高师院校发展性教师评价的“三维”模型方案研究

本论文通过深入研究教育评价、教学评价、课程评价和教师评价的相关基础理论,特别是近几十年新兴起的发展性教师评价理论研究成果,结合陕西高师院校教师评价的实际现状,提出具有较强可操作性的高师院校发展性教师评价的"三维"模型。     

形成性评价在英语听力教学中应用研究

英语听力是英语教学中重要的环节,将形成性评价引入到英语听力教学中,可以弥补终结性评价的不足,还可以激发学生学习兴趣和学习主动性,通过探讨英语听力形成性评价的基础理论,并对形成性评价进行具体分类,进一步阐述了英语听力形成性评价的实施过程。     

转向背后：高等教育评价的历史审思与内涵重构

高质量发展是全面建设社会主义现代化国家的首要任务,高等教育的高质量发展对高等教育及其评价的系统改革提出了更高要求。转向加强高等教育评价基础理论的研究,是深化教育评价改革的内在要求,是破解教育评价实践困境的必由之路,也是实现高等教育高质量发展的正确选择。文章从历史主义的视角回溯高等教育评价理论和实践的发展演变,反思中国高等教育评价背后的内涵和规律,重新建构高等教育评价的教育性、发展性、科学性和生成性。     

探析中国外语教育评价改革

在当今世界教育领域中，教育评价、教育基础理论和教育发展被誉为三大研究课题。教育评价对于教育发展和改革，对于教育管理和决策，都有至关重要的作用，因而备受重视。     

多元智能理论的评价观对我国新课改中学生评价的启示

学生评价是日常教学活动中具有很强导向作用的一环。加德纳的多元智能理论是学生评价的重要基础理论,为学生评价机制的发展与新视野的开阔提供了理论指导,是确认学生智力、才能、学业成绩以及身心发展的重要依据,启迪了我国新一轮基础教育课程改革中学生评价观的完善和发展。本文从以多元智能理论为基础的评价观出发,试图找出当今条件下学生评价体系的不合时宜之处,探讨新型评价体系建立和完善的途径与方法。     

我国教育评价发展的回眸与前瞻

我国教育评价发展经历了觉醒、活跃、规范与创新四个阶段,取得了一定的成绩,但也存在诸如忽视教育主体的发展价值、评价模式单一、忽视评价的有效性、基础理论研究薄弱等问题.当前,我国教育评价发展的趋势是进一步确立发展性的评价观,发挥评价的改进与激励功能,注重评价内容的全面性,构建多样化的评价方法,提高评价对象的主体地位.     

基于AHP的地方高校核心竞争力评价指标体系研究

地方高校是一个资源密集型和资源依赖型组织,高校对战略性资源的占有状况通常决定了其竞争力的强弱。以核心竞争力的资源基础理论为依据,可根据高校对战略性资源的掌握情况构建地方高校核心竞争力评价指标体系,并运用AHP法确定各指标体系的权重,有助于更好地识别地方高校核心竞争力。     

教学改革视域下的大学英语教学评价

从教学改革的视角来看,教学评价需要不断探究。大学英语教学评价基础理论研究不可忽视,它是实现评价目标的动力。评价出发点要有利于促进个体发展、体现主体多元化、方法开放化特征。评价研究建议应从多方面多角度考虑,而不是单一的学业成绩作为考核学生的依据。     

教学改革视域下的大学英语教学评价

从教学改革的视角来看,教学评价需要不断探究。大学英语教学评价基础理论研究不可忽视,它是实现评价目标的动力。评价出发点要有利于促进个体发展、体现主体多元化、方法开放化特征。评价研究建议应从多方面多角度考虑,而不是单一的学业成绩作为考核学生的依据。     

国家重点实验室分类评价指标体系研究

根据实验室研究内容的综合性、交叉性等特征,将国家重点实验室划分为以基础理论为产出目的的实验室和以技术产出为目的的实验室。针对两类实验室的特点,阐述了定量评价和定性评价相结合的重要性和可行性,并给出了评价指标体系及其使用的基本原则。     

学业评价模式的初步研究

学业评价模式是评价理论与评价实践的中介，它具有构建理论与指导实践的两重功能。作为一种重要的评价研究方法，学业评价的模式化研究对于改变当前学业评价研究的无序状态，使之逐步走向理论化、系统化、结构化，将发挥重要作用。     

Investigating the dynamics of formative assessment: relationships between teacher knowledge,assessment practice and learning

This exploratory study of elementary school science examines questions central to policy, practice and research on formative assessment: What is the quality of teachers’ content-pedagogical and assessment knowledge? What is the relationship between teacher knowledge and assessment practice? What is the relationship between teacher knowledge, assessment practice and student learning? Drawing on multiple measures, hierarchical linear modelling and path analysis, results suggest that despite weaknesses in teachers’ content-pedagogical and assessment knowledge, teachers’ formative assessment practices are positively related to student learning. Relationships between teachers’ knowledge and assessment practices are mixed. Findings underscore both the potential and challenge of bringing effective formative practice to fruition as well as the need for continued research.     

Formative assessment and teaching practice: the point of view of Italian teachers

Over the years the debate on the aims, approaches, and impacts of formative assessment has never stopped to grow. Parallel to this growth is the awareness that it is crucial to understand what conceptions teachers have of assessment in order to guarantee more effective teacher education. This paper tries to connect these two fields of research: formative assessment and teacher education through an analysis of teachers’ conceptions: What do teachers think about assessment? What aims do they pursue through it? Do teachers really distinguish between formative and summative assessment? On the backdrop of the formative assessment literature, the article reports on an exploratory research study. Limitations and issues are analysed in order to shed light on teacher education implication and on future educational research paths in the educational assessment field.     

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。     

Commentary: Evaluating the Validity of Formative and Interim Assessment

In many school districts, the pressure to raise test scores has created overnight celebrity status for formative assessment. Its powers to raise student achievement have been touted, however, without attending to the research on which these claims were based. Sociocultural learning theory provides theoretical grounding for understanding how formative assessment works to increase student learning. The articles in this special issue bring us back to underlying first principles by offering separate validity frameworks for evaluating formative assessment (Nichols, Meyers, & Burling) and newly-invented interim assessments (Perie, Marion, & Gong). The article by Heritage, Kim, Vendlinski, and Herman then offers the most important insight of all; that is, formative assessment is of little use if teachers don't know what to do when students are unable to grasp an important concept. While it is true that validity investigations are needed, I argue that the validity research that will tell us the most—about how formative assessment can be used to improve student learning—must be embedded in rich curriculum and must at the same time attempt to foster instructional practices consistent with learning research.     

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.     

Formative assessment in higher education: Moves towards theory and the enhancement of pedagogic practice

The importance of formative assessment instudent learning is generally acknowledged, butit is not well understood across higher education.The identification of some key features offormative assessment opens the way for adiscussion of theory. It is argued that thereis a need for further theoretical developmentin respect of formative assessment, which needsto take account of disciplinary epistemology,theories of intellectual and moral development,students' stages of intellectual development,and the psychology of giving and receivingfeedback. A sketch is offered of the directionthat this development might take. It is notedthat formative assessment may be eitherconstructive or inhibitory towards learning. Suggestions are made regarding research intoformative assessment, and how research mightcontribute to the development of pedagogicpractice.     

建构数学学习发展性评价体系的实践与思考

发展性评价体系中一个重要的工作就是开发多样化的评价工具和方法。在课题研究中我们重点开展了如下七个方面的评价工具的开发与实践:日常观察,等级和分项测试,成长记录袋,表现性任务,通过浓缩孩子成长特点的评价,二次评价,通过家长、学校合作,取得了较好的效果。     

‘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.