Developing the Consensual Assessment Technique as a Modern Trend for the Alternative Evaluation of Giftedness and Creativity in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Authors

  • Yousra Zaki Abboud National Center for Giftedness and Creativity Research - King Faisal University- جامعة الملك فيصل Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.69867/PEAJ057

Keywords:

gifted, creativity, performance evaluation, achievement portfolio, self-evaluation

Abstract

The alternative assessment for the gifted and creative sheds light on modern trends in discovering and evaluating the gifted, adopting multiple criteria, and based on real performance as its basis. The current study aims to establish a theoretical framework for the alternative assessment for the gifted and creative that addresses its objectives and characteristics and compares it with traditional methods in addition to the tools and methods of alternative assessment. The study aims Also, basically, to codify the harmonic assessment technique to evaluate the products of gifted and creative students and prepare them to be suitable for use in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The current study seeks to clarify the concepts associated with alternative assessment, its characteristics and methods, in addition to its advantages and disadvantages, in its theoretical aspect. As for the practical aspect, the current study seeks to codify the harmonic assessment technique as one of the Alternative evaluation methods for the products and innovations of gifted and creative students, and evaluation of the harmonic evaluation technique.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

المصادر والمراجع

أولاً: المراجع العربية:

القفاص، وليد. (2011). التقويم والقياس النفسي والتربوي اتجاهات معاصرة – برامج تدريبية – نماذج لإعداد وتعريب الاختبارات، المكتب الجامعي الحديث. مصر.

أرمسترونج، ثوماس. (2006). الذكاءات المتعددة في غرفة الصف. دار الكتاب التربوي: الدمام).

الخليلي، خليل. (1998). التقييم الحقيقي في التربية. مجلة التربية. (126)،118.

زيتون، حسن. (2003). أصول التقويم والقياس التربوي المفهومات والتطبيقات. الدار الصولتية: الرياض.

سرايا، عادل. (2001). التقويم الحقيقي. مجلة التدريب والتقنية. (74)،40.

علام، صلاح الدين. (2000). التقويم التربوي البديل. دار الفكر التربوي: القاهرة.

مهيدات، عبد الحكيم ؛ المحاسنة، ابراهيم. (2009). التقويم الواقعي. دار جرير، عمان.

المراجع العربية الإنجليزية

Al-Qaffas, W. (2011). Psychological and Educational Assessment and Measurement: Contemporary Approaches, Training Programs, and Models for Test Development and Localization (In Arabic). Modern University Office. Egypt.

Armstrong, T. (2006). Multiple Intelligences in the Classroom (In Arabic). Educational Book House. Dammam.

Al-Khalili, K. (1998). Authentic Assessment in Education. (In Arabic). Journal of Education, (126), 118.

Zeitoon, H. (2003). Principles of Educational Evaluation and Measurement: Concepts and Applications (In Arabic). Dar Al-Sawlatiya. Riyadh.

Sraya, A. (2001). Authentic Assessment. (In Arabic). Journal of Training and Technology, (74), 40.

Allam, S. (2000). Alternative Educational Evaluation (In Arabic). Educational Thought House. Cairo.

Mahaydeh, A. H., & Al-Mahasneh, I. (2009). Realistic Evaluation. (In Arabic). Jarir Publishing, Amman.

ثانياً: المراجع الأجنبية:

Baska, V.T. (2007). Alternative assessments with gifted and talented students. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

Birenbaum, M. and Dochy, F. (1996). Alternative Assessment of Achievements, Learning Processes and Prior Knowledge. Boston; Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Borland, J, H (2003) Rethinking gifted education, published by teacher college press. New York.

Bond, L.A. (1994): Critical Issue: Rethinking assessment and its role in supporting educational reform, North Central Regional Educational Laboratory.

Callahan, C.M. (2002). The ABCs of creating a performance assessment task and scoring rubric. Gifted Education communicator, 33(2), pp. 12-15.

Carson, S. (2006). Creative and Mental Illness. Invitational Panel Discussion Hosted by Yale's Mind matters Consortium, New Haven, CT.

Denham, A &Lahm, E.A(2001). Using technology to construct alternate portfolios of students with moderate and severe disabilities . Teaching Exceptional Children,33/5.

Hill, C. (2000). The progress profile: Constructivist Assessment in early childhood education. In A.L. Costa (Ed) Teaching for intelligence II (pp.211-230) Chicago: Skylight Publishing.

Lane, S., & Stone, C. A. (2006). Performance assessment. In R. L. Brennan (Ed.), Educational Measurement (4th ed.), (pp. 387-432). National Council on Measurement in Education & American Council on Education. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.

Lohman, D. F. (2005). The role of nonverbal ability tests in identifying academically gifted students: An aptitude perspective. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49, 111-138.

Runco, M.A., Illies, J.J., & Reiter- Palmon, R. (2005). Explicit instructions to be creative and original: A comparison of strategies and criteria targets with three types of divergent thinking test, Korean journal of thinking and problem solving, 15, pp.5-15.

Runco, M.A, & Dow, G.T. (2004). Assessing the accuracy of judgment of thinking and problem solving, 14, pp.5-14.

Schlepphege, J. (2010(. The Portfolio: An Alternative assessment method in the foreign language, Seminar paper, Grin. Pub.

Seidel, S. (2006). Project zero /Massachusetts school network. Retrieved December 13,2006, from http://www.pz.harvard.edu/Research/MSN.htm.

Shaklee, B.D., &Viechnicki, K. (1995). A qualitative approach to portfolios: the early assessment foe exceptional potential design, Journal for the Education of the gifted, 18, 156-170

Shivinina, L (2003) The international handbook on innovation, Elsevier science Ltd.

Wiggins, G. (1993). Assessing student performance: Exploring the purpose and limits of testing. New York: Jossey – Bass.

Published

2022-10-01

How to Cite

Abboud, Y. . (2022). Developing the Consensual Assessment Technique as a Modern Trend for the Alternative Evaluation of Giftedness and Creativity in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Journal of the Palestinian Educators Association for Literature and Educational and Psychological Studies, 2(5), 177-195. https://doi.org/10.69867/PEAJ057