学生评价偏差的心理探源

学生评价是对学生进行有效施教的重要依据。正确的学生评价对学生的发展有着极其重要的作用,而一旦对学生评价造成偏差,或使学生骄傲自满,或使学生灰心丧气,对学生发展都会产生不利影响。探讨造成学生评价偏差的心理根源,对防止学生评价偏差的产生有着重要意义。     

浅议学生评价教师的能动作用

谈及教育评价．讲得最多的是教师对学生的评价,如课堂上对学生回答的评价、与学生谈话的评价、学生参与班级管理的评价、学生的纪律表现评价,等等。有的教师似乎把太多的精力放在如何评价学生上,而忽视甚至是漠视学生对教师的评价。     

语文课开展“发展性学生评价”存在的问题探析

学生评价是对学生学习进展与行为变化的评价,它包括对学生知识与能力、过程和方法以及情感、态度、价值观等方面发展状况的评价。学生评价是学校教育、教学评价的核心。现代教学评价极力倡导促进学生进步的发展性学生评价。     

教师评价对学生成长成才的影响研究

对学生的评价是教育教学过程中的重要一环。教师在评价学生方面,存在诸如评价方式单一、没有用发展的眼光评价学生、评价对学生造成的影响认识不到位等问题。文章从课堂即时评价、作业评价、期末评价三角度重新认识评价的作用和对学生成长成才的影响,促进新课程改革核心理念“为了每一位学生的发展”这一目标的实现。     

生活世界理论对学生评价的启示

学生评价是教育评价的重要领域之一,自学校教育诞生之日起就有了对学生如何进行评价的问题。传统的学生评价是对学生生活世界的遗忘,导致学生评价中见物不见人。回归生活世界（returning to life world）的学生评价尊重学生的差异性,强调多元主体评价、评价主体间的对话．强调评价的真实性和情境性,注重过程性评价。     

浅谈初中语文课堂教学评价

课堂评价是语文课堂教学的重要组成部分,有效的课堂评价能够激发学生的学习兴趣,培养学生的创造性思维,全面提高学生的学习能力。因此,语文教师要注重对学生的评价,并且还要注意评价的方法与策略,力争把否定的评价变成激励性的评价,使学生能通过教师的评价积极地参与到学习活动中来。课堂教学评价不仅包括教师对学生的评价,还包括学生之间甚至是学生对教师的评价。科学合理的评价,能够激发学生学习的积极性,促进学生的全面发展。     

影响学生评价教师教学质量因素的研究

学生评价教师教学质量是教师教学质量评价的重要方式。学生评价的背景变量可能导致学生评价结果的大相径庭。从学生的性别、专业、学习成绩、学习课程前兴趣因素对学生评价教师教学质量结果的影响来看,学生的性别、学习课程前的兴趣对评价结果无显著影响;不同专业、不同学习成绩学生对教师教学质量的评价有一定差异。     

生物教学中实施实作评价的探讨

实作评价就是在模拟情境或真实情境下对学生动手操作能力的评价,它是一种完全不同于期中考试、期末考试等对学生学习行为和结果评价的各种传统评价方法。该评价方法特别强调在学生完成真实或模拟事件中,对其过程表现和成果的评价。它是评价学生在仿真或真实活动中的实践能力,评价学生参与实弹演习或实战过程的各种能力。而传统的教学评价,如课堂提问、笔试检测,是评价学生对所学知识掌握和应用的情况,是评价学生纸上谈兵的能力。例如,教学生做一道菜,传统的评价方法只是通过提问或笔     

构建初中化学学业评价机制的策略研究

新课改要求从注重学生的成绩转变为培养学生全面发展,从关注结果的评价转向关注学生自主学习能力的评价,从单一主体的评价向多元化评价转换。化学教学顺应新课改的趋势,对学生的评价从传统的对学生学业成就的评价向全面多元的评价转化,强调关注学生的学习过程、学生身心发展以及学生的学习活动中的表现。本文着重探讨初中化学教学中如何有效地对学生的学习进行积极性评价,以促进学生的全面发展。     

浅谈对小学生对学习语文的评价

对学生学习的评价是对学生学习进展与行为变化的评价。它包括对学生在知识与技能、过程与方法以及态度、情感、价值观等方面发展的评价。对学生学习的评价要注重过程性、质性、情感性和个性差异的评价及采用评价主体多元化、标准多维化等方法。多角度去对学生的学习进行评价,能更好地促进学生的发展。这体现了新课程改革“为了每位学生的发展”的基本精神。     

Does evaluation of teaching lead to improvement of teaching?

Abstract

Given the widespread use of student evaluation of teaching in North American colleges and universities, it is reasonable to ask whether student evaluation has accomplished one of its major intended outcomes, namely improvement of instructional quality. A review of research evidence from three independent sources (faculty surveys, field experiments and longitudinal comparisons) suggests that student evaluation does in fact contribute significantly to improvement of certain aspects of university teaching, particularly if evaluation is supplemented by expert consultation. Furthermore, there is no clear evidence that student evaluation has led to undesirable instructional side‐effects, such as grade inflation and entrenchment of traditional teaching methods.     

实施发展性学生评价的一点思考

学生评价改革是基础教育课程改革的重要组成部分,建立发展性学生评价体系是新一轮课程改革的重心和突破口．发展性学生评价是在教育性学生评价与选拔性学生评价整合的基础上形成的更加科学合理的学生评价模式,正确把握发展性学生评价,并积极运用于教学实践,对促进学生全面主动发展和新课程下的教育教学改革具有重要的现实意义．     

基于知识图谱的我国学生评教研究热点分析

综合运用Bicomb 和 SPSS两种软件,对CNKI 期刊数据库中 2000年以来我国学生评教研究的 261 篇文献进行文献计量分析和知识图谱分析。研究发现,我国学生评教研究热点主要集中在问题和措施、有效性、影响因素与指标体系构建、权力博弈等四个主题。分析认为今后我国学生评教研究需要发展学生评教基本理论,发挥理论指导实践的关键作用,继续加强有效性研究的同时聚焦指标体系构建,借鉴国外成功经验并进行本土化改革,形成有中国特色的学生评教体系。     

浅析对学术型硕士生培养质量评价体系的科学构建

构建与完善研究生培养质量评价体系,是实现科学化管理、提高研究生培养质量的重要制度保障。该体系主要由四类不同权重指数的评价指标,即教师评价、图书资料与实验设备评价、学生评价及研究生管理措施执行情况评价以及专家评估两个部分的内容构成,采用定性与定量相结合的分析方法,从而构成多视角、多层面的研究生培养质量评价信息反馈系统。     

The emergence of contesting motives for student feedback-based evaluation in Australian higher education

Student feedback-based evaluation performs a significant social role in framing perceptions of the quality of teaching in contemporary Australian higher education. Yet its emergence is a relatively recent phenomenon, having only been in widespread application since the mid-1980s. The early manifestations of student feedback-based evaluation came with newly emerging academic development units with a motive to enhance the quality of local teaching and to afford student retention. However, new motives for assailing student feedback evolved with the rapid growth in student numbers, the introduction of student fees and heightened levels of inter-institutional competition for students. As a result, student feedback-based evaluation progressively became also a powerful proxy measure of teaching and curricula quality assurance at an individual, institutional and sectoral level [Blackmore, J. (2009). Academic pedagogies, quality logics and performative universities: Evaluating teaching and what students want. Studies in Higher Education, 34(8), 857–872. doi:10.1080/03075070902898664]. This generated critical tensions between the seminal motive of student feedback around quality improvement, and the rising quality assurances discourses, academic performance management demands and institutional marketing. In this paper, the complex social origins of these competing motives for student feedback-based evaluation in Australian higher education will be explored and analysed. It is argued this provides an important means of understanding the polarising effects of student feedback-based evaluation in Australian universities.     

Building effectiveness in teaching through targeted evaluation and response: connecting evaluation to teaching improvement in higher education

This paper describes the development of a model for integrating student evaluation of teaching results with academic development opportunities, in new ways that take into account theoretical and practical developments in both fields. The model is described in terms of five phases or components: (1) the basic student evaluation system; (2) an interpretive guidance system that helps lecturers understand and interpret their results; (3) a longitudinal reporting system that initiates opportunities for staff to engage in personal and professional development in the context of a learning community; (4) a structured professional development programme that builds a faculty learning community, in which the members utilise extended cycles of evaluation based on (5) a comprehensive evaluation model designed to develop and encourage the collection of evaluation data from a variety of sources concerning the quality and impact of teaching: the teacher; student learning outcomes; student experience; and the teacher’s peers.     

基于直觉模糊满意度模型的多级学生综合考评

学生综合考评结果一方面反映高校学生管理水平和教学水平;另一方面反映不同学生在校综合表现优劣。基于直觉模糊满意度计算模型,确定四级评价指标体系和权重,结合实例对商洛学院某班学生进行了综合考评。将定性与定量的方法结合起来对学生综合考评,科学公正且自动化程度高,结果显示基于直觉模糊满意度的多级学生综合考评高效实用。     

高校学生管理工作评价平台构建

根据高校学生管理工作的现状,针对性地分析了高校学生管理工作考核的原则和内容,设计并实现了基于B/S结构的学生管理工作考核平台,其中的评价模块采用因子分析法,该平台能够根据考核指标对院系学生管理工作做出较为客观的评价,并能适应考核指标体系的变化,能提高学生管理工作的效率和信息化程度.     

The reflection on the blackboard: student teacher self‐evaluation

A common aim of teacher education is to encourage prospective teachers to analyze carefully their instructional performance. Yet, research on teacher cognition heretofore has concentrated primarily on experienced teachers’ planning and instructional thinking. We need more information on how student teachers think about and engage in the evaluation of their teaching performance. This study used data from initial structured interviews to elicit student teachers’ self‐evaluation concerns and examined the student teachers’ journals, a final written self‐evalution, and tapes from post‐teaching interviews to create a profile of each student teacher's responses about self‐evaluation. In this paper I analyze the student teachers’ pre‐conceptions about success, examine their processes of self‐evaluation, and explore a conception of “interactive self‐evaluation.” I offer suggestions about the conditions that may enable student teachers to enhance their analytical processes.     

STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTION: PERCEPTIONS OF COMMUNITY COLLEGE STUDENTS,FACULTY, AND ADMINISTRATORS

The purpose of this study was to compare the opinions of students, teachers, and administrators relative to student evaluation of instruction in selected community colleges. While important educational decisions in community colleges are made on the basis of students’ evaluations (as in retention, promotion, tenure, and pay), little has been accomplished in testing the assumptions behind student evaluation of instruction. The student evaluation process assumes that students are honest, serious, and evaluate instruction, not some incidental activity.

A 25‐item Student Evaluation Process Scale was completed by 607 students, 130 faculty, and 45 administrators in five Illinois community colleges. Findings revealed little significant differences in the opinions of students regarding evaluation of instruction based on variables of sex, age, school location, student type (transfer or occupational), and class standing. There were little significant differences in faculty opinion and within the administrative groups based on selected variables. There were significant differences when the opinions of students, faculty, and administrators were compared. Students and faculty tended to agree with those items that questioned the objectivity of student evaluation of instruction. Administrators and students tended to agree with items reflecting the seriousness with which students evaluate instruction. Faculty and administrators indicated that student evaluation of instruction impacted faculty members’ instructional performances. Neither students, faculty, nor administrators supported the concept of merit pay tied to student evaluation of instruction.

The role of student evaluation of instruction in a faculty evaluation system must be investigated. A variety of groups should participate in this investigation.