James Elwick, Making a Grade: Victorian Examinations and the Rise of Standardized Testing
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
As researchers in educational measurement and assessment, James Elwick's book Making a Grade: Victorian Examinations and the Rise of Standardized Testing is a historical reminder of examinations as an essential part of our educational system interacting with teaching and learning (including cramming) on a global scale.The book explores the examinations, the examiners, and the examinees -the three major components and stakeholders in the science of examinations, which Elwick calls the making of a grade.Delving into the book further, we have realized that Elwick discusses the making of a test score rather than a grade derived from teachers' classroom assessment in the current terminology in educational measurement and assessment.The wrestling of terms is how we make meaning in our existence.Research on grading has a long history in education.Early educators were primarily concerned with the reliability and standardization of teachers' grading practices in a similar manner as the Victorian Examinations discussed in this book.Recent research has, however, shifted to explore factors influencing teachers' grading practices related to both achievement and non-achievement.Teachers work hard to be fair to their students as they juggle their dual roles in grading of judge and coach.Being a coach is not a function directly addressed in Victorian examinations.Elwick focuses on part of the Victorian era, from 1850 to 1900, to discuss the science of examinations and the revolution of examinations.The book features nine chapters and three sections of examinations, examiners, and examinees to outline critical issues concerning three major components and stakeholders within any standardized testing.Part 1 introduces the boom of Victorian examinations across the British Isles and British Empire.In this section, Elwick reveals when, how, and why Victorian examinations, governed by education policy, were created as a sufficient tool to assess not only students' learning but also teachers' teaching.Part 2 discusses the creation and development of examinations from the examiners' (i.e., test developers') perspectives.This section demonstrates the transition from oral to paper examinations, the stages of examination standardization, and modification of standards and decision-making to achieve fit-for-purpose testing.Part 3 explains the classification of examinees (test-takers) and how they respond to the examinations.From a historical point of view, this part documents how examinees changed their behaviors through cramming under the guidance of test-related classroom education, publications, tactics sharing, and private coaching systems.This practice remains dominant in our current education globally.Elwick acknowledges how cramming could lead to negative consequences such as passive learning (e.g., narrowed content, passive motivation, and unitary approaches) and score manipulation.Elwick further highlights how changing attitudes and examination administration could potentially reverse such consequences or even promote testing equity, which we feel has implications to the current examination and testing practice.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,010 | 0,043 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,007 | 0,009 |
| Communication savante | 0,007 | 0,008 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,012 | 0,015 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».