Facets of Possibilities for Assessment

This is a prototype definition of the range of possibilities for assessment of a skill or competency, whether in principle or in practice. Three facets are distinguished: the basis of assessment; who can act as the assessor; and what enduring evidence there may be.

Defining the possible assessment methods of a competency acts as a check that proposed actual assessment methods are of a generally appropriate type.

This model may be used in two ways. Firstly, in a competency concept definition, it should be used to define the possibilities, and to exclude (by omission) what is not a plausible or feasible means of assessment in any envisaged situation. Secondly, for a practical definition for learning or assessment in a particular context, it may define the actual methods used for assessment.

For the actual definitions, please see the VDEX files.

What may be the basis for assessment?

statementname="assessmentBasis"

identifiercaptiondescription
selfAwareness learner’s self-awareness
choices learner’s choices
responses learner’s responses
statements learner’s statements
actions learner’s actions/performance
products learner’s products
consequences consequences or outcomes
sharedPerformance group performance
sharedProducts group products

Who may be the assessor?

statementname="whoAssesses"

identifiercaptiondescription
learner the learner
humanMarker human marker of records
automaticMarker automatic marker of records
experts expert judges, assessors or practitioners
clients one or more clients
peers a peer or peer group

What enduring evidence may there be?

statementname="enduringEvidence"

identifiercaptiondescription
thing the thing assessed
certificate certificate or transcript
testimonial testimonials or witness statements
survey the results of surveys
photographic photographic evidence
audio audio recordings
video video recordings

Notes

A particular competency will then need to have its assessment potential defined as a subset of the possible general range of assessment potential for all skills and competencies. Note that for compound competencies with diverse parts, the assessment potential facets may not interact well. For instance, if an expert judge assesses the product, while a peer group assesses the dialogue, ticking all four boxes will not separate these aspects. It will have to be understood that if more than one 'tick' is put on the list, this is only to scope the possibilities, and does not necessarily represent what is or is not plausible. That may only be dealt with at a lower level, when considering the components of the skill assessed.