The use of design assignments for teaching, learning, and assessment is considered a signature of technology education. However, there are difficulties in the valid and reliable assessment of features of quality within designerly outputs. In light of recent educational reforms in Ireland, which see the introduction of classroom-based assessments centring on design in the technology subjects, it is paramount that the implementation of design assessment is critically considered. An exploratory study was conducted with a first year cohort of initial technology teacher education students (N = 126) which involved them completing a design assignment and subsequent assessment process through the use of adaptive comparative judgement (ACJ). In considering the use of ACJ as a potential tool for design assessment at post-primary level, data analysis focused on criteria used for assessment. Results indicate that quantitative variables, i.e. the amount of work done, can significantly predict performance (R² = .333, p < .001), however qualitative findings suggest that quantity may simply align with quality. Further results illustrate a significant yet practically meaningless bias may exist in the judgement of work through ACJ (ϕ = .082, p < .01) and that there was need to use varying criteria in the assessment of design outputs.

在教学、学习和评估中使用设计作业被认为是技术教育的标志。然而，在设计师输出的质量特征的有效和可靠评估方面存在困难。鉴于爱尔兰最近的教育改革，引入了以技术学科设计为中心的基于课堂的评估，因此必须认真考虑设计评估的实施。对第一年的技术教师教育学生 (N = 126) 进行了一项探索性研究，其中包括他们通过使用适应性比较判断 (ACJ) 完成设计任务和随后的评估过程。在考虑使用 ACJ 作为小学后设计评估的潜在工具时，数据分析侧重于用于评估的标准。结果表明，定量变量，即完成的工作量，可以显着预测绩效（R²  = .333, p  <  .001)，但定性研究结果表明数量可能与质量简单一致。进一步的结果表明，通过 ACJ 对工作的判断可能存在显着但实际上毫无意义的偏差（φ = .082，p  <  .01），并且在评估设计输出时需要使用不同的标准。