Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Evaluation of ICT Competencies

2013, Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_26

Abstract

Information and Communication Technology (ICT) competencies comprise a subset of ­digital literacy, one of the various areas of technological competencies and skills necessary for real-life functioning in all kind of professional activities and levels of education from preschool to graduate levels. Assessment of ICT competencies involves the definition of specific target activities appropriate to the environment in which they are required. These environments range from the home to the workplace and involve such disparate activities as information-retrieval in healthcare settings or libraries; use of clerical, business, or investment applications; and interactions with government or other public services. The range of ICT competencies also includes the specific abilities needed by professionals responsible for the development of software or communication products and services. This chapter discusses several ICT assessment projects, addresses the primary technical specifications required for evaluation, and explores solutions to problems of test administration. These solutions range from electronic quizzes (similar to paper-and-pencil tests) to more “authentic” forms of assessment using e-portfolios or simulations of real software applications. A detailed analysis of the primary approaches for assessment of social, academic, commercial, or economic environments reveals that these approaches primarily focus on a basic core of skills consisting of Web navigation and the use of e-mail and office tools (text processor, spreadsheet, presentation, and database management). In the future, ICT evaluation will involve automatic scoring of natural language responses in documents, solutions of mathematical problems, and graphical or health applications, among many other real-life endeavors.

References (44)

  1. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council of Measurement in Education (1999). Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington, DC: Author.
  2. Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2001). Applying the Rasch model. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Pub.
  3. Ceneval (2010). ENLACE Media Superior. Manual para docentes y directivos [ENLACE for high school. A guide for teachers and directors].
  4. Mexico, DF: Author.
  5. Cohen, R. J., & Swerdlik, M. E. (2002). Psychological testing and assessment; an introduction to tests and measurement. Fifth ed. Boston, MA: McGraw Hill.
  6. Costa, A. L., Garmston, R. J., & Lambert, L. (1988). Evaluation of teaching: The cognitive development view. In Sarah J. Stanley & James Popham (Eds.), Teacher evaluation: six prescriptions for success. New York, NY: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  7. Draba, R. E. (1977). The identification and interpretation of item bias. Memorandum 25. Educational Statistics Laboratory. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
  8. Educational Testing Service (2005). Beyond Technical Competence: Literacy in Information and Communication Technology. An issue paper from ETS, ICT Literacy Assessment. Princeton, NJ: Author.
  9. Finch, F. L. (1988). A taxonomy of competency testing programs. In Richard M. Jaeger & Carol Kehr Tittle (Eds.). Minimum Competency Achievement Testing (Chap. 24). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan. Pub.
  10. Corp.
  11. Gago, H. A., & Mercado, C. R. (1995). La evaluación en la educación superior en México [Evaluation in high-level education in Mexico].
  12. Revista de la Educación Superior, N. 96, pp. 61-86. Mexico: ANUIES.
  13. Glassick, C. E., Taylor, M., & Maeroff, G. I. (1997). Scholarship assessed. Evaluation of the Professoriate. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc. Pub.
  14. Haladyna, T. M., & Downing, S. M. (1989a). A typology of multiple choice item writing rules. Applied Measurement in Education, 2, 37-50
  15. Haladyna, T. M., & Downing, S. M. (1989b). Validity of a taxonomy of multiple-choice item-writing rules. Applied Measurement in Education, 2, 51-78.
  16. Haladyna, T. M. (1992). The effectiveness of several multiple-choice formats. Applied Measurement in Education, 5(1), 73-88.
  17. Instituto Colombiano para el fomento de la Educación Superior (2004). Evaluación por competencias ICFES [ICFES Competencies evaluation]. Editorial Magisterio. Bogotá, Colombia: Author.
  18. Instituto de Evaluación e Ingeniería Avanzada (1998). Kalt Criterial® User's manual. San Luis Potosi, Mexico: Author. Available through: www. ieia.com.mx
  19. Johnson, E. G. (1994). The NAEP 1992 technical report. Educational Testing Service, National Center for Educational Statistics, July 1994, Report No.23-TR20.1031. Washington, USA: US Dept. of Education.
  20. Kilpatrick, J. (1979). Methods and results of evaluation with respect to mathematics education. In B. Christiansen & H. G. Steiner (Eds.), New Trends in Mathematics Teaching (4) (pp.162-179). Paris, France: UNESCO.
  21. Kubiszyn, T., & Borich, G. (2007). Educational Testing and Measurement. Eighth Ed. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Ed.
  22. Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28, 563-575
  23. Linacre, J. M. (2010). Winsteps® User's Manual. Australia: Winsteps.com.
  24. Louis, R., Jutras, F., & Hensler, H. (1996). Des objectifs aux competences: implications pour l'évaluation de la formation initiale des maîtres. Revue Canadienne de l'Éducation, 21(4), 414-432
  25. Magno, C. (2009). Taxonomy of aptitude test items: A guide for item writers. The International Journal of Educational and Psychological Assessment, 2(1), 39-53.
  26. Manatt, R. P. (1985). Competent evaluators of teaching: their knowledge, skills and attitudes. In William R. Duckett (Ed.), The Competent Evaluator of Teaching. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa.
  27. McNally, H. J. (1977). Performance-based teacher evaluation. NASSP Bulletin, 61, 104-105.
  28. OECD (2010a). PISA 2009 Results: Learning to Learn -Student Engagement, Strategies and Practices (Volume III). Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264083943-en OECD (2010b). Strong performers and successful reformers in education. Lessons from PISA for Mexico. Retrieved from http://www.pisa.oecd.org/dataoecd/55/0/46638969.pdf
  29. Pacheco, M. T., & Diaz, B. A. (2000). Evaluación académica. [Academic evaluation] Mexico: CESU-UNAM.
  30. Peterson, K. (2004). Research on school teacher evaluation. NASSP Bulletin, 88, 60-79
  31. Reyes, G. (1997). NAFTA and the future of Mexican High-school education. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 550(1), 96-104
  32. Rueda, M., & Landesmann, M. (1999). ¿Hacia una nueva cultura de la evaluación de los académicos? [Towards a new academic evaluation culture?] Pensamiento Universitario 88. Mexico: UNAM.
  33. Simpson, R. H. (1976). L'educateur et l'autoévaluation. [Teacher Self- evaluation], Coll. SUP. Collin MacMillan, International, Inc. Paris, France: Presses Universitaires de France.
  34. Tristán, L. A. (2004). Aporte a la metodología para diseño -a la medida‖ de reactivos de opción múltiple [Methodological contribution to -tailor-made‖ multiple-choice items].
  35. Foro de Evaluación Educativa VI. Mexico: Ceneval.
  36. Tristán, L. A., & Salazar, M. (2001). Examen de Certificación para profesores de educación media superior (ECPEMS) [Certification exam for teacher in High-school education]. Foro Regional de Evaluación Educativa (pp. 71-77). Campeche, Mexico: Ceneval.
  37. Tristán, L. A., & Vidal, U. R. (2007a). Standards for objective tests. AERA meeting, session: -New Developments in Measurement Thinking‖, Chicago. Available through ERIC document: ED496126.
  38. Tristán, L. A., & Vidal, U. R. (2007b). Linear model to assess the scale's validity of a test. AERA meeting, session: -New Developments in Measurement Thinking‖, Chicago. Available through ERIC document: ED501232.
  39. White, M. (2011). Predicting success in teacher certification testing: The role of academic help seeking. The International Journal of Educational and Psychological Assessment, 7(1), 24-44.
  40. Wilkerson, J. R., & Lang, W. S. (2004). A Standards-driven, Task-based Assessment Approach for Teacher Licensure or Certification with Potential for College Accreditation. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 9(12), [on-line journal], Retrieved at http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=9&n=12
  41. Wilkerson, J. R., & Lang, W. S. (2005). CAATS -Comprehensive Assessments Aligned with Teacher Standards -A Five Step Design Model for Assessing Teachers Validly and Reliably. Annual Meeting of the American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education. Available through ERIC document: ED502867.
  42. Wright, B. D., & Masters, G. (1982). Rating Scale Analysis. Chicago, IL: Mesa Press.
  43. Wright, B. D., & Stone, M. H. (1979). Best Test Design. Chicago, IL: Mesa Press.
  44. Zirkel, P. A. (1996). The Law of Teacher Evaluation. A Self-assessment Handbook. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.