For example, focus should be on the magnitude of a Pearson Correlation Coefficient rather than the significance. Traditional interpretations characterize correlations below 0. Validity indices of most report-based measures are below 0. With validity statistics it is also important to keep in mind that the reported relationships are typically based on aggregated data from multiple people. This makes sense from a sampling perspective, but accurate group-level estimates of physical activity do not necessarily translate to accuracy for estimating individual physical activity levels.
As the name implies, the MAPE value reflects the mean absolute difference in outcomes and is computed by first calculating the absolute value of individual difference scores and then averaging them. This provides a more appropriate and conservative indicator of actual error for individual estimation because it captures the magnitude of both overestimation and underestimation.
Difference Between Measurement and Evaluation
Download Full PDF. Organization and Navigation through the Guide. Description of the Behavioral Epidemiology Framework. Definitions and Terminology. Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior Guidelines.
Measurement is a systematic process of determining the attributes of an object. It ascertains how fast, tall, dense, heavy, broad, something is. However, one can make measurements of physical attributes only and if one has to measure those attributes which cannot be measured with the help of tools. That is where the need for evaluation arises. It helps in passing value judgement about the policies, performances, method, techniques, strategies, effectiveness, etc. Measurement provides a solid base to make an evaluation, as you have something concrete to make a comparison between the objects. Further, Evaluation has a crucial role to play in reforming the learning and teaching process and suggesting changes in the curriculum.
Measurement, Assessment, and Evaluation in Education. We measure distance, we assess learning, and we evaluate results in terms of some set of criteria.
Compiled by Measurement, Assessment, and Evaluation in Education
The crisis caused by the COVID virus has far-reaching effects in the field of education, as schools were closed in March in many countries around the world. In this article, we present and discuss the School Barometer, a fast survey in terms of reaction time, time to answer and dissemination time that was conducted in Germany, Austria and Switzerland during the early weeks of the school lockdown to assess and evaluate the current school situation caused by COVID Later, the School Barometer was extended to an international survey, and some countries conducted the survey in their own languages.
The following are definitions of testing, assessment, and evaluation. In spite of important differences between these terms, they are often used interchangeably by teachers. The verb evaluate means to form an idea of something or to give a judgment about something. According to Weiss , evaluation refers to the systematic gathering of information for the purpose of making decisions.
Educational assessment or educational evaluation  is the systematic process of documenting and using empirical data on the knowledge , skill , attitudes, and beliefs to refine programs and improve student learning. The word 'assessment' came into use in an educational context after the Second World War. As a continuous process, assessment establishes measurable and clear student learning outcomes for learning, provisioning a sufficient amount of learning opportunities to achieve these outcomes, implementing a systematic way of gathering, analyzing and interpreting evidence to determine how well student learning matches expectations, and using the collected information to inform improvement in student learning. The final purpose of assessment practices in education depends on the theoretical framework of the practitioners and researchers, their assumptions and beliefs about the nature of human mind, the origin of knowledge, and the process of learning. The term assessment is generally used to refer to all activities teachers use to help students learn and to gauge student progress. Assessment is often divided into initial, formative, and summative categories for the purpose of considering different objectives for assessment practices.