Three findings have been observed in relation to the way in which assessment has changed over time First, \u201ca greater emphasis on formative assessment can be observed as well as a continuing strong focus on summative assessment approaches.\u201d Summative assessment is \u201cincreasingly being used in some countries to monitor the performance of VET institutions as part of quality assurance in VET.\u201d Second, research is pointing to an increased use of learner-based self-assessment as part of formative processes. Third, an increased use of assessment for individual units or modules has been observed in some countries \u201cto increase the flexibility of learning pathways (for example, by providing opportunities for validating and recognising non-formal and informal learning).\u201d \u00a0But they also note a \u2018swings and roundabouts\u2019 approach as assessment processes move between the modular and more holistic and then back.<\/p>\n

The focus on written assessments may also be changing as \u201ccountries have increasingly adopted different methods of collecting evidence of practical knowledge. For example, many countries have introduced final practical exams or assignments, projects and performance demonstrations. Skills demonstrations are also increasingly carried out in real work environments and employers or other labour market stakeholders are increasingly involved in assessing VET learners.\u201d<\/p>\n

The challenge of these requirements is summarised below, and:<\/p>\n

\u201cThe way assessment has evolved over the years is, to some extent, closely linked to changes in the way qualifications and curricula are described and structured. An important driver of changing or further developing the assessment approach is linked to the key technical characteristics of quality assessment, and particularly to validity and reliability. Reliability and validity cannot easily be achieved simultaneously to the same degree: sometimes a compromise is required or a combination of different forms of assessment is used to satisfy both principles.\u201d<\/p>\n

Thus, written assessments may give reliability, but in the context of VET not necessarily validity given VET\u2019s practical focus.<\/p>\n

Aligning assessment with qualification specs and standards<\/h2>\n

The paper reports that:<\/p>\n

\u201cCountries often make considerable efforts to achieve this alignment, e.g. by mapping assessment content to learning outcomes and assessment criteria. They also discuss the appropriate level of detail in the description of learning outcomes and assessment criteria and sometimes change their approach towards one direction or another. Another aspect discussed in relation to assessment and addressed in reforms is the scope for interpretation and the possibility of adapting learning outcomes and assessment criteria to specific target groups, such as students with special needs. This is often related to the pursuit of fairness.\u201d<\/p>\n

This again mirrors thinking in Australia.<\/p>\n

Broadening the skills and competence base of VET<\/h2>\n

European practice in relation to assessing general subjects indicate a tendency towards externalisation and standardisation of examinations in pursuit of reliability and to help facilitate admission to higher education. This would be somewhat true for VET in schools here in Australia. However,<\/p>\n

\u201cresearch conducted in this study indicates an increase in the assessment of learners’ transversal skills.\u2019 The paper observes that \u201cthis increase appears to be more related to formative assessment, which is conducted internally at the VET provider level, and less to summative or externally conducted assessment. This might be due to the many challenges that are associated with the assessment of transversal competences.\u201d<\/p>\n

A final thought!<\/h2>\n

The paper suggests that further work is needed to address the rationale behind decisions regarding assessment design and related reform. This issue would be good to explore here in Australia too!<\/p>\n