NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
ERIC Number: EJ1032278
Record Type: Journal
Publication Date: 2014
Pages: 14
Abstractor: As Provided
Reference Count: 50
ISBN: N/A
ISSN: ISSN-1743-727X
Explaining Differences between Retrospective and Traditional Pretest Self-Assessments: Competing Theories and Empirical Evidence
Nimon, Kim
International Journal of Research & Method in Education, v37 n3 p256-269 2014
Summarizing theory and results of empirical research, this article serves to illustrate why effects measured with retrospective pretests may be subject to bias and may not always be explained by response shift theory. It presents three contending theories to explain the difference between retrospective and traditional pretest results and considers how the evaluation environment may inform subject bias. Four recommendations are made for workforce education (WE) researchers and practitioners who employ retrospective pretest data to report programme outcomes. WE professionals should (a) consider the cognitive implications of tasking participants to recall information, (b) select a robust evaluation design to encompass the retrospective pretest, (c) provide validity evidence of retrospective pretest data, and (d) conduct additional research to evaluate how elements of the evaluation process moderate retrospective assessments.
Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Publication Type: Journal Articles; Reports - Evaluative
Education Level: N/A
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A