The Validity and Reliability of Assessment for Learning (AfL)

Erwin Akib; Mohamed Najib Abdul Ghafar

doi:doi:10.11648/j.edu.20150402.13

| Peer-Reviewed

The Validity and Reliability of Assessment for Learning (AfL)

Erwin Akib, Mohamed Najib Abdul Ghafar

Published in Education Journal (Volume 4, Issue 2)

Received: 20 February 2015 Accepted: 2 March 2015 Published: 6 March 2015

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Assessment for learning is a new perspective on the assessment system in education. The traditional practice is for evaluating outcomes is an Assessment of Learning. However, new perspective proposes that assessment should be included in the process of learning, that is Assessment for Learning. This main objective of this study is to investigate the validity and reliability of Assessment for Learning. This study used the quantitative survey design, carried out in Indonesia using the proportional stratified random sampling method involving 100 lecturers. It was conducted at University Muhammadiyah of Makassar, South Sulawesi, Indonesia. The data were analyzed using: t-test, anova, and chi-square. The instrument validity and reliability were determined using Rash model analysis. The finding shows that the validity and reliabity of each construct of Assessment for Learning has a high level.

Published in	Education Journal (Volume 4, Issue 2)
DOI	10.11648/j.edu.20150402.13
Page(s)	64-68
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2015. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Assessment for Learning, Reliability, Validity

References

[1]	N. Ramly. Membangun Pendidikan yang Memberdayakan dan Mencerahkan. Jakarta: Grafind, 2005..
[2]	M. N. Ghafar, Pembinaan & Analisis Ujian Bilik Darjah. Edisi Kedua. Skudai: Penerbit UTM Press, 2001.
[3]	J.R. Frederiksen, and A. Collins, A systematic approach to educational testing. Educational researcher, 1989. 18 (9), pp. 27-32.
[4]	J. Ridgway and A. H. Schoenfeld, Balanced Assessment: Designing Assessment Schemes to Promote Desirable Change in Mathematics Education. Keynote paper for the EARLI Email Conference on Assessment, 1994.
[5]	F.J.R.C. Dochy and L. McDowell, Introduction assessment as a tool for learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 1997.. Vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 279 – 298.
[6]	M.N. Ghafar, Penyelidikan Pendidikan. Skudai: Penerbit Universiti Teknologi Pendidikan Malaysia, 1999.
[7]	J.W. Creswell, Educational Research (Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research). Fourth Edition. Boston, USA: Pearson, 2012.
[8]	F.J. Fraenkel and N.E. Wallen, How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. Qualitative Research (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 2009.
[9]	L.D. Goodwin, Changing conceptions of measurement validity: An update on the new Standards. Journal of Nursing Education, 2002. 41(3), pp. 100-106.
[10]	R.l. Ebel and D.A. Frisbie, Essentials of Educational Measurement. (5th Ed.). Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1990.
[11]	P. Black and D. Wiliam, Developing a theory of formative assessment. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and learning London: Sage, 2006, pp. 81 – 100.
[12]	P. E. Newton, Clarifying the purposes of educational assessment, Assessment in Education, July 2007, Vol. 14, No. 2 pp. 149–170.
[13]	M. Scriven, The methodology of evaluation (Washington, DC, American Educational Research Association). 1967.
[14]	B.S. Bloom, J.T. Hasting and G..F. Madaus, Handbook on Formative and Summative Evaluation of Student Learning, McGraw-Hill Book Co, New York, 1971.
[15]	D.R. Sadler, Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems, Instructional Science, 1989, pp. 119–144.
[16]	R. Zessoules and H. Gardner, Authentic assessment: Beyond the buzzword and into the classroom. In V. Perrone (Ed.), Expanding student assessment(pp. 47–71). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1991.
[17]	G. Wiggins, Educative assessment : Designing assessments to inform and improve student performance. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1998.
[18]	D.R. Sadler, Formative assessment: Revisiting the territory. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, and Practice,1998, pp. 77–84.
[19]	P. Black, and D. Wiliam, The formative purpose: Assessment must first promote learning. In M. Wilson (Ed.), Towards coherence between classroom assessment and accountability. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004
[20]	K. Ecclestone, Learning autonomy in post-compulsory education: The politics and practice of formative assessment. London: Routledge, 2002.
[21]	J. Gardner, et al, Changing assessment practice: process, principles and standards. [London]: Assessment Reform Group, 2008.
[22]	C. Gipps, Sociocultural perspectives on assessment. In Learning for life in the 21st century, eds. G. Wells and G. Claxton (Eds.), 73 – 83. Oxford: Blackwell publishers, 2002.
[23]	L. Hayward, Curriculum, pedagogies and assessment in Scotland: The quest for social justice. ‘Ah kent yir faither’. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 2007, pp. 251–68
[24]	B. Marshall, and M. Drummond, How teachers engage with Assessment for Learning: lessons from the classroom. Research Papers in Education 21, 2006, no. 2: pp. 133 - 149
[25]	G. Stobart, Determining validity in national curriculum assessments.Educational Research, 2009, 51(2), pp. 161-179.
[26]	S.M. Brookhart, Successful students’ formative and summative uses of assessment information. Assessment in Education, 2001, 8 (2): pp. 153-169.
[27]	W.J. Popham, Transformative assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 2008.
[28]	R.J. Stiggins, Assessment crisis: The absence of assessment for learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 2002, Vol. 83, No. 10, pp. 758–765.
[29]	R.D. Tierney and J.Charland, Stocks and prospects: Research on formative assessment in secondary classrooms. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED496236), 2007.
[30]	D. Carless, Learning-oriented assessment: Conceptual basis and practical implications. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 2007, 44(1), pp.57-66.
[31]	B. Cowie, Pupil commentary on assessment for learning. Curriculum Journal, 2005b, 16(2), pp. 137-151.
[32]	J. Hattie and H. Timperley, The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 2007, 77(1), pp. 81-112.
[33]	D.B. Reeves, Standards make a difference: The influence of standards in classroom assessment. NASSP Bulletin, 2001, 85(5), pp. 5- 12.
[34]	L. Harris, Employing formative assessment in the classroom. Improving Schools, 2007, 10(3), pp. 249-260.
[35]	V.J. Shute, Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 2008, 78(2), pp. 153-189.
[36]	A.A. Azrilah, Rasch model fundamentals: scale constructs and measurement structure. Integrated Advance Planning Sdn. Bhd, 1996.
[37]	W.P. Fisher, Rating scale instrument quality criteria. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 2007, 21 (1), 1095.
[38]	Norlide, Using The Rasch Measurement Model For Standard Setting Of The English Language Placement Test At The IIUM. Tesis Ijazah Doktor Falsafah. Universiti Islam Antarabangsa, 2007.
[39]	K. Perkins, B.D. Wright and Dorsey, Multiple regression via measurement [diagnosing gout]. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 2002, 14(1), 729-30.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Erwin Akib, Mohamed Najib Abdul Ghafar. (2015). The Validity and Reliability of Assessment for Learning (AfL). Education Journal, 4(2), 64-68. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.edu.20150402.13

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Erwin Akib; Mohamed Najib Abdul Ghafar. The Validity and Reliability of Assessment for Learning (AfL). Educ. J. 2015, 4(2), 64-68. doi: 10.11648/j.edu.20150402.13

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Erwin Akib, Mohamed Najib Abdul Ghafar. The Validity and Reliability of Assessment for Learning (AfL). Educ J. 2015;4(2):64-68. doi: 10.11648/j.edu.20150402.13

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.edu.20150402.13,
  author = {Erwin Akib and Mohamed Najib Abdul Ghafar},
  title = {The Validity and Reliability of Assessment for Learning (AfL)},
  journal = {Education Journal},
  volume = {4},
  number = {2},
  pages = {64-68},
  doi = {10.11648/j.edu.20150402.13},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.edu.20150402.13},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.edu.20150402.13},
  abstract = {Assessment for learning is a new perspective on the assessment system in education. The traditional practice is for evaluating outcomes is an Assessment of Learning. However, new perspective proposes that assessment should be included in the process of learning, that is Assessment for Learning. This main objective of this study is to investigate the validity and reliability of Assessment for Learning. This study used the quantitative survey design, carried out in Indonesia using the proportional stratified random sampling method involving 100 lecturers. It was conducted at University Muhammadiyah of Makassar, South Sulawesi, Indonesia. The data were analyzed using: t-test, anova, and chi-square. The instrument validity and reliability were determined using Rash model analysis. The finding shows that the validity and reliabity of each construct of Assessment for Learning has a high level.},
 year = {2015}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - The Validity and Reliability of Assessment for Learning (AfL)
AU  - Erwin Akib
AU  - Mohamed Najib Abdul Ghafar
Y1  - 2015/03/06
PY  - 2015
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.edu.20150402.13
DO  - 10.11648/j.edu.20150402.13
T2  - Education Journal
JF  - Education Journal
JO  - Education Journal
SP  - 64
EP  - 68
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2327-2619
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.edu.20150402.13
AB  - Assessment for learning is a new perspective on the assessment system in education. The traditional practice is for evaluating outcomes is an Assessment of Learning. However, new perspective proposes that assessment should be included in the process of learning, that is Assessment for Learning. This main objective of this study is to investigate the validity and reliability of Assessment for Learning. This study used the quantitative survey design, carried out in Indonesia using the proportional stratified random sampling method involving 100 lecturers. It was conducted at University Muhammadiyah of Makassar, South Sulawesi, Indonesia. The data were analyzed using: t-test, anova, and chi-square. The instrument validity and reliability were determined using Rash model analysis. The finding shows that the validity and reliabity of each construct of Assessment for Learning has a high level.
VL  - 4
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Erwin Akib

Measurement and Evaluation, Faculty of Education, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor, Malaysia
Mohamed Najib Abdul Ghafar

Measurement and Evaluation, Faculty of Education, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor, Malaysia

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Erwin Akib, Mohamed Najib Abdul Ghafar. (2015). The Validity and Reliability of Assessment for Learning (AfL). Education Journal, 4(2), 64-68. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.edu.20150402.13

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Erwin Akib; Mohamed Najib Abdul Ghafar. The Validity and Reliability of Assessment for Learning (AfL). Educ. J. 2015, 4(2), 64-68. doi: 10.11648/j.edu.20150402.13

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Erwin Akib, Mohamed Najib Abdul Ghafar. The Validity and Reliability of Assessment for Learning (AfL). Educ J. 2015;4(2):64-68. doi: 10.11648/j.edu.20150402.13

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.edu.20150402.13,
  author = {Erwin Akib and Mohamed Najib Abdul Ghafar},
  title = {The Validity and Reliability of Assessment for Learning (AfL)},
  journal = {Education Journal},
  volume = {4},
  number = {2},
  pages = {64-68},
  doi = {10.11648/j.edu.20150402.13},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.edu.20150402.13},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.edu.20150402.13},
  abstract = {Assessment for learning is a new perspective on the assessment system in education. The traditional practice is for evaluating outcomes is an Assessment of Learning. However, new perspective proposes that assessment should be included in the process of learning, that is Assessment for Learning. This main objective of this study is to investigate the validity and reliability of Assessment for Learning. This study used the quantitative survey design, carried out in Indonesia using the proportional stratified random sampling method involving 100 lecturers. It was conducted at University Muhammadiyah of Makassar, South Sulawesi, Indonesia. The data were analyzed using: t-test, anova, and chi-square. The instrument validity and reliability were determined using Rash model analysis. The finding shows that the validity and reliabity of each construct of Assessment for Learning has a high level.},
 year = {2015}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - The Validity and Reliability of Assessment for Learning (AfL)
AU  - Erwin Akib
AU  - Mohamed Najib Abdul Ghafar
Y1  - 2015/03/06
PY  - 2015
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.edu.20150402.13
DO  - 10.11648/j.edu.20150402.13
T2  - Education Journal
JF  - Education Journal
JO  - Education Journal
SP  - 64
EP  - 68
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2327-2619
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.edu.20150402.13
AB  - Assessment for learning is a new perspective on the assessment system in education. The traditional practice is for evaluating outcomes is an Assessment of Learning. However, new perspective proposes that assessment should be included in the process of learning, that is Assessment for Learning. This main objective of this study is to investigate the validity and reliability of Assessment for Learning. This study used the quantitative survey design, carried out in Indonesia using the proportional stratified random sampling method involving 100 lecturers. It was conducted at University Muhammadiyah of Makassar, South Sulawesi, Indonesia. The data were analyzed using: t-test, anova, and chi-square. The instrument validity and reliability were determined using Rash model analysis. The finding shows that the validity and reliabity of each construct of Assessment for Learning has a high level.
VL  - 4
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download