Criterion-referenced versus Norm-referenced

Criterion-referenced’ and ‘norm-referenced’ were terms originally coined by American educational psychologist Robert Glaser in 1963.  Over time, the terms have developed into value-filled concepts within the discipline of education.  Criterion-referenced assessment is judgement based on preset criteria (Biggs & Tang, 2007, p. 177).  Norm-referenced assessment is "using the achievement of a group of students to set the standards for specific grades” (Nightingale et al., 1996, p. 9).  The validity of differentation between the two forms in practice is debated (Bloxham, Boyd, & Orr, 2011).  However, the outcomes of both assessment forms provide the basis for learning through performance feedback.

In a study of the effects of performance feedback on cognition and affect, Kim, Lee, Chung, and Bong (2010) investigated the moderating effects of "perceived competency and performance-approach goals" (p. 142).  The researchers used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to record the responses of 22 participants.  They found that participants with high self-perceptions of competency produced brain activation associated with negative affect in response to criterion-referenced feedback.  Comparatively, participants with low-competence produced negative affect in response to norm-referenced feedback.  Performance-approach goals, or “the desire to validate one’s competence by demonstrating relative superiority” (Kim et al., 2010, p. 143), moderated feedback effects independently of perceived competence.  No matter the level of perceived competence, high scores for performance-approach goals correlated to negative affect in response to norm-referenced feedback.

Although the limitations of the methodology are recognised, the research of Kim et al. (2010) does introduce the possibility of distinguishing performance feedback by perceived competency and performance-approach.  Measures of competency and performance-approach goals in diagnostic assessment are suggested.  Generated data from the assessment could provide a means for tailoring performance feedback to enhance effectiveness.  For example, students with high perceptions of competency and low to moderate performance-approach goal scores could be provided with norm-referenced feedback.  Similarly, students with low-competence and high performance-approach could be provided with criterion-referenced feedback.

REFERENCES

Biggs, J. B., & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for quality learning at University (3^rd ed.). Maidenhead, England: McGraw-Hill.

Bloxham, S., Boyd, P., & Orr, S. (2011). Mark my words: The role of assessment criteria in UK higher education grading practices. Studies in Higher Education, 36(1), 1-16.

Glaser, R. (1963). Instructional design and the measurement of learning outcomes: Some questions. American Psychologist, 18(8), 519-521.

Kim, S.-i., Lee, M.-J., Chung, Y., & Bong, M. (2010). Comparison of brain activity during norm-referenced versus criterion-referenced feedback: The role of perceived competence and performance-approach goals. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(2), 141-152.

Nightingale, P., Te Wiata, I., Toohey, S., Ryan, G., Hughes, C., & Magin, D. (1996). Assessing learing in universities. Sydney, Australia: UNSW Press.