Thoughts about the Measurement of Learning: The Case for Guided Learning and Associated Measurement Issues

Abstract

First of all, let us make it clear that we have no qualms whatsoever in declaring that we should measure learning (and not just mastery) well. Mastery is not unimportant, but it is easier to capture. Learning relates to the value-added nature of a class environment, and reflects whether any movement in the “correct” direction has taken place. Even more clearly, we need to separate "learning" from ‘background.” Students come to us with a variety of skills and aptitudes; those with well developed analytical and communication skills will likely perform better on any assessment test we provide. “Learning” may not be present if “good" students do well; even excellent students need to do better in order for learning to have taken place. In short, experiential learning is the affective, cognitive, and behavioral change in a student pursuant to some structural experience designed to facilitate these changes.