Nouveauté
Examination Question Items and Competency Based Curriculum
Par :Formats :
Disponible dans votre compte client Decitre ou Furet du Nord dès validation de votre commande. Le format ePub est :
- Compatible avec une lecture sur My Vivlio (smartphone, tablette, ordinateur)
- Compatible avec une lecture sur liseuses Vivlio
- Pour les liseuses autres que Vivlio, vous devez utiliser le logiciel Adobe Digital Edition. Non compatible avec la lecture sur les liseuses Kindle, Remarkable et Sony
, qui est-ce ?Notre partenaire de plateforme de lecture numérique où vous retrouverez l'ensemble de vos ebooks gratuitement
Pour en savoir plus sur nos ebooks, consultez notre aide en ligne ici
C'est si simple ! Lisez votre ebook avec l'app Vivlio sur votre tablette, mobile ou ordinateur :
- FormatePub
- ISBN8235653320
- EAN9798235653320
- Date de parution09/09/2026
- Protection num.pas de protection
- Infos supplémentairesepub
- ÉditeurIoakim Ioakim
Résumé
Competency-based curriculum represents a significant transformation in curriculum development because it emphasizes demonstrated knowledge, skills, application, and broader competencies rather than simple content coverage. Assessment is therefore central to CBC implementation. Evidence from K-12 competency-based education indicates that assessment has received insufficient attention in many implementation studies, despite being fundamental to determining whether learners have achieved competence.
Objective examination items remain legitimate and valuable within CBC because they provide efficient scoring, broad curriculum sampling, comparability, and opportunities for standardized assessment. However, their educational value depends on the quality of their construction and the cognitive demands they impose. MCQs, true/false, matching, and completion items should not be restricted to factual recall.
Through authentic contexts, evidence-based stimuli, data interpretation, non-routine problems, and carefully designed alternatives, objective questions can assess aspects of application, analysis, critical thinking, and problem solving. The most appropriate policy direction is consequently not to replace examinations completely but to transform them into standards-based, competency-sensitive assessment systems.
Foundational knowledge must remain rigorously assessed because competencies depend on substantive disciplinary knowledge. At the same time, examinations should increasingly require learners to apply, analyze, evaluate, solve problems, interpret evidence, construct arguments, and communicate conclusions. These expectations should be complemented by formative assessment, projects, practical activities, portfolios, observations, and other performance evidence where appropriate.
Ultimately, CBC and rigorous assessment are not contradictory. A high-quality competency-based assessment system should preserve the legitimate functions of examinations certification, comparability, accountability, progression, and quality assurance while expanding the kinds of evidence collected about student learning. Subjective examination items can make a substantial contribution to this transformation when they are carefully aligned with competency standards, supported by transparent scoring criteria, moderated for fairness and reliability, and combined with complementary assessment methods.
The central principle should therefore be not "examinations versus competencies, " but "examinations redesigned to provide credible evidence of competencies while maintaining rigorous educational standards."
Objective examination items remain legitimate and valuable within CBC because they provide efficient scoring, broad curriculum sampling, comparability, and opportunities for standardized assessment. However, their educational value depends on the quality of their construction and the cognitive demands they impose. MCQs, true/false, matching, and completion items should not be restricted to factual recall.
Through authentic contexts, evidence-based stimuli, data interpretation, non-routine problems, and carefully designed alternatives, objective questions can assess aspects of application, analysis, critical thinking, and problem solving. The most appropriate policy direction is consequently not to replace examinations completely but to transform them into standards-based, competency-sensitive assessment systems.
Foundational knowledge must remain rigorously assessed because competencies depend on substantive disciplinary knowledge. At the same time, examinations should increasingly require learners to apply, analyze, evaluate, solve problems, interpret evidence, construct arguments, and communicate conclusions. These expectations should be complemented by formative assessment, projects, practical activities, portfolios, observations, and other performance evidence where appropriate.
Ultimately, CBC and rigorous assessment are not contradictory. A high-quality competency-based assessment system should preserve the legitimate functions of examinations certification, comparability, accountability, progression, and quality assurance while expanding the kinds of evidence collected about student learning. Subjective examination items can make a substantial contribution to this transformation when they are carefully aligned with competency standards, supported by transparent scoring criteria, moderated for fairness and reliability, and combined with complementary assessment methods.
The central principle should therefore be not "examinations versus competencies, " but "examinations redesigned to provide credible evidence of competencies while maintaining rigorous educational standards."
