Changes for page Post Box Exercise

Last modified by Ivan Kharitonov on 2022/01/30 17:24

From version < 7.1 >

edited by Chris Van Goethem
on 2020/12/25 13:52

To version < 11.1 >

edited by Randell Greenlee
on 2021/11/09 09:55

< >

Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Raw
Rendered

Summary

Page properties (4 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)

Details

Page properties

Title

@@ -1,1
          +1,1 @@
--Observation in simulated environment
++Role Play

Parent

@@ -1,1
          +1,1 @@
--Main.Sectoral Layer.Sectoral Layer Glossary.WebHome
++01 Sectoral Layer.Sectoral Layer Glossary.WebHome

Author

@@ -1,1
          +1,1 @@
--XWiki.ChrisVanGoethem
++XWiki.RandellGreenlee

Content

@@ -4,29
          +4,48 @@
  = Description =
--The simulated environment reflects a real live situation, but is standardised. This makes it possible to build in incentives for behaviour or choices. The situation can be a "copy" of a real live situation, but also a roleplay (for more behaviour skills). The candidate is observed in this simulated situation.
++The candidate is placed in a situation with an actor as counterpart. The actor steers the situation, based on a predefined scenario, passing specific realistic situations. Observation is done based on a checklist.
--This method is used for skills that can be shown in the workspace. The assessment method allows to test very specific competences, as the environment can be controlled. Mainly for practical, observable skills.
++The role play is effective for testing communicative and social competences like interviewing, rhetoric, argumentation, empathy, assertiveness, persuasiveness, sensitivity (behavioral observation). It's also useful for assessing operational readiness, goal orientation, frustration tolerance, persistence, problem solving skills, analytic skills, decision making skills. and. It can test the skill of adapting communication and language to different target groups. The setting of the role play can be a difficult collaborator interview, a conflict with a leading person, a critical incident on the workplace, a discussion with a designer or a discussion with a technical director.
  ----
  = Quality Concepts =
--== Validity ==
++=== Validity ===
--Since all factors are under control, the internal validity of this method is high. The method excludes unpredictability of situation and environment. So, it is easier to ensure safety. Very specific competencies can be tested. Since the behavior of people can change as a result of the observation situation (Hawthorne effect), internal validity is also threatened. This effect can be partially reduced if the work situation is only filmed (indirect observation). Since it is less a real-life situation, the external validity (transferability) of the observed behavior is lower. A good test will reflect real life situations in a controlled environment as much as possible.
++|(((
++The validity of the method is increased by the tasks being appropriate for the competences to be measured. Above all, interpersonal and artistic skills can be assessed with the role play. The following communicative and social skills can be assessed: interviewing, rhetoric, reasoning, empathy, assertiveness, persuasiveness and sensitivity. In order to increase the validity, the selected role-playing situations should be representative of the event technology. It is important to make the situation challenging and relevant. The situations need to occur regularly in real life. As the scenario only reflects one concrete situation there is a risk that it doesn't reflect all situations in professional practice. However, the method is close to real life and is well controllable.
--== Reliability ==
++A particular challenge for the validity of the role play is the requirement on the candidate to be active as an actor. Care should be taken here to make it clear that the acting performance is not assessed. The candidate should be able to develop his role freely and without pressure in order to be able to express his inherent competencies.
--The quality of simulated environment observation depends on the accuracy and repeatability of the test setup.
--Simulated environments guarantee equal treatment of candidates, the result should be identical, wherever and by whatever assessors they are conducted. Therefore every candidate is assessed in an identical situation.
--One of the elements in this are well trained assessors and a levelling system, this avoids that assessment would be biased by assessors influenced by previous tests or looking outside the competences to for example not occupation related behaviour.
--The reliability is increased by the possibility to easily develop exact observable criteria.
++According to Obermann (2018), the relationship between job success and the results of role play is .16. This corresponds to a very low correlation. It should be noted, however, that in the assessment context, job success is only indirectly relevant in the context of validation.
++)))
++=== Reliability ===
++
++|(((
++The role play should be constructed in such a way that the competences to be measured should not be reflected in a single situation. Otherwise there is a risk that the candidate will accidentally behave correctly. If several situations are to reveal the same competencies, the reliability is increased.
++
++The situations and the start of the conversation should be clearly worded. Unclear formulations can lead to the candidate misunderstanding the task and situation, which disrupts reliability. Language barriers should also be taken into account accordingly. The starting position is identical for each candidate if the scenario is well developed. But the path can be different and contain unpredicted situations. The assessor needs to find a balance to steer on one hand, but leave the initiative to the candidate on the other.
++
++Various factors can limit the candidate's concentration and performance:
++
++poor room lighting or ventilation, disturbing sources of noise, lack of equipment, poor health or psychological condition of the candidate (e.g. fear, stress).
++
++The reliability is increased by not changing the order of the methods. In this way, the assessment processes remain comparable.
++
++The assessors / observers should be extensively trained to ensure evaluation and interpretation, to ensure comparability and objectivity. It should be clear which behaviors can be attributed to certain skills. So, reliability is enforced by a good scoring structure.
++
++The behavior of the interlocutors is standardized by means of a written instruction. This is a prerequisite for objectivity, which in turn ensures that different results are due to the performance of the participants and not to variations in the interlocutors.
++)))
++
  == Limitations ==
--Development of a assessment set-up is time consuming.
++Role plays are less suitable for assessing knowledge-based skills. Likewise, no competencies are expressed that are expressed in written and drawn results. The methodology is less usefull for observing physical skills, exept if combined with an observation in a simulated environment.
++To check how the candidate behaves in a non-simulated environment, real-life observations should be preferred. A good scenario should be able to bring forward knowledge based skills.
++
  ----
  = Considerations =
@@ -33,25
          +33,25 @@
  == Tips ==
--Organise the test in a way that the candidate feels at ease. If it is a tradition to have a cup of coffee at the start of a working day, include this in the startup of the test.
--Give the candidate time to discover the situation.
--Do not built in traps or tricky situations that hardly ever occur in real life.
--Be clear and open about the role and activities of the observers. Attention points can be:
++|(((
++Educate the assessee that their acting performance is not being tested. He should behave as he would in everyday work. The atmosphere should be as realistic as possible. Assessee and interlocutors (= role players) need prior written information. This gives the other party information on how to react to certain situations and questions. The person watching should not have direct eye contact with the assessee. In advance, it is recommended for observer training to practice role-playing with video analysis. Assessors need to be trained for the specific scenario's, idealy in interaction with their collegues.
--* Observers write also about positive points.
--* Observers are silent, because they keep a distance.
--* Observers will only stop the test in case of danger or overtime.
++It can help to get the candidate on the right track to use some properties (assessories) to visualise the role of the actor (for example a typical piece of clothing, documents, models, ...). Make clear the candidate is playing his/her own role in the given situation.
++)))
  == Traps ==
--If the candidate needs support, the assistant must be trained to limit the intervention to what the candidate requires and not (as we would do in reality) to take over the decision-making process or be proactive.
--There is a risk that the assessor is biased. That is why assessors should be professionals from the field of competences being assessed. Assessors have to be aware that there are different methods to perform a specific task and should take distance from one prefered method, for as far as the goal is reached.
++The situation characteristics from the requirements analysis cannot be implemented carefully enough. This can have the consequence that the behavior is not relevant for the competence to be tested. Sentences like "In reality I would do it completely differently." are signs of this. There is a risk for socialy expected answers and behavior.
++If the assessor has no experience with role-playing games, an unpredictable momentum can develop which affects the comparability. Assessors need to be aware of the reasons for all scenario steps and have to balance natural behaviour and following the storyline of the scenario that leads to the visibility of the skills. Errors can be a high level of willingness to compromise or hardness. Principle of local independence: The interview partner must act neutrally in the individual situations, even if the assessee had a poor start in a previous situation. Otherwise only the overall performance can be assessed, but not individual competencies. Avoid that the same assessor is playing different roles for the same candidate.
++
++A short instruction in the role play overemphasizes the situational flexibility. Communicative observations can take place less.
++
++Uncertainties about the setting (e.g. Has the exercise already started? Who ends the conversation?) should be avoided. Other participants should not act as conversation partners as this does not standardize the exercise. An assessor can't be the role player at the same time.
++
  == Scoring Tools ==
--Observing can be done through a list of observable criteria. The criteria should be derived from the sectoral layer skills, in other words, they are a concretisation of the visible, observable result of the skill in a specific situation.
--As the situation is always identical, the scoring tool can be very specific and leave little room for interpretation.
--The final decision is made based on the link of the criteria with the competence and by comparing the observations of the different assessors.
++There could be used a check List and notes about the behaviour of the candidate with reference to the expected behaviour. The criteria should be derived from the sectoral layer skills, in other words, they are a concretization of the visible, observable result of the skill in a specific situation. As the situation can differ, the scoring tool will be more general and leave more room for interpretation than other methods.
  ----
@@ -59,40
          +59,33 @@
  == Information for Standard ==
--The standard must describe the specific situations, incentives and expected complexity of the skills to be assessed.
++The method should include a short description and the expected behaviour.
  == Development ==
--The development of an observation in a simulated environment starts with the analysis of the skills that need to be evaluated. Since not every skill can be tested in all variations, representative situations are chosen to reflect the mastery of the general skill. The skills are built into a well-chosen scenario that reflects a real-life experience, but also integrates behavioural incentives and choices. The candidate is asked to perform a task, but the environment limits or alters the way the task is performed. In this way, the candidate must make his/her own decisions.
--The activities should reflect different contexts. Often a skill or behavior is built in twice to improve reliability and avoid "false positives".
--Assessment facilities must be tested and updated before they are used with "real" candidates.
++The development of an assessment scenario starts from the analysis of the skills that need to be assessed. The scenario reflects a real life situation in which the tested skills are prominently present. Based on the scenario, a list of observable criteria, derived from the competences is created.
  == Needs/Set-Up ==
--This is an observation in a “real life” professional setting. It must be organized as a normal day in the life of the candidate (= working day). One assessor could be acting as a “colleague” the other would assess from a distance. There could also be trained “colleagues” (must not have an assessor qualification), who “work with” the candidate in the observation environment. This is only necessary when a colleague is “physically” necessary to assess the competence at hand. One assessor can't oversee all activities, idealy there are at least two assessors, one who is observing from a distance and a second one observing close.
--Technical competence is relatively easy to assess. Knowledge behind the action can be assessed in most cases, if the test is prepared in the proper way. Competences are tested in the “group” working environment, as it is in reality. Several competences can almost always be assessed at one time. The proper atmosphere is very important.
--The assessments could be done at educational institutions with the necessary equipment.
++In most cases a quiet space with a table and some chairs is all that is needed. Depending on the test, documentation can be needed (light plots, sound documentation, …).
  == Requirements for Assessors ==
--Assessors need competences for valid observations, such as those that can be acquired in observer training courses. They should have a basic knowledge of diagnostics, be able to deal with perceptual effects (e.g. errors of observation and assessment) and be able to recognize their own subjectivity. A professional competence is essential for the evaluation of the candidate's performance against the background of the assessment standard. It is also needed to construct a work situation appropriate to the competences to be assessed.
++Assessors must be able to instruct the actors according to the situation. As observers, they need skills in observing, diagnosing and evaluating the candidate's behavior. The assessment of competencies requires professional expertise.
  == Examples ==
--For the skill "Working on heights" a candidate should perform several activities on ladders, scaffolding, … Based on a checklist, his/her behaviour is observed.
++The candidate has a discussion with a designer about a design concept that needs to be translated into a practical plan. In this discussion e.g. conceptual and artistical understanding, technical problem solving and predicting problems and language use can be assessed.
  == In Combination with ==
--This Method can be combined with a criterion focused interviews to fill the gaps or skills that have not been observed (not negative or positive). It can be combined with a multiple choice or open answer test for knowledge that is not made visible in practice.
++Role Plays can be used in combination with a post box exercise, where the information needed is not (or limited) put on paper, but the counterpart is presenting the information and the candidate can ask questions about the required results. It can be complemented with a criterium focused interview for skills that didn't become visible.
  = References/Notes =
--* Catalogus Assessmentmethodes voor EVC, Agentschap Hoger Onderwijs, volwassenenonderwijs, Kwalificaties en Studietoelagen, Ministery of education and training of the Flemish community (2015). Online: [[http:~~/~~/www.erkennenvancompetenties.be/evc-professionals/evc-toolbox/bestanden/catalogus-assessmentmethodes-evc-2015.pdf>>http://www.erkennenvancompetenties.be/evc-professionals/evc-toolbox/bestanden/catalogus-assessmentmethodes-evc-2015.pdf]]  (last 17.08.2020)
--* Jhpiego (2011): Simulation Training for Educators of Health Care Workers. Online: [[http:~~/~~/reprolineplus.org/system/files/resources/simulation_facilitatorsguide.pdf>>http://reprolineplus.org/system/files/resources/simulation_facilitatorsguide.pdf]]  (last 05.08.2020)
--* Multiprofessional Faculty Development (2012): Teaching and Learning in Simulated Environments. Online: [[https:~~/~~/faculty.londondeanery.ac.uk/e-learning/teaching-clinical-skills/teaching-and-learning-in-simulated-environments>>https://faculty.londondeanery.ac.uk/e-learning/teaching-clinical-skills/teaching-and-learning-in-simulated-environments]]  (last 05.08.2020)
--* Scottish Qualifications Authority (2019): Guide to Assessment. Online: [[https:~~/~~/www.sqa.org.uk/files_ccc/Guide_To_Assessment.pdf>>https://www.sqa.org.uk/files_ccc/Guide_To_Assessment.pdf]]  (05.08.2020)
--* Vincent-Lambert, C. / Bogossian, F. (2006): A guide for the assessment of
--* clinical competence using simulation. Online: [[https:~~/~~/pdfs.semanticscholar.org/bda7/dae4871a49e19fd2cc186823379518e39192.pdf>>https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/bda7/dae4871a49e19fd2cc186823379518e39192.pdf]]  (last 05.08.2020)
++* Catalogus Assessmentmethodes voor EVC, Agentschap Hoger Onderwijs, volwassenenonderwijs, Kwalificaties en Studietoelagen, Ministery of education and training of the Flemish community (2015). Online: http:~/~/www.erkennenvancompetenties.be/evc-professionals/evctoolbox/bestanden/catalogus-assessmentmethodes-evc-2015.pdf. (last 17.08.2020)
++* Eck, C. et al. (2016): Assessment-Center. Entwicklung und Anwendung – mit 57 AC-Aufgaben und Checklisten zum Downloaden und Bearbeiten im Internet. 3. Aufl. Berlin / Heidelberg: Springer.
++* Obermann, C. (2018): Assessment Center. Entwicklung, Durchführung, Trends. Mit neuen originalen AC-Übungen. 6., vollständig überarb. u. erw. Aufl. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien.
  == AT ==

Changes for page Post Box Exercise

Summary

Details

TeBeVAT Menu