Purpose: The main purpose of the research was to measure reliability and validity of the Scoring Rubric for Information Literacy (Van Helvoort, 2010). Design/methodology/approach: Percentages of agreement and Intraclass Correlation were used to describe interrater reliability. For the determination of construct validity, factor analysis and reliability analysis were used. Criterion validity was calculated with Pearson correlations. Findings: In the described case, the Scoring Rubric for Information Literacy appears to be a reliable and valid instrument for the assessment of information literate performance. Originality/value: Reliability and validity are prerequisites to recommend a rubric for application. The results confirm that this Scoring Rubric for Information Literacy can be used in courses in higher education, not only for assessment purposes but also to foster learning. Oorspronkelijke artikel bij Emerald te vinden bij http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JD-05-2016-0066
MULTIFILE
In this paper, we analyse the development of the term “legal capabilities”. More specifically, we do three things. First, we track the emergence and development of the notion of legal capabilities. The term legal capabilities was used in legal research long before the capability approach was introduced in that field. Early on, its conceptualisation mainly reflected elements of legal literacy. In more recent writings, it is claimed that the notion is based on the capability approach. Second, we critically analyse the current use of the term legal capabilities and show that there is no proper theoretical grounding of this term in the capability approach. This is problematic, because it might give rise to misunderstandings and flawed policy recommendations. Third, we suggest some first steps towards a revision of the notion of legal capabilities. Starting from the concept of “access to justice”, legal capabilities have to be understood as the real opportunities someone has to get access to justice, rather than merely as formal opportunities or internal capabilities.
MULTIFILE
In the wake of neo-liberal informed global trends to set performance standards and intensify accountability, the Dutch government aimed for ‘raising standards for basic skills’. While the implementation of literacy standards was hardly noticed, the introduction of numeracy standards caused a major backlash in secondary schools, which ended in a failed introduction of a high stakes test. How can these major differences be explained? Inspired by Foucault’s governmentality concept a theoretical framework is developed to allow for detailed empirical research on steering processes in complex systems in which many actors are involved in educational decision-making. A mixed-methods multiple embedded case-study was conducted comprising nine school boards and fifteen secondary schools. Analyses unveil processes of responsibilisation, normalisation and emerging dividing practices. Literacy standards reinforced responsibilities of Dutch language teachers; for numeracy, school leadership created entirely new roles and responsibilities for teachers. Literacy standards were incorporated in an already used instrument which made implementation both subtle and inevitable. For numeracy, schools distinguished students by risk of not passing the new test affirming the disciplinary nature of schools in the process. While little changed to address teachers main concerns about students’ literacy skills, the failed introduction of the numeracy test usurped most resources.
DOCUMENT
