发展性评价:学生评价的理性选择

学生评价是教育评价的重要内容,由于受历史文化、社会现实和传统教育观的影响,学生评价存在过于注重甄别选拔功能、评价主体单一、评价目标内容偏狭及忽视差异性等问题.发展性学生评价应通过确立全面的评价目标内容、实施多元主体的差异性评价和综合运用多样化的评价方法实现对传统学生评价的超越,切实促进学生的全面发展.     

特殊儿童评估的新进展

本文总结了特殊教育中评估方法的新进展.分析了团队评估的形式以及合作型团队的特征;介绍了行为表现评估、以课程为基础的评估与产品集评估等评估方法;探究了特殊化智力测验在特殊教育评估中的重要作用.     

从“形成性评价”到“学习性评价”：课堂评价理论与实践的新发展

"学习性评价"是在"形成性评价"基础上发展演变而来的、为适应新一轮国际基础教育改革而产生的课堂评价理论及其指导下的课堂评价实践。"学习性评价"的五大核心理念体现了国际基础教育评价理念经历的重大变化。"学习性评价"与"形成性评价"既有密切联系又有显著区别。我国需要从评价制度(如督导)和政策层面上确立"学习性评价"在课程与教学中的地位,积极发挥"学习性评价"对课程与教学改革的促进作用。     

合理运用形成性评价 促进教学效果最优化

评价是英语课程的重要组成部分,在对学生进行终结性评价的同时,我们还应更注重对学生的形成性评价。形成性评价能使学生增强自信,使他们从被动接受评价者,转变成为评价的主体和积极参与者。在评价时,注意遵循一定的原则,并且合理利用评价策略。     

博士生教育质量评价:沿革与启示

科学评价博士生教育质量对于引导和推动博士生教育发展具有重要意义。我国博士生教育质量评价大致可以概括为四个阶段:政府主导的输入质量评价、事业性机构参与的输出质量评价、学生主体视角的过程质量评价及多元主体介入的发展质量评价。基于对博士生教育质量评价发展沿革的梳理,提出博士生教育质量评价发展启示:一是提倡多元主体共同参与,回应不同主体对于博士生教育质量的诉求;二是关注毕业博士群体,从毕业博士视角反思博士生教育状况;三是构建科学可行的博士生教育质量评价体系,全面准确地衡量博士生教育质量;四是适当公开相关评价标准和数据信息,切实发挥博士生教育质量评价的效用。     

浅析结构化测评在人力资源管理领域的应用

目的：研究人力资源管理领域结构化测评的普及和应用。通过对有关结构化测评领域的文章进行分类,从中提出重要的观点进行分析研究。结论：在国内外人员招聘和公开选拔,测评都是一个关键环节,而结构化测评是正式的,有指导性的,事先决定了问题项目和反应可能性的测评。由于结构化测评的问题都与工作相关,对被测人员而言会更加的公平。与同样具有较高选拔效度的工作抽样和评价中心相比,结构化测评费用更低,花费时间较少而且容易实施。因此,研究结构化测评在人力资源管理领域的应用是发展的趋势。     

‘Formative good,summative bad?’ – A review of the dichotomy in assessment literature

The debate between summative and formative assessment is creating a situation that increasingly calls to mind the famous slogan in George Orwell’s (1945) Animal Farm – ‘Four legs good, two legs bad’. Formative assessment is increasingly being portrayed in the literature as ‘good’ assessment, which tutors should strive towards, whereas summative assessment is ‘bad’ assessment on which tutors should minimise their focus, instead moving towards formative assessment (Taras 2005). By revisiting the origins of formative assessment, this article aims to bring back to light that summative and formative assessment are connected at their inception. It highlights how research in the literature has unintentionally created a harmful dichotomy between summative and formative assessment, and it identifies some attempts in the literature to re-connect formative and summative assessment. This paper challenges the dichotomy in the literature and invites those in higher education to consider the fundamental idea that formative and summative assessment need to work in harmony and should not be seen as contrary to each other.     

Teachers’ approaches to classroom assessment: a large-scale survey

Classroom assessment has become a cornerstone of today’s standards-based system of education. However, recent policy developments, professional standards, and variable assessment education have led to significant variability in teachers’ approaches to assessment. The primary purpose of this research was to use a new instrument predicated on recently published classroom assessment standards – the Approaches to Classroom Assessment Inventory – to measure teachers’ (a) approaches to assessment, (b) perceived skill in current assessment tasks and responsibilities, and (c) professional learning preferences and priorities. Based on 404 teachers from across North America, this study contributes initial evidence of how teachers approach classroom assessment with respect to four dimensions: Assessment Purposes, Assessment Processes, Assessment Fairness and Measurement Theory. Results from this study point to significant differences based on career stage and previous assessment education. The study concludes with four key implications for assessment research and practice.     

做好培训评估 提高培训质量

培训评估是一个重要的工作环节,具有重要作用。有效的培训评估一般包括界定评估目的、明确评估标准、制定评估方案、收集分析评估信息、实施评估、撰写评估报告、结果反馈等几个环节。评估内容通常分为反应、学习、行为和结果四层次。目前,我院在继续做好一、二级评估的同时,需加强三、四级评估工作。     

透视高等教育评估“热”

高等教育评估机构不断出现,更多的对象与项目被纳入到评估中。通过对近些年我国高等教育评估“热”的分析,从理论上指出评估存在“工具理性驱逐价值理性”、“鉴定功能排斥其他功能”和“评估手段置换评估目的”的三大陷阱,提出跨越陷阱需要“重视高等教育评估的特殊性”、“正视不同评估的效用”和“回归评估是手段而不是目的”。     

Assessors’ approaches to portfolio assessment in Assessment of Prior Learning procedures

In an effort to gain better understanding of the assessment of prior informal and non‐formal learning, this article explores assessors’ approaches to portfolio assessment. Through this portfolio assessment, candidates had requested exemptions from specific courses within an educational programme or admission to the programme based on their prior learning. The assessors judged the portfolios according to set rating criteria, and subsequently discussed their approaches. Their decision‐making processes, perception of portfolio use in the Assessment of Prior Learning (APL), deciding factors in portfolio assessment and use of the rating criteria were key elements in this discussion. The results show that they do use the rating criteria as an indicator in decision‐making, but have mixed perceptions regarding the fairness of APL portfolio assessment. They perceive the portfolio evidence in combination with sound argumentation as the deciding elements in portfolio assessment.     

“双减”政策背景下学生学业评价问题的若干思考

在“双减”政策背景下,中小学既要大力压减考试次数,严格控制作业数量,又要确保教育教学的高质量发展,提供令家长满意的高品质教育,所以必须加大学生学业评价改革的探索力度。一些可行的改革策略主要有:去繁就简,简化评价设计,提高评价效率;改进结果评价,深化命题改革,探索表现性评价;强化过程评价,评学结合,以评促学。有了学业评价改革的配套支撑,轻负高质的教育才有望真正实现。     

美国高等教育增值评价模式的兴起与应用

为提升本科教育质量、回应社会问责,一种重新回归学生本位,关注学生成长和发展,评测高等教育为学生带来影响的增值评价运动正在美国大学兴起。增值评价主要测量学生从进入大学到毕业期间所发生的变化,目前可运用直接法、间接法、事后法三种方法来测量。学生的增值是学校教育质量的根本体现,增值评价改变了大学以往过多以"输入"为标准、以经验判断为主要依据的评价模式,构建起了以学习者为中心,以可显现证据为基础,以教育过程、学生学习结果为核心的一套新的教育质量评价体系,是对以往高等教育评估模式的超越,也是美国大学回归大学之道的根本体现。     

Assessment leaders’ perspectives of institutional cultures of assessment: a Delphi study

Institutional cultures of assessment are praised as beneficial to student learning. Yet, extant studies have not explored the theoretical foundations and pragmatic approaches to shaping cultures of assessment. The researchers used the Delphi method to explore 10 higher education assessment leaders’ attitudes and theoretical perspectives regarding cultures of assessment. These expert assessment leaders were iteratively surveyed until a reasonable threshold of consensus was reached. Study participants viewed buy-in as a necessary component of a positive campus culture of assessment, and advice on reshaping negative cultures was offered. Assessment leaders’ guiding theoretical frameworks were implied and loosely defined with metaphors. Finally, advice is offered for improving cultures of assessment by symbolically connecting assessment to student learning through dialogue.     

客观对待教师绩效评价和发展性教师评价

教师绩效评价有其特定的内涵,既包括对教师教学工作过程的评价,也包括对教师教学工作结果的评价。由于教育目标更具模糊性与教育效果的复杂性,对教师的绩效评价就更应侧重于对教师教学过程的评价。许多研究者与管理者却把教师绩效评价曲解为“不正确”的教师评价,而把发展性教师评价神化为“正确”的教师评价。他们错误地认为教师绩效评价只能调动少部分人的积极性,绩效评价是针对过去的、对未来没有意义,唯有发展性教师评价才能促进教师发展,而教师绩效评价不能促进教师专业发展。实际上,发展性教师评价关于“自我实现的人”的人性假设及其人文主义的管理范式也有其内在的缺陷。虽然,发展性教师评价是更高境界的教师评价,但它必须以教师绩效评价所达到的严格、精确为现实基础。由于我国现阶段教师管理中面临的最严重的问题是科学化不足,因此,应当认真对待教师绩效评价,而不是盲目地推崇发展性教师评价。     

论以学生能力发展为中心的高职翻译评价体系构建

为了构建以发展学生翻译能力为中心的高职翻译评价体系,学校与企业要在评价内容、评价主体和评价方式等方面通力合作。教师和企业人士通过评价来引导学生学习,培养学生对实用性文体运用多种能力、技巧和策略进行语际转换的能力。     

Technology-based assessment in science: Issues underlying teacher advocacy of testing policy

The theme of this article is that the development of informed teacher advocacy for new advancements in technology-based assessment is an essential requirement if such advancements are to contribute toward the systemic improvement of the quality of school science instruction. The potential for advocacy involvement by teachers is considered a natural reaction toward the increasing tendency for classroom practices to be affected by local, state, or national assessment policy initiatives. In support of such an advocacy process, this article provides an awareness of the principles of good measurement practices in conjunction with the qualitative characteristics of technology-based assessment that together are sufficient to serve as a foundation for teachers whose concerns may motivate them to raise relevant questions regarding assessment policy. Based upon such implied standards of testing practice, the article suggests key evaluative questions for teachers to ask about any forms of science assessment that would have the effect of amplifying the potential value of new technology-based forms of assessment applications to enhance ongoing classroom processes of science teaching.