The Difference Between

Assessment, Measurement
Test and Evaluation
Dr. Edi Riadi, M.Pd
Lecturer Postgraduate Program
Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa University
Banten
Assessments (Penilaian)
Assessments is a process for obtaining information
that is used for making decisions about students,
curricula, programs, and schools; educational policy
(Anthony J Nitko & Brookhart, 2011:3). When we say
we are assessing a students competence, we
mean we are collecting information to help us decide
the degree to which the student has achieved the
learning targets. A large number of assessment
techniques may be used to collect this information.
These include formal and informal observations of a
student; paper-and-pencil tests; a students
performance on homework, lab work, research
papers, projects, and during oral questioning; and
analyses of a students record.

Measurement
Measurement is a procedure for
assigning numbers (usually called
scores) to a specified characteristic of a
person in such a way that the numbers
describe the degree to which the person
possesses the attribute
(Nitko&Brookhart, 2011:6). .
Assessment is a broader term than test
or measurement because not all types
of assessments yield measurements.

TEST
A test is an instruments or systematic procedure for
observing and describing one or more characteristics
of a student using either a numerical scale or a
classification scheme (Nitko&Brookhart, 2011:5).
Test is a concept narrower than assessment. In
schools, we usually think of a test as a paper and
pencil instrument with a series of questions that
students must answer. Teachers usually score these
tests by adding together the points a student earned
on each question. By using this test, teachers
describe the student using numerical scale.

EVALUATION
Evaluation is a process of making a value
judgment about the worth of a students
product or performance (Nitko&Brookhart,
2011:6). Evaluations are the bases for
decisions about what course of action to
follow. Evaluations does occur in the absence
of tests, measurements, and other objective
information.
Summary of Differences
Dimension of Difference Assessment Evaluation
Timing Formative Summative
Focus of Measurement Process-Oriented Product-Oriented
Relationship Between
Administrator and Recipient
Reflective Prescriptive
Findings, Uses Thereof Diagnostic Judgmental
Ongoing Modifiability of Criteria,
Measures Thereof
Flexible Fixed
Standards of Measurement Absolute Comparative
Relation Between Objects of A/E Coperative Competitive
Teaching with
the Revised
BloomsTaxonomy
The Historical Revised
BloomsTaxonomy
Taxonomy of Cognitive Objectives 1950s- developed
by Benjamin Bloom. Means of expressing
qualitatively different kinds of thinking. Adapted for
classroom use as a planning tool. Continues to be
one of the most universally applied models.
Provides a way to organize thinking skills into six
levels from the most basic to the higher order levels
of thinking. 1990s- Lorin Anderson (former student
of Bloom) revisited the taxonomy
As a result, a number of changes were made


Taxonomy = Classification

Classification of thinking

Six cognitive levels
of complexity
Why use Blooms taxonomy?
Write and revise
learning objectives
Plan curriculum
Identifies simple to
most difficult skills
Effectively align
objectives to
assessment
techniques and
standards


Incorporate
knowledge to be
learned (knowledge
dimension) and
cognitive process to
learn

Evaluation
Synthesis
Analysis
Application
Comprehension
Knowledge
Creating
Evaluating
Analyzing
Applying
Understanding
Remembering
Original Revised
Noun Verb
Evaluation
Synthesis
Analysis
Application
Comprehension
Knowledge
Creating
Evaluating
Analyzing
Applying
Understanding
Remembering
Original Revised
Noun Verb
Evaluation
Synthesis
Analysis
Application
Comprehension
Knowledge
Creating
Evaluating
Analyzing
Applying
Understanding
Remembering
Original Revised
Noun Verb
Remembering
Understanding
Applying
Analyzing
Evaluating
Creating
Creating
Evaluating
Analyzing
Applying
Understanding
Remembering
Cognitive
Domain
Characterizing
by value or
value concept
Organizing &
conceptualizing
Receiving
Responding
Valuing

Affective
Domain
Psychomotor
Domain
Articulating
Imitating
Manipulating
Performing
Precisioning

Creating
Evaluating
Analyzing
Applying
Understanding
Remembering
Cognitive
Domain
Analyzing
Applying
Creating
Evaluating
Remembering
Understanding

Characterizing
by value or
value concept
Organizing &
conceptualizing
Receiving
Responding
Valuing

Affective
Domain
Psychomotor
Domain
Articulating
Imitating
Manipulating
Performing
Precisioning

Change in Terms
Categories noun to verb
Taxonomy reflects different forms of thinking
(thinking is an active process) verbs describe
actions, nouns do not
Reorganized categories
Knowledge = product/outcome of thinking
(inappropriate to describe a category of
thinking) now remembering
Comprehension now understanding
Synthesis now creating to better reflect nature
of thinking described by each category

Handout #
Changes in Structure
Products of thinking part of taxonomy
Forms of knowledge = factual, conceptual,
procedural, metacognitive (thinking about
thinking)
Synthesis (creating) and evaluation
(evaluating) interchanged
Creative thinking more complex form of
thinking than critical thinking (evaluating)

Handout #
Changes in Emphasis
USE: More authentic tool for curriculum
planning, instructional delivery and
assessment
Aimed at broader audience
Easily applied to all levels of education
Revision emphasizes explanation and
description of subcategories

Handout #

Remembering
The learner is able to recall, restate and
remember learned information


Describing
Finding
Identifying
Listing


Retrieving
Naming
Locating
Recognizing

Can students recall information?
Understanding
Student grasps meaning of information
by interpreting and translating
what has been learned
Classifying
Comparing
Exemplifying
Explaining
Inferring
Interpreting
Paraphrasing
Summarizing
Can students explain ideas or concepts?
Applying
Student makes use of information in a context
different from the one in which it was learned
Implementing
Carrying out

Using
Executing
Can students use the information in
another familiar situation?
c
=
Analyzing
Student breaks learned information into
its parts to best understand that information
Attributing
Comparing
Deconstructing
Finding

Integrating
Organizing
Outlining
Structuring

Can students break information into parts to
explore understandings and relationships?
Evaluating
Student makes decisions based on in-depth
reflection, criticism and assessment
Checking
Critiquing
Detecting
Experimenting
Hypothesising
Judging
Monitoring
Testing

Can students justify a decision or
a course of action?
Creating
Student creates new ideas and information
using what previously has been learned
Constructing
Designing
Devising
Inventing

Making
Planning
Producing

Can students generate new products,
ideas, or ways of viewing things?
Questioning . . .
Lower level questionsremembering,
understanding & lower level applying levels
Lower level questions
Evaluate students preparation and
comprehension
Diagnose students strengths and weaknesses
Review and/or summarizing content

University of Illinois (2006) Handout #
Questioning . . .
Higher level questions require complex
application, analysis, evaluation or creation
skills
Higher level questions
Encourage students to think more deeply and
critically
Facilitate problem solving
Encourage discussions
Stimulate students to seek information on their
own

University of Illinois (2006) Handout #
Remembering stems
What happened after...?
How many...?
What is...?
Who was it that...?
Name ...
Find the definition of
Describe what happened after
Who spoke to...?
Which is true or false...?

(Pohl, 2000)
Understanding stems
Explain why
Write in your own words
How would you explain?
Write a brief outline...
What do you think could have happened next...?
Who do you think...?
What was the main idea...?
Clarify
Illustrate
(Pohl, 2000)
Applying stems
Explain another instance where
Group by characteristics such as
Which factors would you change if?
What questions would you ask of?
From the information given, develop a set of
instructions about

(Pohl, 2000)
Analyzing stems
Which events could not have happened?
If. ..happened, what might the ending have been?
How is...similar to...?
What do you see as other possible outcomes?
Why did...changes occur?
Explain what must have happened when...
What are some or the problems of...?
Distinguish between...
What were some of the motives behind..?
What was the turning point?
What was the problem with...?

(Pohl, 2000)
Evaluating stems
Judge the value of... What do you think about...?
Defend your position about...
Do you think...is a good or bad thing?
How would you have handled...?
What changes to would you recommend?
Do you believe...? How would you feel if...?
How effective are...?
What are the consequences...?
What influence will....have on our lives?
What are the pros and cons of....?
Why is....of value?
What are the alternatives?
Who will gain & who will loose?


(Pohl, 2000)
Creating stems
Design a...to...
Devise a possible solution to...
If you had access to all resources, how would you
deal with...?
Devise your own way to...
What would happen if ...?
How many ways can you...?
Create new and unusual uses for...
Develop a proposal which would...

(Pohl, 2000)
Summary
Blooms revised taxonomy
Systematic process of thinking & learning
Assists assessment efforts with easy-to-use
format
Visual representation of alignment between goals
& objectives with standards, activities, &
outcomes
Helps form challenging questions to help
students gain knowledge & critical thinking skills
Assists in development of goals, objectives, &
lesson plans

Lets Practice!
make items questionnaire to measure
cognitive domains based on the examples in
this book bloom, matching the school
subjects and levels do you teach.
Discussion and
Questions

References and Resources

Cruz, E. (2003). Bloom's revised taxonomy. In B. Hoffman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Educational
Technology. http://coe.sdsu.edu/eet/Articles/bloomrev/start.htm

Dalton, J. & Smith, D. (1986) Extending childrens special abilities: Strategies for primary classrooms.
http://www.teachers.ash.org.au/researchskills/dalton.htm

Ferguson, C. (2002). Using the revised Blooms Taxonomy to plan and deliver team-taught, integrated,
thematic units. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 239-244.

Forehand, M. (2008). Blooms Taxonomy: From emerging perspectives on learning, teaching and
technology. http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Bloom%27s_Taxonomy

Mager, R. E. (1997). Making instruction work or skillbloomers: A step-by-step guide to designing and
developing instruction that works, (2nd ed.). Atlanta, GA: The Center for Effective Performance,
Inc.

Mager, R. E. (1997). Preparing instructional objectives: A critical tool in the development of effective
instruction, (3rd ed.). Atlanta, GA: The Center for Effective Performance, Inc.

Pohl, Michael. (2000). Learning to think, thinking to learn: Models and strategies to develop a
classroom culture of thinking. Cheltenham, Vic.: Hawker Brownlow.

Tarlinton (2003). Blooms revised taxonomy.
http://www.kurwongbss.qld.edu.au/thinking/Bloom/bloomspres.ppt.

University of Illinois, Center for Teaching Excellence (2006). Blooms taxonomy.
www.oir.uiuc.edu/Did/docs/QUESTION/quest1.htm