Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Published in:
Hochschuldidaktik als quantitativ-empirische Wissenschaft Read chapter Read first chapter

2015 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

6. Prüfung

Authors : Susanne Bücker, Meike Deimling, Janina Durduman, Julia Holzhäuser, Sophie Schnieders, Maria Tietze, Sharmina Sayeed, Michael Schneider

Published in: Gute Hochschullehre: Eine evidenzbasierte Orientierungshilfe

Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Zusammenfassung

Studiennoten weisen starke Zusammenhänge mit standardisierten Kompetenztests und Schulnoten auf, sind gleichzeitig jedoch auch stark messfehlerbehaftet. Das Anspruchsniveau von Prüfungsaufgaben hängt vor allem davon ab, ob die Aufgaben lediglich Wiedererkennen und Reproduktion oder auch Transformation, Anwendung oder Transfer des Gelernten erfordern. Die Notenvergabepraxis in Deutschland unterscheidet sich stark zwischen Studiengängen und Hochschulen. Deutschlandweit wurden gute Noten zwischen 2000 und 2011 kontinuierlich häufiger vergeben. Studierende bereiten sich intensiv auf Prüfungen vor, wenn eine Veranstaltung ihnen hohe Selbstwirksamkeitsüberzeugungen in Bezug auf das Erreichen der Lehrziele und guter Prüfungsresultate vermittelt. Gut dokumentierte Lerninhalte, Erfolgserlebnisse während des Semesters sowie klare Lehrziele und Bewertungskriterien tragen dazu bei. Die Ergebnisrückmeldung sollte differenziert und inhaltsorientiert erfolgen, um nachfolgendes Lernen anzuregen.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
previous chapter PowerPoint-Präsentation
next chapter Lehrevaluation
Literature
Moosbrugger, H., & Kelava, A. (Hrsg.) (2012). Testtheorie und Fragebogenkonstruktion (2. Aufl.). Heidelberg: Springer.
Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college teachers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Sacher, W., & Rademacher, S. (2009). Leistungen entwickeln, überprüfen und beurteilen: Bewährte und neue Wege für die Primar- und Sekundarstufe. Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt.
Internationale Fachzeitschrift mit Peer-Review: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, Taylor & Francis.
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college teachers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Baird, L. L. (1985). Do grades and tests predict adult accomplishment? In Research in Higher Education, 23(1), 3–85.CrossRef
Balch, W. R. (1989). Item order affects performance on multiple-choice exams. In Teaching of Psychology, 16(2), 75–77. doi:10.1207/s15328023top1602_9.CrossRef
Balkis, M., Duru, E., & Bulus, M. (2013). Analysis of the relation between academic procrastination, academic rational/irrational beliefs, time preferences to study for exams, and academic achievement: a structural model. In European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28(3), 825–839. doi:10.1007/s10212-012-0142-5.CrossRef
Bar, T., Kadiyali, V., & Zussman, A. (2009). Grade information and grade inflation: The Cornell Experiment. In Journal of Economic Perspectives, 23(3), 93–108.CrossRef
Barak, M., & Rafaeli, S. (2004). On-line question-posing and peer-assessment as means for web-based knowledge sharing in learning. In International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 61(1), 84–103. doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2003.12.005.CrossRef
Bechler, O., & Thielsch, M. T. (2012). Schwierigkeiten bei der Vorbereitung auf schriftliche Prüfungen. In Zeitschrift für Hochschulentwicklung, 7(3), 137–156.
Bird, F., & Yucal, R. (2012). Improving marking reliability of scientific writing with the Developing Understanding of Assessment for Learning programme. In Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(5), 536–553. doi:10.1080/02602938.2012.658155.CrossRef
Bleske-Rechek, A., Zeug, N., & Webb, R. M. (2007). Discrepant performance on multiple-choice and short answer assessments and the relation of performance to general scholastic aptitude. In Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(2), 89–105. doi:10.1080/02602930600800763.CrossRef
Boatright-Horowitz, S. L., & Arruda, C. (2013). College students’ categorical perceptions of grades: It’s simply ‚good‘ vs. ‚bad‘. In Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(3), 253–259. doi:10.1080/02602938.2011.618877.CrossRef
Boretz, E. (2004). Grade inflation and the myth of student consumerism. In College Teaching, 52(2), 42–46.CrossRef
Broekkamp, H., & Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M. v. (2007). Students’ adaptation of study strategies when preparing for classroom tests. In Educational Psychology Review, 19(4), 401–428. doi:10.1007/s10648-006-9025-0.CrossRef
Carlson, J. L., & Ostrosky, A. L. (1992). Item sequence and student performance on multiple-choice exams: Further evidence. In Journal of Economic Education, 23(3), 232–235.CrossRef
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. In Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155.CrossRef
Dinther, M. v., Dochy, F., & Segers, M. (2011). Factors affecting students’ self-efficacy in higher education. In Educational Research Review, 6, 95–108. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2010.10.003.CrossRef
Downing, S. M. (2005). The effects of violating standard item writing principles on tests and students: The consequences of using flawed test items on achievement examinations in medical education. In Advances in Health Sciences Education, 10, 133–143. doi:10.1007/s10459-004-4019-5.CrossRef
Dunning, D., Johnson, K., Ehrlinger, J., & Kruger, J. (2003). Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence. In Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12(3), 83–87. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.01235.CrossRef
Ergene, T. (2003). Effective interventions on test anxiety reduction: A meta-analysis. In School Psychology International, 24(3), 313–328. doi:10.1177/01430343030243004.CrossRef
Falchikov, N., & Boud, D. (1989). Student self-assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis. In Review of Educational Research, 59(4), 395–430. doi:10.3102/00346543059004395.CrossRef
Falchikov, N., & Goldfinch, J. (2000). Student peer assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. In Review of Educational Research, 70(3), 287–322. doi:10.3102/00346543070003287.CrossRef
Fisseni, H. J. (2004). Lehrbuch der psychologischen Diagnostik (3. Aufl.). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
Froncek, B., Hirschfeld, G., & Thielsch, M. T. (in Druck). Characteristics of effective exams: Development and validation of an instrument for evaluating written exams. In Studies in Educational Evaluation. doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2014.01.003.
Gordon, M. E., & Fay, C. H. (2010). The effects of grading and teaching practices on students’ perceptions of grading fairness. In College Teaching, 58(3), 93–98. doi:10.1080/87567550903418586.CrossRef
Hahne, R., Lohmann, R., Krzyszycha, K., Österreich, S., & App, A. (2009). Studium und psychische Probleme: Sonderauswertung zur 15. Sozialerhebung des Deutschen Studentenwerks. Berlin: Deutsches Studentenwerk.
Haladyna, T. M., & Downing, S. M. (2002). A review of multiple-choice item-writing guidelines for classroom assessment. In Applied Measurement in Education, 15(3), 309–334. doi:10.1207/S15324818AME1503_5.CrossRef
Hattie, J. (2013). Lernen sichtbar machen. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. In Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. doi:10.3102/003465430298487.CrossRef
Hembree, R. (1988). Correlates, causes, effects, and treatment of test anxiety. In Review of Educational Research, 58(1), 47–77. doi:10.3102/00346543058001047.CrossRef
Hogan, T. P., & Murphy, G. (2007). Recommendations for preparing and scoring constructed-response items: What the experts say. In Applied Measurement in Education, 20(4), 427–441. doi:10.1080/08957340701580736.CrossRef
Hoge, R. D., & Coladarci, T. (1989). Teacher-based judgments of academic achievement: A review of literature. In Review of Educational Research, 59(3), 297–313.CrossRef
Johnson, V. E. (2003). Grade inflation: A crisis in college education. New York: Springer.
Jonsson, A., & Svingby, G. (2007). The use of scoring rubrics: Reliability, validity and educational consequences. In Educational Research Review, 2, 130–144. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2007.05.002.CrossRef
Kaufman, J. H., & Schunn, C. D. (2011). Students’ perceptions about peer assessment for writing: Their origin and impact on revision work. In Instructional Science, 39, 387–406. doi:10.1007/s11251-010-9133-6.CrossRef
Kevala, A., & Moosbrugger, H. (2012). Deskriptivstatistische Evaluation von Items (Itemanalyse) und Testwertverteilung. In H. Moosbrugger, & A. Kevala (Hrsg.), Testtheorie und Fragebogenkonstruktion (2. Aufl., S. 75–102). Berlin: Springer.
Kingston, N., & Nash, B. (2011). Formative assessment: A meta-analysis and a call for research. In Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 30(4), 28–37. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3992.2011.00220.x.CrossRef
Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. In Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254–284.CrossRef
Lundeberg, M. A., & Fox, P. W. (1991). Do laboratory findings on test expectancy generalize to classroom outcomes? In Review of Educational Research, 61(1), 94–106. doi:10.3102/00346543061001094.CrossRef
Mabe, P. A., & West, S. G. (1982). Validity of self-evaluation of ability: A review and meta-analysis. In Journal of Applied Psychology, 67(3), 280–296. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.67.3.280.CrossRef
Martinez, M. E. (1999). Cognition and the question of test item format. In Educational Psychologist, 34(4), 207–218. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3404_2.CrossRef
McMorris, R. F., Boothroyd, R. A., & Pietrangelo, D. J. (1997). Humor in educational testing: A review and discussion. In Applied Measurement in Education, 10(3), 269–297. doi:10.1207/s15324818ame1003_5.CrossRef
Millman, J., Slovacek, S. P., Kulick, E., & Mitchell, K. J. (1983). Does grade inflation affect the reliability of grades? In Research in Higher Education, 19(4), 423–429.CrossRef
Newman, D. L., Kundert, D. K., Lane Jr., D. S., & Bull, K. S. (1988). Effect of varying item order on multiple-choice test scores: Importance of statistical and cognitive difficulty. In Applied Measurement in Education, 1(1), 89–97. doi:10.1207/s15324818ame0101_8.CrossRef
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. In Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218. doi:10.1080/03075070600572090.CrossRef
Palmer, E. J., & Devitt, P. G. (2007). Assessment of higher order cognitive skills in undergraduate education: Modified essay or multiple choice questions? In BMC Medical Education, 7, 49. doi:10.1186/1472-6920-7-49.CrossRef
Patton, C. (2012). ‚Some kind of weird, evil experiment‘: Student perceptions of peer assessment. In Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(6), 719–731. doi:10.1080/02602938.2011.563281.CrossRef
Perlini, A. H., Lind, D. L., & Zumbo, B. D. (1998). Context effects on examinations: The effects of time, item order and item difficulty. In Canadian Psychology, 39(4), 299–307.CrossRef
Pressley, M., Yokoi, L., Meter, P. v., Etten, S. V., & Freebern, G. (1997). Some of the reasons why preparing for exams is so hard: What can be done to make it easier? In Educational Psychology Review, 9(1), 1–38. doi:1040-726X/97/0300-0001$12.50/0.CrossRef
Radmacher, S. A., & Latosi-Sawin, E. (1995). Summary writing: A tool to improve student comprehension and writing in psychology. In Teaching of Psychology, 22(2), 113–115. doi:10.1207/s15328023top2202_4.CrossRef
Richardson, M., Abraham, C., & Bond, R. (2012). Psychological correlates of university students’ academic performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. In Psychological Bulletin, 38(2), 353–387. doi:10.1037/a0026838.CrossRef
Ritts, V., Patterson, M. L., & Tubbs, M. E. (1992). Expectations, impressions, and judgments of physically attractive students: A review. In Review of Educational Research, 62(4), 413–426. doi:10.3102/00346543062004413.CrossRef
Roberts, D. M. (1993). An empirical study on the nature of trick questions. In Journal of Educational Measurement, 30(4), 331–344. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.1993.tb00430.x.CrossRef
Rodriguez, M. C. (2003). Construct equivalence of multiple-choice and constructed-response items: A random effects synthesis of correlations. In Journal of Educational Measurement, 40(2), 163–184. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.2003.tb01102.x.CrossRef
Roth, P. L., BeVier, C. A., Switzer, F. S., & Schippmann, J. S. (1996). Meta-analyzing the relationship between grades and job performance. In Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(5), 548–556. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.81.5.548.CrossRef
Roth, P. L., & Clarke, R. L. (1998). Meta-analyzing the relation between grades and salary. In Journal of Vocational Behavior, 53, 386–400.CrossRef
Sacher, W., & Rademacher, S. (2009). Leistungen entwickeln, überprüfen und beurteilen: Bewährte und neue Wege für die Primar- und Sekundarstufe. Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt.
Schunk, D. H. (1990). Goal setting and self-efficacy during self-regulated learning. In Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 71–86. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2501_6.CrossRef
Scoles, J., Huxham, M., & McArthur, J. (2013). No longer exempt from good practice: Using exemplars to close the feedback gap for exams. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 38(6), 631–645. doi:10.1080/02602938.2012.674485.CrossRef
Südkamp, A., Kaiser, J., & Möller, J. (2012). Accuracy of teachers’ judgements of students’ academic achievement: A meta-analysis. In Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 743–762. doi:10.1037/a0027627.CrossRef
Tal, I. R., Akers, K. G., & Hodge, G. K. (2008). Effect of paper color and question order on exam performance. In Teaching of Psychology, 35(1), 26–28. doi:10.1080/00986280701818482.CrossRef
Tamir, P. (1993). Positive and negative multiple choice items: How different are they? In Studies in Educational Evaluation, 19(3), 311–325. doi:10.1016/S0191-491X(05)80013-6.CrossRef
Trapmann, S., Hell, B., Weigand, S., & Schuler, H. (2007). Die Validität von Schulnoten zur Vorhersage des Studienerfolgs: Eine Metaanalyse. In Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 21(1), 11–27. doi:10.1024/1010-0652.21.1.11.CrossRef
Vardi, I. (2013). Effectively feeding forward from one written assessment task to the next. In Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(5), 599–610. doi:10.1080/02602938.2012.670197.CrossRef
Wimshurst, K., & Manning, M. (2013). Feed-forward assessment, exemplars and peer marking: Evidence of efficacy. In Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(4), 451–465. doi:10.1080/02602938.2011.646236.CrossRef
Wissenschaftsrat (2012). Prüfungsnoten an Hochschulen im Prüfungsjahr 2010: Arbeitsbericht mit einem wissenschaftspolitischen Kommentar des Wissenschaftsrates. Köln: Geschäftsstelle des Wissenschaftsrates.
Zeidner, M. (2007). Test anxiety in educational contexts: Concepts, findings, and future directions. In P. A. Schulz, & R. Pekrun (Hrsg.), Emotion in education (S. 165–184). San Diego: Elsevier.
Metadata
Title
Prüfung
Authors
Susanne Bücker
Meike Deimling
Janina Durduman
Julia Holzhäuser
Sophie Schnieders
Maria Tietze
Sharmina Sayeed
Michael Schneider
Copyright Year
2015
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Book
Gute Hochschullehre: Eine evidenzbasierte Orientierungshilfe

Print ISBN: 978-3-662-45061-1

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-662-45062-8

Copyright Year: 2015

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-45062-8_6

Premium Partner

    Image Credits