This study was an attempt to add to existing research by estimating the ability of third-party examiners to assess whether or not an organization successfully implemented strategies based on the criteria of the Texas Award for Performance Excellence (TAPE). The TAPE is given each year by the Quality Texas Foundation and recognizes organizations that demonstrate superior performance as it is defined by customer satisfaction and continuous improvement. The TAPE is a state-level award for quality that uses the same criteria as the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award for Performance Excellence. This research was an analysis of the TAPE process at the level of examiners, also known as the Board of Examiners. The Board is made up of approximately 150 experienced professionals from several types of business sectors and is responsible for evaluating organizational self-assessments. In this quantitative study, data were converted from the Quality Texas Foundation into a database. Because the set of the TAPE applicants included in the study consisted of the entire population of TAPE applicants selected from 2001 to 2004, descriptive statistics were appropriate for producing informative data that could be analyzed for variation and stability in the scoring process. Exploration of patterns in descriptive statistics and multivariate analysis of variance were the primary tools used in this particular study along with Cronbach’s Alpha as an indicator of reliability. Since scoring for the TAPE is based on an individual examiner’s best subjective assessment, it was impossible to have one objective score against which all the other scores could be measured. The team consensus score was therefore used as the true score for measurement. Establishing reliability of examiners’ scores was a problem due to the fact that organizations and teams did not repeat. Results from the study led to the conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to make a determination on what influences examiners’ scoring consistency. More data will need to be collected in such a way so as to make it possible to identify that impact consistency of examiner scores.

Neben der Frage nach der leistungssteigernden Wirkung von sogenannten "Ich-kann"-Checklisten auf die Metakognitionsstrategien der Schülerinnen und Schüler, geht die Arbeit auch den Fragen nach, welche Schülerinnen und Schüler "Ich-kann"-Checklisten nutzen, in welcher Form und unter welchen Kontextmerkmalen sie am wirksamsten sind. Dabei handelt es sich um Listen mit festgelegten, fachlichen und überfachlichen Kompetenzen einer bzw. mehrerer Unterrichtseinheiten, die in Form von „Ich-kann“-Formulierungen für Schüler geschrieben sind und die Aufforderung einer Selbst- und Fremdeinschätzung beinhalten. Blickt man in die Veröffentlichungen der letzten Jahre zu diesem Thema und in die schulische Praxis, so ist eine deutliche Hinwendung zur Entwicklung und Arbeit mit „Ich-kann“-Checklisten und Kompetenzrastern zu erkennen. Umso erstaunlicher ist es, dass diesbezüglich so gut wie keine empirischen Untersuchungen vorliegen (vgl. Bastian & Merziger, 2007; Merziger, 2007). Basierend auf einer quantitativen Erhebung von 197 Gymnasialschülerinnen und -schülern in der 7. Jahrgangsstufe im Fach Deutsch wurde über einen Zeitraum von zwei Jahren diesen übergeordneten Fragen nachgegangen. Die Ergebnisse lassen die Aussagen zu, dass "Ich-kann"-Checklisten insbesondere für Jungen ein wirksames pädagogisches Instrument der Selbstregulation darstellen. So fördert die Arbeit mit "Ich-kann"-Checklisten nicht nur die Steuerung eigener Lernprozesse, sondern auch die Anstrengungsbereitschaft der Schülerinnen und Schüler, mehr für das Fach tun zu wollen. Eine während der Intervention erfolgte Selbsteinschätzung über den Leistungsstand mittels der "Ich-kann"-Checklisten fördert dabei den freiwilligen außerunterrichtlichen Gebrauch. / This paper examines the performance enhancing effect of so called “Can Do” checklists on the metacognitive strategies of 13 to 14 year old Gymnasium students. This study analyzes which students actually use “Can Do” checklists, in what form they apply them, and the specific circumstances in which they appear to be most effective. These checklists define fundamental, subject-specific, and interdisciplinary competencies that are formulated into written “Can Do” lessons that require both self-assessment and third-party assessment. The increasing development and application of “Can Do” checklists and performance metrics is clearly seen both in the recent scholarly papers that address this issue and in classroom practice. The fact that this trend is emerging despite the lack of empirical studies is particularly surprising (e.g. Bastian & Merzinger, 2007; Merzinger, 2007). These salient questions were examined through analysis of a two-year quantitative survey that monitored two consecutive classes of 197 Gymnasium students in their German class during their 7th academic year. The results of this study indicate that “Can Do” checklists are an effective pedagogical tool for self-evaluation especially for boys. Applying this methodology both fosters self management of the learning process and motivates the student to invest more effort into the subject. The benefits of continuous performance self-assessment using “Can Do” checklists also transfer voluntarily beyond the classroom.