The educational and digital support centre (PAPN) offers you a focus on the assessment from the perspective of its subjectivity.

The previous article focused on educational alignment, and in particular on assessment strategies: how can we assess that objectives have been achieved?

Research in education science on objectivity and subjectivity with respect to assessments (diagnostic, formative or summative) continues to be topical. Ardoino (1976) focused on the notion of judgement in the 1970s, while Monteil (1987) studied inequalities faced with the assessment, demonstrating that randomly assigned grades have consequences on students’ subsequent performance. Cardinet (1992) highlighted the challenge of “impossible objectivity” in the assessment, while Gérard (2002) recognized the inevitable and indispensable subjectivity in any assessment process, while cautioning against the arbitrary present in many assessments.

Gérard (2002) noted that the purpose of the assessment is to prepare a decision, whether for guiding students, helping them progress in their learning, or taking other measures. Depending on the objective, the assessment process is adapted using different criteria, indicators and tools. In some cases, the assessor is free to choose the objective of the assessment, while in other cases, this objective is imposed. However, there is always someone who makes this choice, which inevitably influences the assessment process. This illustrates the inevitable and indispensable subjectivity in the assessment.

While an assessment is necessarily subjective and prone to bias, it is legitimate to question how to achieve a non-arbitrary and fair evaluation. Before answering this question, it is interesting to consider the work of Jean-Marie De Ketele (1989). According to him, carrying out an assessment involves collecting a set of sufficiently relevant, valid and reliable information, and examining the degree of adequacy between this set of information and a set of criteria appropriate to the objectives defined at the onset, or adjusted along the way, with a view to making a decision.

In a future article, we will discuss an analytical approach proposed by De Ketele and Roegiers (1993) to collect a body of information in a non-arbitrary manner (or at least, the least arbitrary possible) in order to guide the assessment.

For more information, by all means contact the educational and digital support centre at .

References

  • Ardoino, J. (1976). Preface by M. Morin, L’imaginaire dans l’éducation permanente : analyse du discours des formateurs (The imaginary in lifelong learning: an analysis of the teachers’ discourse. Paris: Bordas/Gauthier-Villars.
  • Cardinet, J. (1992). L’objectivité de l’évaluation, Formation et technologies (The objectivity of the assessment, training and technologies) – Revue européenne des professionnels de la formation, n°0, 17-26.
  • De Ketele, J.M., (1989). L’évaluation de la productivité des institutions d’éducation (Assessing the productivity of educational institutions), Cahiers de la Fondation Universitaire: Université et société, le rendement de l’enseignement universitaire.
  • De Ketele, J.-M., GERARD, F.-M., ROEGIERS, X. (1997). L’évaluation et l’observation scolaires : deux démarches complémentaires (School assessment and observation: two complementary approaches), Éducations – Revue de diffusion des savoirs en éducation, 12, 33-37. KETELE, J.M. & ROEGIERS, X., (1993). Méthodologie du recueil d’informations (Method for gathering information), Bruxelles: De Boeck Université.
  • Fa2 Louvain. Observer des dispositifs / des activités d’apprentissage pour fournir un retour (Observing learning devices / activities to provide feedback). Consulted on Wednesday 17 May. https://www.fa2l.be/accompagnements/observer-les-dispositifs/
  • Gérard, F.-M. (2002). L’indispensable subjectivité de l’évaluation (The essential subjectivity of the assessment). Antipodes, no. 156, 26-34.
  • Monteil, J.-M. (1987). Effets de la valorisation et de la dévalorisation sur les performances scolaires dans une situation inter-groupale : étude expérimentale (Effects of valorization and devalorization on academic performance in an inter-group situation: experimental study). Clermont-Ferrand : Université de Clermont-Ferrand, Laboratoire de Psychologie sociale.
  • Roegiers, X. (2012). Glossaire. Dans: , M. Miled, I. Ratziu, C. Letor, R. Étienne, G. Hubert, M. Dali, Quelles réformes pédagogiques pour l’enseignement supérieur: Placer l’efficacité au service de l’humanisme (What educational reforms for higher education: Putting efficiency at the service of humanism (pp. 273-280) Louvain-la-Neuve: De Boeck Supérieur. https://www.cairn.info/quelles-reformes-pedagogiques-pour-l-enseignement–9782804169077-page-273.htm