Assessing Students In A Graduate Tests And Measurement Course: Changing The Classroom Climate

College Student Journal, March, 2000 by Beverly M. Klecker

Four classroom assessment techniques were used in a graduate-level course in tests and measurements as an initial exploration of the relationships between classroom climate and classroom assessment. The subjects in this action research study were forty-three students in two class sections. The content of the course was divided into four areas (1) legal and ethical issues of assessment; (2) using statistics to describe assessment data; (3) reliability and validity; and (4) types and uses of standardized tests. Classroom instruction included lecture/media presentations followed by content-reinforcing group act ivies. The criterion-referenced grades for the course were based on mastery of core concepts assessed by (1) individual multiple-choice tests; (2) collaborative group multiple-choice tests; (3) take-home open-response tests; and (4) take-home multiple-choice tests. At the end of the course, the students rated the four assessment events and provided written evaluations. Twenty-nine (67.4%) of the students preferred the group multiple-choice format; eleven (25.6%) preferred the take-home, open-response test; two (4.6%) preferred the standard-format, individual multiple-choice test, and one student (2.4%) preferred the take- home multiple-choice test. Student ratings of fairness of assessment in the course were 4.9 and 4.7 for the two classes.

"I hate tests ... I am no good at taking tests ... I can't do math ... I'll never understand this ... This will be my one `C' in graduate school ... I have saved this course until last." These comments were frequently heard as graduate students entered the introductory class of "Tests and Measurements." Typically, these graduate students have had no previous experience with tests and measurements other than taking classroom tests and the requisite admission tests (e.g., Graduate Record Examination).

Classroom assessment in postsecondary education provides feedback to students and information to professors about student achievement and course objectives. The main goal of classroom assessment is to obtain valid, reliable, meaningful, and appropriate information about student learning (Brookhart, 1998; Linn & Gronlund, 1995; Stiggins & Bridgeford, 1985). The relationship between classroom climate, classroom assessment, and student learning has been widely researched (Brookhart, 1997; Porter & Freeman, 1986; Stiggins & Conklin, 1992; Tittle, 1994). These studies have found that assessment measuring clearly identified learning targets, fairly scored, reduced student anxiety, relaxed the classroom climate and lead to increased student learning. However, the context for most of this research has been elementary and middle schools.

Theoretical Framework

Empirical studies of postsecondary classroom assessment have found that students prefer criterion-referenced grading to norm-referenced grading. Students would rather that their work be compared with a standard of quality rather than with the work of their fellow students (Jacobsen, 1993). O'Sullivan and Johnson (1993) found that students who participated in an educational measurement class where grading was performance-based increased their learning. Stearns (1996) found that collaborative exams assisted learning and improved classroom climate. Rodabaugh and Kravitz (1994) reported that professors who had fair assessment and grading policies were rated more highly by students that professors who had unfair assessment practices. This was true even if the latter gave higher grades.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to extend the research on the relationship between classroom assessment and classroom climate in the postsecondary context. The questions that drove the inquiry were: (1) "Which of four assessment strategies will students prefer?" and (2) "Will fair testing practices and criterion-referenced grading have an effect on classroom climate?" The four strategies were: (1) individual multiple-choice test; (2) collaborative group multiple-choice test; (3) take-home open-response test; and (4) take-home multiple-choice test.

Method

The two questions were explored through a descriptive research study. There were four assessment conditions. There was no control group and no manipulated variable. All students received the same instruction through the same method of delivery. All students took the same assessments the same week of the semester.

Participants

Forty-three graduate students enrolled in two sections of "Tests and Measurements" in a mid-sized, mid-south, regional state university were the participants in the study. Twenty-five students were enrolled in Class 1 (Monday); eighteen students were enrolled in Class 2 (Wednesday). Each class met three hours once a week for sixteen weeks.

Course Content

The objectives for the course were outlined in the syllabus distributed to the students during the first class. Course content was presented in outline form with corresponding assigned textbook chapters. The semester was divided into four units of instruction: 1) legal and ethical issues of assessment; (2) using statistics to describe assessment data; (3) reliability and validity; and (4) types and uses of standardized tests.