Una ampliación del concepto de Templete: de herramienta para desarrollar ejercicios a instrumento para regular el proceso de desarrollo de los exámenes de ciencias

Guillermo Solano-Flores, Richard J. Shavelson, Steven A. Schneider


En este artículo discutimos las limitaciones y ventajas del uso de templetes. Un templete es un conjunto de instrucciones para desarrollar ejercicios; su fin es abatir el costo y el tiempo de desarrollo de los exámenes. Los templetes no permiten generar ejercicios intercambiables desde el punto de vista estadístico. Sin embargo, cuando sus instrucciones son precisas y se entrena a los autores de pruebas para usarlos adecuadamente, los templetes permiten generar ejercicios de estructura y apariencia similarares. Basados en nuestra experiencia y en nuestro trabajo de investigación, discutimos las ventajas de usar templetes como: (a) herramientas para desarrollar pruebas de respuesta construida, (b) documentos que formalizan las propiedades estructurales de los ejercicios; (c) ambientes para la creación de ejercicios que permiten estandarizar y simplificar los formatos de respuesta para los estudiantes; y (d) herramientas conceptuales que regulan el proceso de desarrollo de exámenes. En este artículo también advertimos de posibles usos inapropiados de los templetes.

Palabras clave

Enseñanza de las ciencia; construcción de pruebas; prueba de ejecución.

Texto completo:

HTML (English) PDF (English)


Aschbacher, P. R. (1991). Performance assessment: State activity, interest, and concerns. Applied Measurement in Education, 4 (4), 275-288.

Baxter, G. P., Shavelson, R. J., Goldman, S. R., & Pine, J. (1992). Evaluation of procedure-based scoring for hands-on science assessment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 29 (1), 1-17.

Bejar, I.I. (1995). From adaptive testing to automated scoring of architectural simulations. In E. L. Mancall & P.G. Bashook (Eds.), Assessing clinical reasoning: The oral examination and alternative methods (pp. 115-127). Evanston: American Board of Medical Specialties.

Bormuth, J.R. (1970). On the theory of achievement test items. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Crocker, L. (1997). Assessing content representativeness of performance assessment exercises. Applied Measurement in Education, 10 (1), 83-95.

Cronbach, L. J., Linn, R. L., Brennan, R. L., & Haertel, E. H. (1997). Generalizability analysis for performance assessments of student achievement or school effectiveness. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57, 373-399.

Cronbach, L. J., Rajaratnam, N., & Gleser, G. C. (1963). Theory of generalizability: A liberalization of reliability theory. British Journal of Statistical Psychology, 16, 137-163. Downing, S. M. & Haladyna, T. M. (1997). Test item development: Validity evidence form quality assurance procedures. Applied Measurement in Education, 10 (1), 61-82.

Fitzpatrick, R. & Morrison, E.J. (1971). Performance and product evaluation. In R. L. Thorndike (Ed.), Educational Measurement (pp. 237-270). Washington: American Council on Education.

Gelman, R. & Greeno, J. G. (1989). On the nature of competence: Principles for understanding in a domain. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction. Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 125-186). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

General Accounting Office (1993). Student testing: Current extent and expenditures, with cost estimates for a national examination. Washington: Author.

Guttman, L. (1969). Integration of test design and analysis. In Proceedings of the 1969 invitational conference on testing problems (pp. 53-65). Princeton: Educational Testing Service.

Haertel, E. H. & Linn, R. L. (1996). Comparability. In Phillips, G. W. (Ed.), Technical issues in large-scale performance assessment (pp. 59-78). Washington: National Center for Education Statistics, U. S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.

Haladyna, T. M. & Shindoll, R. R. (1989). Shells: A method for writing effective multiple-choice test items. Evaluation and the Health Professions, 12, 97-104.

Hively, W., Patterson, H. L., & Page, S. H. (1968). A "universe-defined" system of arithmetic achievement tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 5 (4), 275-290.

Hodson, D. (1992). Assessment of practical work: Some considerations in philosophy of science. Science & Education, 1, 115-144.

Katz, I. R. (1998). A software tool for rapidly prototyping new forms of computer-based assessments (GRE Board Professional Report No. 91-06aP). Princeton: Educational Testing Service.

Klein, S. P., Shavelson, R. J., Stecher, B. M., McCaffrey, D., & Haertel, E. (1997). The effect of using shells to develop hands-on tasks. Unpublished manuscript. Santa Monica: The RAND Corporation.

Lindquist, E. F. (Ed.). (1951). Educational measurement. Washington: American Council of Education.

LOGALä (1996). Science Explorer 3.0 [Computer program]. Cambridge, MA: LOGAL Software, Inc.

Messick, S. (1994). The interplay of evidence and consequences in the validation of performance assessments. Educational Researcher, 23 (2), 13-23.

National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (1996). Adolescence and Young Adulthood/Science Standards for National Board Certification. Detroit: Author.

National Research Council (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington: National Academy Press.

Nuttall, D. L. (1992). Performance assessment: The message from England. Educational Leadership, 49 (8), 54-57.

O'Neil, J. (1992). Putting performance assessment to the test. Educational Leadership, 49 (8), 14-19.

Roid, G. H., & Haladyna, T. M. (1982). A technology for test-item writing. New York: Academic Press.

Schneider, S., Daehler, K. R., Hershbell, K., McCarthy, J., Shaw, J., & Solano-Flores, G. (en prensa). Developing a national science assessment for teacher certification: Practical lessons learned. In L. Ingvarson (Ed.), Assessing teachers for professional certification: The first ten years of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. Greenewich: JAI Press, Inc.

Shavelson, R. J., Baxter, G. P., & Gao, X. (1993). Sampling variability of performance assessments. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30 (3), 215-232.

Shavelson, R. J., Baxter, G. P., & Pine, J. (1992). Performance assessments: Political rhetoric and measurement reality. Educational Researcher, 21 (4), 22-27.

Shavelson, R. J., Ruiz-Primo, M. A. & Wiley, E. (1999). Notes on sources of sampling variability in science performance assessments. Journal of Educational Measurement, 36 (1), 61-71.

Solano-Flores, G. (1993). Item structural properties as predictors of item difficulty and item association. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53 (1), 19-31.

Solano-Flores, G., Jovanovic, J, Shavelson, R. J., & Bachman, M. (1994, April). Development of an item shell for the generation of performance assessments in physics. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.

Solano-Flores, G., Jovanovic, J., Shavelson, R. J., & Bachman, M. (1999) On the development and evaluation of a shell for generating science performance assessments. International Journal of Science Education, 21 (3), 293-315.

Solano-Flores, G., Raymond, B., Schneider, S. A., & Timms, M. (1999). Management of scoring sessions in alternative assessment: The computer-assisted scoring approach. Computers & Education, 33, 47-63.

Solano-Flores, G., & Shavelson, R. J. (1997). Development of performance assessments in science: Conceptual, practical and logistical issues. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 16 (3), 16-25.

Stecher, B. M., & Klein, S. P. (1997). The cost of science performance assessments in large-scale testing programs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11 (1), 1-14.

Stecher, B. M., Klein, S. P., Solano-Flores, G., McCaffrey, D., Robbyn, A., Shavelson, R. J., & Haertel, E. (en prensa). The effects of content, format, and inquiry level on performance on science performance assessment scores. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis.

Thorndike, R. L. (Ed.). (1971). Educational Measurement (2nd. Ed.). Washington: American Council on Education.

Wigdor, A. K., & Green, B. F., Jr. (Eds.). (1991). Performance assessment for the workplace (Vol. 1). Washington: National Academy Press.

Enlaces refback

  • No hay ningún enlace refback.