Assessment on two levels - possible or not?

Is it possible to create tests at two levels, so teachers can better understand students’ potential and help them get the most out of their learning process? With this question, Yuverta VMBO in Amsterdam-West approached Educational Advice & Training. Teachers from different departments explored the possibilities together with educational advisor Steven Raaijmakers.

Laying the foundation through preliminary research

In a working session, the differences and similarities between the levels were examined together. What exactly is expected from students at the basic level and at the advanced (kader) level? Can a clear distinction be made between questions, assignments, and learning objectives? These questions formed the foundation of the initial sessions.

Building the test

Next, the teachers and Educational Development & Training explored how to construct a test that fairly assesses each level without students disengaging due to questions being too difficult or too easy. This led to stimulating discussions about question order, marking the level of questions, and other quality requirements for tests. An external expert was also consulted on this issue.

How reliable is a combined test?

The school hoped that a combined test with both basic and advanced questions could provide a reliable picture of students’ potential. After the preliminary research, the teachers concluded that it is very difficult to create a fair and reliable test at two levels. A test that is too short does not give a reliable picture of a student’s knowledge. Combining two short tests into one means that neither level yields results reliable enough.

Although reliability cannot be guaranteed, such a test does serve a signaling function. The results of a combined test can indicate that it is wise to decide at a later stage whether another level might be more appropriate. This ultimately supports the school’s goal of placing students where they fit best.

At Yuverta, we saw how valuable it is to combine theory and practice. The end result is greater insight into the complexity of testing at two levels, and concrete tools for further development. Together we build powerful, fair assessments that truly help students progress.

Steven Raaijmakers, Educational Advisor

Characteristic working method

This project is a good example of the approach of Educational Advice & Training: research-based, evidence-informed, and focused on practical applicability. When a certain approach does not work optimally, we search together for a better solution.

More information and contact

Curious how Educational Development & Training can help with your educational challenges? Please contact Steven Raaijmakers.