Understanding the Place of Assessment Standards

2013 ◽  
pp. 277-286
Author(s):  
Andrew Kilgour ◽  
Tania Gerzina ◽  
Mike Keppell ◽  
Janet Gerzina
Keyword(s):  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
T. Rogošić ◽  
B. Juričić ◽  
F. Aybek Çetek ◽  
Z. Kaplan

ABSTRACT Air traffic controller training is highly regulated but lacks prescribed common assessment criteria and methods to evaluate trainees at the level of basic training and consideration of how trainees in fluence flight efficiency. We investigated whether there is a correlation between two parameters, viz. the trainees’ assessment score and fuel consumption, obtained and calculated after real-time human-in-the-loop radar simulations within the ATCOSIMA project. Although basic training assessment standards emphasise safety indicators, it was expected that trainees with higher assessment scores would achieve better flight efficiency, i.e. less fuel consumption. However, the results showed that trainees’ assessment scores and fuel consumption did not correlate in the expected way, leading to several conclusions.


2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 39
Author(s):  
Zulfia Hanum Alfi Syahr

The improvement of court’s quality has been done through various efforts, one of them is an accreditation program. Before the implementation of internal accreditation policies, the courts under the Supreme Court had used ISO standards to maintain the service quality. Along with the development of judiciary innovations especially the dream toward the great judiciary, the Supreme Court has developed special accreditation standards for each judicial environment. General Court (Badilum) has implemented the Quality Assurance Accreditation (APM) programme in 7 assessment areas. Afterward, the Religious Courts (Badilag) in addition to 7 APM areas as in Badilum also applied 9 other assessment standards. Furthermore, the Military and Administration Agency (Badilmiltun) has 7 different accreditation assessment areas with Badilum and Badilag. The problem that will be examined is how to determine the ideal criteria for assessing court accreditation. Given that the ideal accreditation standard is not only improving the quality of court services but also being able to meet the needs and expectations of justice seekers, as indicated by the community satisfaction index. The court accreditation standard used today is the adoption of the International Framework of Court excellent (IFCE) and is adapted to the area of Bureaucratic Reform and the oversight function of the Supreme Court. The method of determining accreditation criteria is done by comparing court accreditation standards that have been used with the SERVQUAL model. The SERVQUAL model is an initial model that appears to measure service quality. The results of the study found that a number of court accreditation assessment standards has been represented the dimensions of service quality at SERVQUAL.


Author(s):  
Sabrina Petersohn ◽  
Sophie Biesenbender ◽  
Christoph Thiedig

The following contribution asks which role standards for research information play in practices of responsible research evaluation. The authors develop the notion of assessment standards against the background of functional standard classifications. The development of semantic and procedural assessment standards in the national research evaluation exercises of the Netherlands, Great Britain, and Italy are investigated using a qualitative case study design. A central finding of the study is that assessment standards incorporate conflicting values. A continuous tradeoff between the transparency of evaluation procedures and provided information as well as the variety of research outputs is being counterbalanced in all countries by compensating a higher level of semantic standardization with lower degrees of procedural standardization.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document