Four validity threats framework for traditional high-stakes performance assessment¶
Research Method · All research methods
Evidence · 2 claims (2 for) · 1 study (1 review),q2· 0 of 1 report an effect size · 2 claims rest on one study
Description¶
The review organizes its analysis around four validity threats that traditional high-stakes performance assessments pose: test anxiety among candidates, the restricted linearity resulting from combining standardization with construct-relevant tasks, a lack of assessment authenticity, and inconsistencies between raters in scoring performance. It states that "The first validity threat associated with high-stakes performance assessments is the prevalence of test anxiety among candidates", and evaluates serious-game mechanics by their potential to mediate each threat. The framework structures the review's extraction of game mechanics and its design principles.
Accounts¶
- Four validity threats framework for traditional high-stakes performance assessment: The review organizes its analysis around four validity threats that traditional high-stakes performance assessments pose: test anxiety among candidates, the restricted linearity resulting from combining standardization with construct-relevant tasks, a lack of assessment authenticity, and inconsistencies between raters in scoring performance. It states that "The first validity threat associated with high-stakes performance assessments is the prevalence of test anxiety among candidates", and evaluates serious-game mechanics by their potential to mediate each threat. The framework structures the review's extraction of game mechanics and its design principles. (Bijl et al. (2024))
Claims¶
- Serious games can provide an authentic physical context and task for professional competencies, though a small number of successful games used neither [+M]
- Adaptivity is rarely implemented in serious games for professional competencies, no reviewed game adjusts difficulty down based on player actions, and none were found for cognitive skills [+M]
Related Research Methods¶
-
Key Sources¶
- Bijl, A., Veldkamp, B. P., Wools, S., & de Klerk, S. (2024). Serious games in high-stakes assessment contexts: a systematic literature review into the game design principles for valid game-based performance assessment. Education Tech Research Dev, 72, 2041–2064. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-024-10362-0
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
research-method |
id |
four-validity-threats-framework-for-traditional-high-stakes-performance-assessment |
title |
Four validity threats framework for traditional high-stakes performance assessment |
description |
The review organizes its analysis around four validity threats that traditional high-stakes performance assessments pose: test anxiety among candidates, the restricted linearity resulting from combining standardization with construct-relevant tasks, a lack of assessment authenticity, and inconsisten |
status |
review |
generated |
by process:settle-candidates on 2026-10-28 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.