![Sample our Education journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5932/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Education.jpg"})
Abstract
Entirely predictable examinations are ones for which the questions are known in advance. Some assessments are designed this way, but in public examinations, predictability is subtler. Students familiarise themselves with the requirements broadly: likely topics that will come up, question formats and how to maximise their marks. If students can predict what they have to do, they can memorise performances, such as essays, and restrict their learning to fit only with examination requirements. The danger is that this focus could undermine curriculum aims. Further, examinations that are overly predictable might produce results that do not generalise to other performances or have predictive validity. This paper presents part of a broader project investigating whether the Higher Level Irish Leaving Certificate (LC) examinations were too predictable. Here, the development of a rating scale for students’ views of examination predictability is described. Data were collected from 1002 Irish LC students taking higher level examinations in biology (n = 536), English (n = 749) and geography (n = 387). Students’ views on predictability of the examination could be grouped consistently across subject areas into three factors: valuable learning, predictability and narrowing of the curriculum. Belief that narrowing of the curriculum was a good examination preparation tactic had a negative relationship with examination scores and perceived learning value of examinations was positively associated with students’ scores in biology and English. These findings indicate that the scoring system rewards students who believe they must study the discipline broadly.
Acknowledgements
This project was commissioned by the State Examinations Commission in Ireland. We are grateful to them for their support of the research and for the participation of the teachers and learners in Ireland in this project.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes on contributors
Jo-Anne Baird is Director of the Department of Education, University of Oxford, and Pearson Professor of Educational Assessment. She is a Visiting Professor at Queen’s University, Belfast, and Professor II in psychology at the University of Bergen. Her research interests include examination standards, marking reliability and assessment design.
Dr Daniel Caro is a Research Fellow at the Oxford University Centre for Educational Assessment at the Department of Education, University of Oxford. His research interests include socioeconomic effects on educational attainment and school effectiveness, international tests and production of freeware packages in R, such as ‘intsvy’.
Dr Therese N. Hopfenbeck is Director of the Oxford University Centre for Educational Assessment at the Department of Education, University of Oxford. Her research interests include assessment for learning, self-regulated learning and international tests.