Clarifying and expanding equity in assessment by considering three orientations: Fairness, inclusion and justice.
Saved in:
| Title: | Clarifying and expanding equity in assessment by considering three orientations: Fairness, inclusion and justice. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Kakara Anderson, Hannah L., Govaerts, Marjan, Abdulla, Layla, Balmer, Dorene F., Busari, Jamiu O., West, Daniel C. |
| Source: | Medical Education. May2025, Vol. 59 Issue 5, p494-502. 9p. |
| Subjects: | Medical education standards, Educational test & measurement standards, Social justice, Equality, Reflection (Philosophy), Social integration, Conceptual structures, Quality assurance |
| Abstract: | Context: Despite increasing discussion and scholarship, equity in assessment is rarely defined and distinguished in a way that allows for shared understanding in medical education. This paper seeks to clarify and expand the conversation about equity in assessment by critically reviewing three distinct and evolving orientations toward equity in assessment. Orientations refers to the positions, attitudes, interests or priorities individuals can hold toward equity in assessment. The three orientations include fairness‐oriented assessment, assessment for inclusion and justice‐oriented assessment. While fairness‐oriented assessment is a prevailing orientation in medical education, assessment for inclusion and justice‐oriented assessment, originally developed in other fields of education, deserve careful consideration. Methods: In this paper, the authors explore unique underpinning assumptions of each orientation by critically examining the foundational literature of each orientation. They reflect on the unique perspectives each orientation provides, including the actions one might take and what advantages and disadvantages might result from looking at equity in assessment from any one orientation. Conclusions: Informed by this reflection, the authors propose that to more effectively advance equity in assessment in medical education, those working in the field should clearly identify their respective orientations, intentionally choose methods, tools and measures aligned with their orientations and expand their work by exploring alternative orientations. This paper reviews three orientations to equity in assessment ‐ fairness‐oriented, inclusion‐focused, and justice‐driven ‐ to enable educators to clarify their stance, align methods, and explore alternative perspectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Medical Education is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Context: Despite increasing discussion and scholarship, equity in assessment is rarely defined and distinguished in a way that allows for shared understanding in medical education. This paper seeks to clarify and expand the conversation about equity in assessment by critically reviewing three distinct and evolving orientations toward equity in assessment. Orientations refers to the positions, attitudes, interests or priorities individuals can hold toward equity in assessment. The three orientations include fairness‐oriented assessment, assessment for inclusion and justice‐oriented assessment. While fairness‐oriented assessment is a prevailing orientation in medical education, assessment for inclusion and justice‐oriented assessment, originally developed in other fields of education, deserve careful consideration. Methods: In this paper, the authors explore unique underpinning assumptions of each orientation by critically examining the foundational literature of each orientation. They reflect on the unique perspectives each orientation provides, including the actions one might take and what advantages and disadvantages might result from looking at equity in assessment from any one orientation. Conclusions: Informed by this reflection, the authors propose that to more effectively advance equity in assessment in medical education, those working in the field should clearly identify their respective orientations, intentionally choose methods, tools and measures aligned with their orientations and expand their work by exploring alternative orientations. This paper reviews three orientations to equity in assessment ‐ fairness‐oriented, inclusion‐focused, and justice‐driven ‐ to enable educators to clarify their stance, align methods, and explore alternative perspectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 03080110 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/medu.15534 |
