Advertisement

A Conceptual Framework for Authentic Competence Assessment in VET: A Logic Design Model

  • Viola DeutscherEmail author
  • Esther Winther
Reference work entry

Abstract

Authentic assessment of competence remains a central target of VET research; adequate measurement approaches clearly are rare though a prerequisite for accountable systems to authorize access to vocational activities, as well as for international qualification acknowledgment. The chapter outlines a conceptual framework of authentic assessment as well as respective evaluation methods. Though authentic assessment is broadly discussed in scientific literature, coherent definitions and frameworks with respect to the assessment of vocational competence are scant. However, drawing on different streams of authenticity research, it can be suggested to operationalize “authentic competence assessment” by six major key characteristics:
  1. 1.

    Authentic modes of assessment

     
  2. 2.

    Relevant item sampling

     
  3. 3.

    Complexity of tasks

     
  4. 4.

    Staged embedding

     
  5. 5.

    Process orientation

     
  6. 6.

    Social interaction

     

The chapter substantiates these characteristics, places them in a logic assessment model, gives practical implementation examples (commercial domain), and finally introduces adequate evaluation methods by which this framework can be accounted for.

Keywords

Vocational education Authenticity Assessment Framework Quality 

References

  1. Achtenhagen F, Weber S (2003) “Authentizität” in der Gestaltung beruflicher Lernumgebungen. In: Bredow A, Dobischat R, Rottmann J (eds) Berufs- und Wirtschaftspädagogik von A-Z. Schneider, Baltmannsweiler, pp 185–199Google Scholar
  2. AERA/NCME (2014) The standards for educational and psychological testing. American Educational Research Association, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Alessi SM (1988) Fidelity in the design of instructional simulations. J Comp Based Instr 15(2):40–47Google Scholar
  4. Brown JS, Collins A, Duguid P (1989) Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educ Res 18(1):32–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1997) The Jasper project: lessons in curriculum, instruction, assessment, and professional development. Lawrence Erlbaum, MahwahGoogle Scholar
  6. Cronin JC (1993) Four misconceptions about authentic learning. Educ Leadersh 50(7):78–80Google Scholar
  7. Custer RL, Schell J, McAlister BD, Scott JL, Hoepfl M (2000) Using authentic assessment in vocational education, Information Series No. 381. ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education, ColumbusGoogle Scholar
  8. Deutscher VK, Winther E (2017) Instructional sensitivity in vocational education. Learn Instruct 53(1):21–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Goffman E (1959) The presentation of self in everyday life. Doubleday, Garden CityGoogle Scholar
  10. Gulikers JT, Bastiaens TJ, Kirschner PA (2004) A five-dimensional framework for authentic assessment. Educ Technol Res Dev 52(3):67–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gulikers JT, Bastiaens TJ, Kirschner PA, Kester L (2008) Authenticity is in the eye of the beholder: student and teacher perceptions of assessment authenticity. J Vocat Educ Train 60(4):401–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hacker W (2003) Action regulation theory: a practical tool for the design of modern work processes? Eur J Work Organ Psychol 12(2):105–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hartig J, Jude N (2007) Empirische Erfassung von Kompetenzen und psychometrische Kompetenz-modelle. In: Hartig J, Klieme E (eds) Möglichkeiten und Voraussetzungen technologiebasierter Kompetenzdiagnostik. BMBF, Bonn, pp 17–36Google Scholar
  14. Herrington J, Herrington A (1998) Authentic assessment and multimedia: how university students respond to a model of authentic assessment. High Educ Res Dev 17(3):305–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Herrington J, Oliver R (2000) An instructional design framework for authentic learning environments. Educ Technol Res Dev 48(3):23–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Klotz VK, Winther E (2017) On improving current assessment practices – competence measurement in the domain of business and commerce. In: Leutner D, Fleischer J, Grünkorn J, Klieme E (eds) Competence assessment in education: research, models and instruments. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 221–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Klotz VK, Winther E, Festner D (2015) Modeling the development of vocational competence: a psychometric model for economic domains. Vocat Learn 8(3):247–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kopriva R (2001) ELL validity research designs for state academic assessments: an outline of five research designs evaluating the validity of large-scale assessments for English language learners and other test takers. Paper prepared at the Council of Chief State School Officers Meeting, Houston, TX, June 22–23, 2001Google Scholar
  19. Lave J, Wenger E (1991) Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mislevy RJ, Almond RG, Lukas JF (2003) A brief introduction to evidence centered design. Educational Testing Service, PrincetonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mulder M, Weigel T, Collins K (2006) The concept of competence concept in the development of vocational education and training in selected EU member states. A critical analysis. J Vocat Educ Train 59(1):65–85Google Scholar
  22. Newmann FM (1997) Authentic assessment in social studies: standards and examples. In: Phye GD (ed) Handbook of classroom assessment: learning, achievement, and adjustment. Academic, San Diego, pp 359–380Google Scholar
  23. OECD (2016) The survey of adult skills: reader’s companion, OECD Skills Studies, 2nd edn. OECD Publishing, Paris.  https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264258075-enCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pellegrino JW (2012) The design of an assessment system focused on student achievement. A learning sciences perspective on issues of competence, growth and measurement. In: Bernholt S, Neumann K, Nentwig P (eds) Making it tangible – learning outcomes in science education. Waxmann, Münster, pp 79–107Google Scholar
  25. Preiß P (2005) Entwurf eines Kompetenzkonzepts für den Inhaltsbereich Rechnungswesen/Controlling. In: Gonon P, Klauser F, Nickolaus R, Huisinga R (eds) Kompetenz, Kognition und neue Konzepte der beruflichen Bildung. Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden, pp 67–85Google Scholar
  26. Reeves TC, Okey JR (1996) Alternative assessment for constructivist learning environments. In: Wilson BG (ed) Constructivist learning environments: case studies in instructional design. Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs, pp 191–202Google Scholar
  27. Ruiz-Primo M, Shavelson R (1996) Problems and issues in the use of concept maps in science assessment. J Res Sci Teach 33(6):569–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sangmeister J, Winther E, Deutscher V, Bley S, Kreuzer C, Weber S (2018) Designing Competence Assessment in VET for a Digital Future. In: Ifenthaler D (eds) Digital Workplace Learning. Springer, ChamGoogle Scholar
  29. Savery JR, Duffy TM (1995) Problem-based learning: an instructional model and its constructivist framework. Educ Technol 35(5):31–38Google Scholar
  30. Schell J (2000) Think about authentic learning and then authentic testing. In: Custer RL, Schell J, McAlister BD, Scott JL, Hoepfl M (eds). (2000)Using authentic assessment in vocational education, Information Series No. 381. ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education, Columbus, pp 7–18Google Scholar
  31. Schmidt JU (2000) Prüfungen auf dem Prüfstand – Betriebe beurteilen die Aussagekraft von Prüfungen. Berufsbildung Wiss Praxis 29(5):27–31Google Scholar
  32. Segers M, Dochy F, De Corte E (1999) Assessment practices and students’ knowledge profiles in a problem-based curriculum. Learn Environ Res 2:191–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Shavelson RJ, Seminara J (1968) Effect of lunar gravity on man’s performance of basic maintenance tasks. J Appl Psychol 52(3):177–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Stachowiak H (1980) Der Weg zum Systematischen Neopragmatismus und das Konzept der Allgemeinen Modelltheorie. In: Stachowiak H (ed) Modelle und Modelldenken im Unterricht. Klinkhardt, Bad Heilbrunn, pp 9–49Google Scholar
  35. Wiggins GP (1993) Assessing student performance: exploring the purpose and limits of testing. Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  36. Winther E (2010) Kompetenzmessung in der beruflichen Bildung. wbv, BielefeldGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Economic and Business Education, Vocational TrainingUniversity of MannheimMannheimGermany
  2. 2.Vocational Education and TrainingUniversity of Duisburg-EssenDuisburgGermany

Section editors and affiliations

  • Esther Winther

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations