Search results

Assessing learners with extensive support needs has traditionally been rooted in deficit perspectives, in which student incapacities are highlighted. We start this chapter with an overview of this historical view and identify its shortcomings. Next, we identify alternate assessment and progress monitoring as key efforts for shifting the lens from deficit-oriented assessment toward more grade-aligned, inclusive-, and strengths-based strategies. We also identify strategies for comprehensive assessment that can continue this shift in approach. Finally, we conclude with ideas for future directions in assessing learners with extensive support needs.

L. Dee Fink proposes that different and more significant kinds of learning should be created in higher education to transition student outcomes from simply “learning” to “significant learning,” and these new types of learning should be situated within significant learning experiences (Fink, 2003). Fink also identified a taxonomy of significant learning that included six components: integration, foundational knowledge, application, human dimension, caring, and learning how to learn. Using Fink’s Taxonomy of Significant Learning as a framework, the authors will share the development of a course on navigating the US Healthcare System that resulted in significant learning outcomes for students completing the first semester of a four-year Doctor of Pharmacy curriculum. Each learning experience will link to a component of the taxonomy and will serve as the mechanism for the authors to share the development and implementation associated with each aspect of the semester-long course. The assessment structure of the course is described in detail. The authors present one or more learning experiences to illustrate each component of Fink’s Taxonomy. Finally, lessons learned from the development and implementation of the course are presented to guide programs considering implementation of a similar significant learning experience.

The humanitarian principle of impartiality requires that assistance be based on need alone. In order to ascertain needs, and later to assess whether assistance has been effective in meeting those needs, we need to gather evidence. In humanitarian crises this is generally done through assessments, monitoring and evaluation, and it generally involves seeking information from those we seek to assist. In the fast-paced environment of humanitarian crises, the question of whether the collection of this information is ethical is frequently overlooked. For research participants, the consequences can be extremely severe.

This chapter examines the ethics of research, primarily in the form of assessments, monitoring and evaluation, in humanitarian crises. The chapter first considers the question of what constitutes research in humanitarian crises, and why it is needed. It then examines the general principles of ethical research (respect, beneficence, research merit and integrity, and justice), and highlights three key considerations that require particular attention in humanitarian crises: the justificatory threshold, the vulnerability of research participants, and safety and security. The chapter also examines key components of the research process that are particularly important (and frequently overlooked) in humanitarian crises, including the privacy and confidentiality of research participants, informed consent and feedback to research participants. It concludes with the suggestion that basic instruction in the principles of ethical research should be included in the orientation and training provided to humanitarian practitioners, including to emergency response teams who are commonly involved in carrying out assessments in the early stages of a humanitarian response.

Citizens are substantial stakeholders in every e-government system, thus their willingness to use and ability to access the system are critical. Unequal access and information and communication technology usage, which is known as digital divide, however has been identified as one of the major obstacles to the implementation of e-government system. As digital divide inhibits citizen’s acceptance to e-government, it should be overcome despite the lack of deep theoretical understanding on this issue. This research aimed to investigate the digital divide and its direct impact on e-government system success of local governments in Indonesia as well as indirect impact through the mediation role of trust. In order to get a comprehensive understanding of digital divide, this study introduced a new type of digital divide, the innovativeness divide.

The research problems were approached by applying two-stage sequential mixed method research approach comprising of both qualitative and quantitative studies. In the first phase, an initial research model was proposed based on a literature review. Semi-structured interview with 12 users of e-government systems was then conducted to explore and enhance this initial research model. Data collected in this phase were analyzed with a two-stage content analysis approach and the initial model was then amended based on the findings. As a result, a comprehensive research model with 16 hypotheses was proposed for examination in the second phase.

In the second phase, quantitative method was applied. A questionnaire was developed based on findings in the first phase. A pilot study was conducted to refine the questionnaire, which was then distributed in a national survey resulting in 237 useable responses. Data collected in this phase were analyzed using Partial Least Square based Structural Equation Modeling.

The results of quantitative analysis confirmed 13 hypotheses. All direct influences of the variables of digital divide on e-government system success were supported. The mediating effects of trust in e-government in the relationship between capability divide and e-government system success as well as in the relationship between innovativeness divide and e-government system success were supported, but was rejected in the relationship between access divide and e-government system success. Furthermore, the results supported the moderating effects of demographic variables of age, residential place, and education.

This research has both theoretical and practical contributions. The study contributes to the developments of literature on digital divide and e-government by providing a more comprehensive framework, and also to the implementation of e-government by local governments and the improvement of e-government Readiness Index of Indonesia.

Purpose – To highlight ways to overcome challenges in conducting authentic assessments and using data effectively in program planning.

Approach – To help teachers investigate the definition and purpose of assessments available for use in today's diverse classrooms, and use assessment results to inform instruction.

Practical implications – A school team analysis framework focused on teacher collaboration when conducting evaluations of districts' reading programs, a data use cycle, and a reflective questionnaire are provided for professional development.

Social implications – Social justice and differentiated instruction require balanced assessment methods and portfolio use as an implementable and manageable method to document student progress.

Originality/value of paper – This chapter engages teachers in the reality that they can be the driving force behind assessments for learning in their classrooms, schools, and districts.

In this chapter, we discuss health-related physical fitness and motor development assessments for students with physical disabilities or other health impairments in special education using traditional and innovative techniques. Traditional assessment techniques are those that are more standardized and formalized, while innovative assessment techniques refer to new variations or ways (alternative/authentic) to assess the abilities of students with physical disabilities and other health impairments. According to the United States Department of Education (2009), students with disabilities must be included in State and local assessments. Even though there has been significant growth in numbers, diversity and academic orientation of persons with physical disabilities, assessments practices have largely remained the same over the years. Adopting innovative pedagogies and emerging innovative assessment techniques may address some unmet needs of current students with disabilities faced with assessment biases.

The European Union’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) calls for far-reaching changes to the way economic activity will occur in EU digital markets. Before its remedies are imposed, it is critical to assess their impacts on individual markets, the digital sector, and the overall European economy. The European Commission (EC) released an Impact Assessment in support of the DMA that purports to evaluate it using cost/benefit analysis.

An economic evaluation of the DMA should consider its full impacts on dynamic competition. The Impact Assessment neither assesses the DMA's impact on dynamic competition in the digital economy nor evaluates the impacts of specific DMA prohibitions and obligations. Instead, it considers benefits in general and largely ignores costs. We study its benefit assessments and find they are based on highly inappropriate methodologies and assumptions. A cost/benefit study using inappropriate methodologies and largely ignoring costs cannot provide a sound policy assessment.

Instead of promoting dynamic competition between platforms, the DMA will likely reinforce existing market structures, ossify market boundaries, and stunt European innovation. The DMA is likely to chill R&D by encouraging free riding on the investments of others, which discourages making those investments. Avoiding harm to innovation is critical because innovation delivers large, positive spillover benefits, driving increases in productivity, employment, wages, and prosperity.

The DMA prioritizes static over dynamic competition, with the potential to harm the European economy. Given this, the Impact Assessment does not demonstrate that the DMA will be beneficial overall, and its implementation must be carefully tailored to alleviate or lessen its potential to harm Europe’s economic performance.