Session Information
09 SES 09 C, Assessments, Grades and Student Achievement
Paper Session
Contribution
Numerous predictive validity studies have indicated that grades from the previous educational level are the most valid instrument for selection to further education (e.g., Atkinson & Geiser, 2009; Cliffordson, 2008; Gustafsson, 2003; Gustafsson & Carlstedt, 2006). Yet, why grades present such good predictive validity, is not yet fully understood (Atkinson & Geiser, 2009).
The explicit function of grades is to provide information about students’ knowledge and skills, to increase their motivation to learn and to be used as tools for selection to further education. In general, two different grading systems can be identified: norm-referenced grades where the individual’s performance is being compared with the norm-group and criterion-referenced grades where the student’s performance is compared with pre-defined goals. The primary function of norm-referenced grades is to rank students for selection, whilst criterion-referenced grades primarily are designed to give information about the knowledge and skills the student has acquired. However, criterion-referenced grades are also used for selection purposes and norm-referenced grades also give information about knowledge and skills.
Even though grades should represent a comprehensive assessment of the extent to which students have acquired the knowledge and skills set out in the syllabus and curriculum, research has shown that this is a somewhat simplified picture of what grades represent. Grades have been shown to encapsulate both acquired subject-specific knowledge and skills, and other aspects such as individual differences in motivation and interest (e.g., Alexander, 1935; Andersson, 1998; Gustafsson & Balke, 1993; Klapp Lekholm & Cliffordson, 2008). The encapsulation of subject-specific factors and other factors in grades may in part explain why grades have a better predictive validity than other instruments used for selection (Gustafsson & Carlstedt, 2006). Klapp Lekholm and Cliffordson (2008) found that criterion-referenced compulsory school grades encapsulate both subject-specific factors and a common grade factor, accounting for the variance common to all subject grades. The common grade factor was mainly influenced by interest and parental commitment (Klapp Lekholm & Cliffordson, 2009). Furthermore, Thorsen and Cliffordson (2011) investigated the relative importance of subject-specific factors and the common grade factor, for the predictive validity of criterion-referenced compulsory school grades for study success in upper secondary school. They found that the common grade factor made a significant contribution to the predictive validity of the criterion-referenced grades. However, due to the construction of norm-referenced grades it is sometimes believed that the influence of other aspects is smaller or that they even are exempt from such aspects. However, Andersson (1998) found a general school achievement factor in norm-referenced grades, hypothesized to represent motivation and school adjustment.
Hence, the purpose of the present study is to investigate the relative importance of subject-specific factors and other factors encapsulated in grades, for the predictive validity of norm-referenced compulsory school grades for study success in upper secondary school. The multidimensional model of grades, established by Klapp Lekholm and Cliffordson (2008) which was confirmed stable by Thorsen and Cliffordson (2011), offers the opportunity to examine the issue. Possible differences due to gender and parents’ education are considered.
Method
Expected Outcomes
References
Alexander, W. P. (1935). Intelligence concrete and abstract. British Journal of Psychology. Monograph Supplement, 19, 177. Atkinson, R. C., & Geiser, S. (2009, April). Reflections on a century of college admissions tests. Research & Occasional Paper Series, 4. University of Carlifornia, Berkeley Andersson, A. (1998). The dimensionality of the leaving certificate. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 42(1), 25-40. Cliffordson, C. (2008). Differential prediction of study success across academic programs in the Swedish context: The validity of grades and tests as selection instruments for higher education. Educational Assessment, 13(1), 56-75. Gustafsson, J.-E., & Balke, G. (1993). General and specific abilities as predictors of school achievement. Multivariate Behavioural Redearch, 28(4), 407-434. Gustafsson, J.-E. (2003, November). The predictive validity of grades and aptitude tests in higher education. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Association for Education Assessment - Europe, Lyon, France, November 2003. Gustafsson, J.-E., & Carlstedt, B. (2006, August). Abilities and grades as predictors of achievement: The encapsulation theory. Paper presented at the symposium “The investment theory of intelligence: New evidence, new challenges” at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Associations, New Orleans. Klapp Lekholm, A., & Cliffordson, C. (2008). Discrepancies between school grades and test scores at individual and school level: effects of gender and family background. Educational Research and Evaluation,14(2), 181-199. Klapp Lekholm, A., & Cliffordson, C. (2009). Effects of student characteristics on grades in compulsory school. Educational Research and Evaluation, 15(1), 1-23. Muthén, B., Kaplan, D., & Hollis, M. (1987). On structural equation modeling with data that are not missing completely at random. Psychometrica, 52(3), 431-462. Thorsen, C., & Cliffordson, C. (2011). Teachers’ grading assignment and the predictive validity of criterion-referenced grades. Submitted for possible publication.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.