American College Students' Attitudes Toward Institutional Accountability Testing: Developing Measures

Zilberberg, Anna; Anderson, Robin; Finney, Sara J.; Marsh, Kimberly R.

doi:10.1080/10627197.2013.817153

Cited by 12 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another potential method of increasing the perceived self‐relevance of the test is to provide students with feedback about their performance. Providing feedback on a low‐stakes test may make the test seem less personally meaningless (Peterson & Irving, ; Zilberberg, Anderson, Finney, & Marsh, ) because, at the very least, the student would get an indication of his or her proficiency in a given area. Though providing students with feedback on their performance seems like an obvious way to make the test more self‐relevant, research suggests that it does not have an immediate impact on motivation.…”

Section: Test Conditions Shown To Influence Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring Motivation in Low‐Stakes Assessments

Finn

2015

ETS Research Report Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a growing concern that when scores from low‐stakes assessments are reported without considering student motivation as a construct of interest, biased conclusions about how much students know will result. Low motivation is a problem particularly relevant to low‐stakes testing scenarios, which may be low stakes for the test taker but have considerable consequences for teachers, school districts, or educational and governmental institutions. The current review addresses the impact of motivation on assessment scores and research that have identified methods for minimizing the error introduced by unmotivated test takers. A comprehensive review of the test conditions that have been shown to influence motivation is provided. In addition, the review identifies a number of circumstances under which motivation can be enhanced or diminished. The benefits and limitations of the various measurement techniques that have been used to mitigate the negative impact of low‐motivation test takers on score interpretation are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Test Conditions Shown To Influence Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring Motivation in Low‐Stakes Assessments

Finn

2015

ETS Research Report Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some lines of contemporary investigation have sought to demonstrate the influence of effort on test performance when the stakes are low by experimentally inducing motivation. Means of inducing effort have varied across studies but included manipulating motivational frames (e.g., “scores will be made available to employers”; [26]), offering monetary incentives [94], publicly recognizing students for their test performance [95], and providing feedback about performance [96]. Other studies have used nonexperimental procedures to study effort, such as measuring motivation via self-report [97], observational coding [98], filtering out subjects with extreme response times [99], and using person-fit statistics to detect unusual response patterns [100].…”

Section: Cognitive Test Performance Under Low-stakes Conditionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ability Tests Measure Personality, Personality Tests Measure Ability: Disentangling Construct and Method in Evaluating the Relationship between Personality and Ability

Kyllonen

Kell

2018

J. Intell.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Although personality and cognitive ability are separate (sets of) constructs, we argue and demonstrate in this article that their effects are difficult to tease apart, because personality affects performance on cognitive tests and cognitive ability affects item responses on personality assessments. Cognitive ability is typically measured with tests of items with correct answers; personality is typically measured with rating-scale self-reports. Oftentimes conclusions regarding the personality-ability relationship have as much to do with measurement methods as with construct similarities and differences. In this article, we review key issues that touch on the relationship between cognitive ability and personality. These include the construct-method distinction, sources of test score variance, the maximal vs. typical performance distinction, and the special role for motivation in low-stakes testing. We review a general response model for cognitive and personality tests that recognizes those sources of test score variance. We then review approaches for measuring personality through performance (objective personality tests, grit game, coding speed, economic preferences, confidence), test and survey behavior (survey effort, response time, item position effects), and real-world behavior (study time, registration latency, behavior residue, and social media). We also discuss ability effects on personality tests, indicated by age and cognitive ability effects, anchoring vignette rating errors, and instructions to 'fake good'. We conclude with a discussion of the implications for our understanding of personality and ability differences, and suggestions for integrating the fields.

show abstract

“…Two assumptions about the motivational effects of receiving feedback can be distinguished. One is that obligatory feedback 9 increases test motivation because the test is perceived by test-takers as more personally meaningful (Huffman et al 2011;Zilberberg et al 2013). 10 The second is that when receiving feedback is a choice and test-takers actively seek feedback, their level of test motivation is higher than those who do not.…”

Section: Interest In Receiving Feedback (Indirect Indicator)mentioning

confidence: 99%

The correlation between vocational school students’ test motivation and the performance in a standardized test of economic knowledge: using direct and indirect indicators of test motivation

Happ

Förster

2018

Empirical Res Voc Ed Train

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: In this study, the correlation between test motivation and performance on an economic knowledge test was investigated. To this end, the economic knowledge of 1018 students in vocational schools in Germany was assessed using a standardized test, and their self-reported test motivation and interest in receiving feedback on their performance on the test functioned as indicators of test motivation. The expectancy-value model served as the theoretical basis, while this paper followed Knekta and Eklöf (J Psychoeduc Assess 33(7):662-673, 2015) and focused on invested effort in particular. Further, the number of missing values on the test was examined as a potential external criterion for test motivation. The correlation between gender and test motivation being a subject of frequent discussion in the literature, gender was incorporated as a control variable into the modeling. Methods and results: Three structural equation models of the results show that self-reported test motivation (direct indicator) and the number of missing values on the test (external criterion) correlated significantly with the economic knowledge test score achieved. Interest in receiving feedback (indirect indicator) had no significant correlation with the economic knowledge test score. However, there is a positive correlation between interest in receiving feedback and self-reported test motivation. The analyses taking into account gender show that there is no correlation between gender and interest in receiving feedback or gender and self-reported test motivation. There are, however, correlations between gender and the economic knowledge test score as well as between gender and the number of missing values. Conclusions: The findings underline the importance of a differentiated view on the assessment of correlations between test motivation and test performance. Thereby, dividing indicators of test motivation into direct (self-reported test motivation) and indirect (interest in receiving feedback) indicators, as well as taking into account the external criterion (number of missing values), in particular, were seen as the value added by this study.

show abstract

American College Students' Attitudes Toward Institutional Accountability Testing: Developing Measures

Cited by 12 publications

References 12 publications

Measuring Motivation in Low‐Stakes Assessments

Measuring Motivation in Low‐Stakes Assessments

Ability Tests Measure Personality, Personality Tests Measure Ability: Disentangling Construct and Method in Evaluating the Relationship between Personality and Ability

The correlation between vocational school students’ test motivation and the performance in a standardized test of economic knowledge: using direct and indirect indicators of test motivation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About