| Popis: |
This chapter presents the case of SIMCE—the Chilean National Assessment of Learning Outcomes and reviews its progress and challenges regarding validity. Despite the lack of a structured validation agenda in the case of SIMCE, this work reveals that the documentation to support the validity of the interpretation of its results is often produced by the institution responsible for this evaluation, whereas the studies on its consequences have been developed primarily by academics and independent agencies. However, it is argued that judging the value—or evaluating—a national learning assessment system, does not depend solely on technical arguments, nor is automatically derived from the validity evidence that is gathered. Evaluating an assessment system requires a broader vision (Newton, 2007), and the criteria include, among other variables, its social legitimacy or political viability, given how important they can be for the understanding, implementation, and continuity of such a system. In line with the above, the chapter describes two milestones in which, in Chile, public questioning of the national assessment system led to the formation of external working committees to examine the system, discuss and agree upon a broad diagnosis and recommendations. The method followed and the contribution made by these non-conventional and complementary evaluation instances are presented. Finally, the chapter concludes that in Chile today the question of evaluation should go beyond the validity of SIMCE tests and the interpretation of their scores, and focus on the whole of the Quality Assurance System and, in particular, the consequences for schools that are mandated by law. We argue that this kind of broad approach is necessary when judging most national test-based accountability systems. |
