Purpose of mande in kin ppt

1. MEASUREMENT AND
EVALUATION

2. IMPORTANCE AND
PURPOSE OF
MEASUREMENT AND
EVALUATION IN HUMAN
PERFORMANCE

6. DEFINITIONS
• MEASUREMENT - COLLECTION OF
INFORMATION ON WHICH A
DECISION IS BASED
• EVALUATION - THE USE OF
MEASUREMENT IN MAKING
DECISIONS

7. • INTERDEPENDENT CONCEPTS AS
EVALUATION IS A PROCESS THAT
USES MEASUREMENTS AND THE
PURPOSE OF MEASUREMENT IS TO
ACCURATELY COLLECT
INFORMATION USING TESTS FOR
EVALUATION
• IMPROVED MEASUREMENT LEADS
TO ACCURATE EVALUATION
“GARBAGE IN, GARBAGE OUT”

8. OBJECTIVE VERSUS SUBJECTIVE
TEST CONTINUUM
• OBJECTIVE TEST - 2 OR MORE
PEOPLE SCORE THE SAME TEST
AND ASSIGN A SIMILAR GRADE
• DEFINED SCORING SYSTEM AND
TRAINED TESTERS INCREASES
OBJECTIVITY
• HIGHLY SUBJECTIVE TEST LACKS
A STANDARDIZED SCORING
SYSTEM

9. EVALUATION
• COLLECT SUITABLE DATA
(MEASUREMENT)
• JUDGE THE VALUE OF THE DATA
ACCORDING TO SOME STANDARD
(I.E., CRITERION-REFERENCED
STANDARD OR NORM-
REFERENCED STANDARD)
• MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON THE
DATA

10. FUNCTIONS OF
MEASUREMENT AND
EVALUATION

11. • PLACEMENT in classes/programs or
grouping based on ability
• DIAGNOSIS of weaknesses
• EVALUATION OF ACHIEVEMENT to
determine if individuals have reached
important objectives

12. • PREDICTION of an individual’s level of
achievement in future activities or
predict one measure from another
measure
• PROGRAM EVALUATION
• MOTIVATION

13. FORMATIVE AND
SUMMATIVE EVALUATION

14. FORMATIVE EVALUATION
• JUDGMENT OF ACHIEVEMENT
DURING THE PROCESS OF
LEARNING OR TRAINING
• PROVIDES FEEDBACK DURING THE
PROCESS TO BOTH THE
LEARNER/ATHLETE AND
TEACHER/COACH
“WHAT IS SUCCESSFUL AND WHAT
NEEDS IMPROVEMENT”

15. SUMMATIVE EVALUATION
• JUDGMENT OF ACHIEVEMENT AT
THE END OF AN INSTRUCTIONAL
UNIT OR PROGRAM
• TYPICALLY INVOLVES TEST
ADMINISTRATION AT THE END OF
AN INSTRUCTIONAL UNIT OR
TRAINING PERIOD
• USED TO DECIDE IF BROAD
OBJECTIVES HAVE BEEN
ACHIEVED

17. STANDARDS FOR
EVALUATION

18. “EVALUATION IS THE
PROCESS OF GIVING
MEANING TO A
MEASUREMENT BY
JUDGING IT AGAINST
SOME STANDARD”

19. • CRITERION-REFERENCED (C-R)
STANDARD IS USED TO DETERMINE
IF SOMEONE HAS ATTAINED A
SPECIFIED STANDARD
• NORM-REFERENCE (N-R)
STANDARD IS USED TO JUDGE AN
INDIVIDUAL’S PERFORMANCE IN
RELATION TO THE
PERFORMANCES OF OTHER
MEMBERS OF A WELL-DEFINED
GROUP

20. • CRITERION-REFERENCED (C-R)
STANDARDS ARE USEFUL FOR
SETTING PERFORMANCE
STANDARDS FOR ALL
• NORM-REFERENCED (N-R)
STANDARDS ARE VALUABLE FOR
COMPARISONS AMONG
INDIVIDUALS WHEN THE
SITUATION REQUIRES A DEGREE
OF SENSITIVITY OR
DISCRIMINATION IN ABILITY

21. • NORM-REFERENCED STANDARDS
- DEVELOPED BY TESTING A
LARGE GROUP OF PEOPLE
- USING DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS
TO DEVELOP STANDARDS
- PERCENTILE RANKS ARE A
COMMON NORMING METHOD
• MAJOR CONCERN - GROUP
CHARACTERISTICS USED TO DEVELOP
NORMS MAY NOT RESULT IN
DESIRABLE NORMS; EXAMPLES WITH
BODY COMPOSTION AND BLOOD
CHOLESTEROL LEVELS WERE
AVERAGE MAY NOT BE DESIRABLE

22. • CRITERION-REFERENCED STANDARDS
- PREDETERMINED STANDARD OF
PERFORMANCE SHOWS THE
INDIVIDUAL HAS ACHIEVED A
DESIRED LEVEL OF
PERFORMANCE
- PERFORMANCE OF INDIVIDUAL
IS NOT COMPARED WITH THAT
OF OTHER INDIVIDUALS
“COMMON PRACTICE TO APPLY A
CRITERION-REFERENCED STANDARD
TO A NORM-REFERENCED TEST”

23. DETERMINING ACCURACY OF
CRITERION-REFERENCED (C-R)
STANDARDS
• ACCURACY EXAMINED BY USING A
2 X 2 CONTIGENCY TABLE
• C-R TEST RELIABILITY EXAMINES
THE CONSISTENCY OF
CLASSIFICATION

25. LIMITATIONS OF CRITERION-
REFERENCED (C-R) STANDARDS
• NOT ALWAYS POSSIBLE TO FIND A
CRITERION THAT EXPLICITLY
DEFINES MASTERY,
PARTICULARLY IN SOME SKILLS

27. LIMITATIONS OF CRITERION-
REFERENCED (C-R) STANDARDS
• ACCURACY OF C-R TEST VARIES
WITH THE POPULATION BEING
TESTED

28. EXAMPLE:
ACCURACY OF
EXERCISE STRESS
TEST VARIES WITH
THE DISEASE
PREVALENCE IN THE
GROUP STUDIED (I.E.,
PERCENTAGE OF
PATIENTS WHO
TRULY HAVE
CORNOARY ARTERY
DISEASE

29. MODELS OF EVALUATION

30. EDUCATIONAL MODEL

31. ADULT FITNESS MODEL

32. QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS??