Journal Articles

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/7915

Browse

Filters

2022 - 20253

Settings

Start date: 2020Subject: search.filters.subject.Assessment

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A Scoping Review of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Assessment and Diagnosis: Tools, Practices, and Sex Bias
    (Springer Nature, 2025-08-07) Crocker SL; Roemer A; Strohmaier S; Wang GY; Medvedev ON
    Objectives: Accurately diagnosing attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is challenging due to the overlap of symptoms with other mental health conditions. This scoping review evaluated the dependability and accuracy of prevalent diagnostic scales and investigates potential obstacles to ADHD assessment diagnosis including potential sex bias. Method: Following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines, 11 widely used diagnostic scales were identified and included. All scales were evaluated based on their psychometric quality and alignment with DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for ADHD. Results: The Attention Deficit Disorders Evaluation Scale emerged as the most reliable among the 11 scales, with the Symptom Checklist-4 ranking as the least reliable. No single assessment tool was adequate for ADHD diagnosis; additional testing was required for accurate conclusions. The literature revealed sex and age biases in some of the assessments. It was discovered that girls were diagnosed with ADHD less often than boys, yet their likelihood of misdiagnosis was notably lower. Conclusions: This review emphasizes the necessity of comprehensive, multi-method assessment approaches for accurate ADHD diagnosis, as no single tool demonstrated sufficient diagnostic precision. Effective clinical assessment design must incorporate strong psychometric measures, address sex-based diagnostic disparities, and emphasize the importance of evaluating behavioural changes over time and their functional impact across settings.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Relational assessment in a low-trust world
    (Taylor and Francis Group, 2024-05-31) Ramsey P; Cataloni S
    Prompted by concerns over student use of ChatGPT, staff teaching leadership and teamwork on a large university course experimented with an alternative way of assessing students’ learning. Past assessment practices emphasised individual reflection and quality assurance. Aiming for a more relational approach that is aligned with the course’s content, an oral review was employed. Staff conducted a review of learning with teams rather than individuals. Based on an in-depth staff review of the experience, this article explores the approach. The relational nature of the review was a dramatic departure from students’ previous experience of assessment, which some students found disconcerting. Staff identified key lessons that can be applied to future oral review assessments. Lessons learned involved how to balance the twin goals of quality assurance and personalised learning. Staff recognise the need to explain the approach to assessment, starting early in the course.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    COVID-19 impact on high stakes assessment: a New Zealand journey of collaborative adaptation amidst disruption
    (Taylor and Francis Group, 2022-10) Poskitt J
    New Zealand’s defined coastal boundaries, isolation and small population were favourable factors to minimise the spread of COVID-19. Decisive governmental leadership and a public willing to comply with high-level lockdown in the first phase, resulted in minimal disruption to assessment. But as the pandemic progressed through Delta and Omicron variants, concerns grew about equitable access to assessments, declining school attendance, and inequitable educational outcomes for students, especially of Māori and Pacific heritage. School and educational agency experiences of high stakes assessment in a period of uncertainty were examined through document analysis and research interviews. Using Gewirtz’s contextual analysis of the multi-dimensional and complex nature of justice, and Rogoff’s conceptual framework of three planes of socio-cultural analysis: the personal (learner), inter-personal (school) and institutional (educational agencies), revealed that though collaborative adaptations minimised assessment disruptions on wellbeing and equity of access, they did not transform high stakes assessment.