Определение различных типов системы оценки и оценочных процедур в контексте исторического развития
Автор: Варакута Алена Александровна, Шеломенцев Павел Юрьевич, Андриенко Елена Васильевна
Журнал: Science for Education Today @sciforedu
Рубрика: Математика и экономика для образования
Статья в выпуске: 6 т.11, 2021 года.
Бесплатный доступ
Проблема и цель. Авторами исследуется проблема многообразия систем оценки в современном образовании, в сравнительно-сопоставительном плане рассматриваются изменения оценочных процедур в обучении и воспитании с учетом периодизации их развития и современных требований стандартизации. Цель статьи - определение различных типов системы оценки и оценочных процедур в контексте исторического развития. Методология. Исследование носит теоретический характер и включает анализ, сравнение, обобщение отечественных и зарубежных научных и научно-практических исследований системы оценки с опорой на концепцию исторической и социокультурной обусловленности образования. В качестве методологической основы исследования выступили системный и личностно-деятельностный подходы, позволяющие представить динамику развития оценки как единый образовательный процесс во взаимосвязи его составных частей и социально-психологических факторов влияния. Результаты. В ходе исследования авторы раскрыли сущность двойственного характера оценки как дидактического и социально-психологического феноменов. Описали взаимосвязь между оценочными процедурами и качеством современного образования. Выделили основные периоды развития образовательной оценки на основе критериев изменения требований к содержанию образования, а также изменений в системе оценивания, касающиеся задач, методов, форм оценки, балльных шкал и способов мотивации. Обосновали периодизацию исторического развития образовательной оценки, включающую восемь основных этапов. Выделили и охарактеризовали основные типы оценки в истории образования и современности: парциальная оценка, результативная оценка, системная оценка, стандартизированная оценка, формирующая оценка, суммирующая оценка, эвалюационная оценка, рейтинговая оценка. Заключение. В результате исследования авторы статьи пришли к выводам о том, что в многообразии систем оценки в современном образовании можно выделить восемь основных типов, становление которых происходило последовательно в историческом контексте. При этом основной тенденцией формирования систем оценки является стандартизация образования.
Оценка, система оценки, оценочные процедуры, историческое развитие, образование, типология оценки
Короткий адрес: https://sciup.org/147236394
IDR: 147236394 | УДК: 378+316+005 | DOI: 10.15293/2658-6762.2106.07
Defining different types of assessment systems and assessment procedures in the context of historical development
Introduction. The authors investigate a wide range of assessment systems in modern education. They analyze and compare changes in educational assessment procedures, taking into account the periodization of their development and modern requirements and standards. The purpose of the article is to identify and clarify various types of assessment systems and assessment procedures in the context of historical development. Materials and Methods. This theoretical research includes analysis, comparison, and generalization of Russian and international studies on the development of assessment systems based on the concept of the historical and socio-cultural determination of education. The study follows systemic, learner-centered and activity-based approaches in order to present the dynamics of the development of educational assessment as a system comprising interconnected parts and socio-psychological factors. Results. The authors clarified the essence of the dual nature of educational assessment as a didactic and socio-psychological phenomenon. They described the relationship between assessment procedures and the quality of modern education. The study identified the main periods in the development of educational assessment based on the criteria for changing the requirements for the content of education, as well as changes in the assessment system regarding tasks, methods, forms of assessment, point scales and methods of motivation. The authors have developed and justified the historical periodization of educational assessment, which includes eight main stages. The main types of assessment including partial assessment, effective assessment, systemic assessment, standardized assessment, formative assessment, summative assessment, evaluation for management, and rating assessment have been identified and described. Conclusions. The article concludes that modern education implements eight main types of assessment, which have been developed in a historical context. At the same time, standardization of education is considered as the main trend in the formation of assessment systems.
Список литературы Определение различных типов системы оценки и оценочных процедур в контексте исторического развития
- Allal L. Assessment and the co-regulation of learning in the classroom // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2020. - Vol. 27 (2). - P. 332-349. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1609411
- Andersson C., Palm T. Reasons for teachers' successful development of a formative assessment practice through professional development - a motivation perspective // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2018. - Vol. 25 (6). - P. 576-597. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2018.1430685
- Andrade H. L., Brookhart S. M. Classroom assessment as the co-regulation of learning // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2020. - Vol. 27 (4). - P. 350-372. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1571992
- Baas D., Vermeulen M., Castelijns J., Martens R., Segers M. Portfolios as a tool for AfL and student motivation: are they related? // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2020. -Vol. 27 (4). - P. 444-462. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1653824
- Barrance R., Elwood J. National assessment policy reform 14-16 and its consequences for young people: student views and experiences of GCSE reform in Northern Ireland and Wales // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2018. - Vol. 25 (3). - P. 252-271. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2017.1410465
- Brandmo C., Panadero E., Hopfenbeck T. N. Bridging classroom assessment and self-regulated learning // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2020. - Vol. 27 (4). -P. 319-331. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2020.1803589
- Brunfaut T., Harding L. International language proficiency standards in the local context: Interpreting the CEFR in standard setting for exam reform in Luxembourg // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2020. - Vol. 27 (2). - P. 215-231. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1700213
- Caro D., Kyriakides L. Assessment design and quality of inferences in PISA: limitations and recommendations for improvement // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. -2019. - Vol. 26 (4). - P. 363-368. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1645990
- Chen P. P., Bonner S. M. A framework for classroom assessment, learning, and self-regulation // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2020. - Vol. 27 (4). - P. 373-393. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1619515
- Cumming J. J. Senior secondary school assessment and standard-setting in Queensland, Australia: social context and paradigmatic change // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2020. - Vol. 27 (2). - P. 160-177. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1684877
- DeLuca C., Pyle A., Braund H., Faith L. Leveraging assessment to promote kindergarten learners' independence and self-regulation within play-based classrooms // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2020. - Vol. 27 (4). - P. 394-415. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2020.1719033
- Goldstein H. PISA and the globalization of education: a critical commentary on papers published in AIE special issue 4/2019 // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2019. -Vol. 26 (6). - P. 665-674. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1674244
- Gray L., Baird J.-A. Systemic influences on standard setting in national examinations // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2020. - Vol. 27 (2). - P. 137-141. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2020.1750116
- Greene J. A. Building upon synergies among self-regulated learning and formative assessment research and practice // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2020. -Vol. 27 (4). - P. 463-476. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2020.1802225
- Guo W. Y., Yan Z. Formative and summative assessment in Hong Kong primary schools: students' attitudes matter // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2019. - Vol. 26 (6). -P. 675-699. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1571993
- Hartmeyer R., Stevenson M. P., Bentsen P. A systematic review of concept mapping-based formative assessment processes in primary and secondary science education // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2018. - Vol. 25 (6). - P. 598-619. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2017.1377685
- He J., Barrera-Pedemonte F., Buchholz J. Cross-cultural comparability of noncognitive constructs in TIMSS and PISA // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2019. -Vol. 26 (4). - P. 369-385. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2018.1469467
- Imlig F., Ender S. Towards a national assessment policy in Switzerland: areas of conflict in the use of assessment instruments // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2018. -Vol. 25 (3). - P. 272-290. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2017.1390439
- Isaacs T., Lamprianou I. International assessment policy reform: nothing new under the sun // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2018. - Vol. 25 (3). - P. 227-229. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2018.1482094
- Knekta E., Sundstrom A. 'It was, perhaps, the most important one' students' perceptions of national tests in terms of test-taking motivation // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2019. - Vol. 26 (2). - P. 202-221. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2017.1323725
- Kuramoto N., Koizumi R. Current issues in large-scale educational assessment in Japan: focus on national assessment of academic ability and university entrance examinations // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2018. - Vol. 25 (4). - P. 415-433. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2016.1225667
- Lenkeit J., Schwippert K. Doing research with international assessment studies: methodological and conceptual challenges and ways forward // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2018. - Vol. 25 (1). - P. 1-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2017.1352137
- LeRoy B. W., Samuel P., Deluca M., Evans P. Students with special educational needs within PISA // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2019. - Vol. 26 (6). - P. 386-396. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2017.1421523
- MacPhail A., Halbert J., O'Neill H. The development of assessment policy in Ireland: a story of junior cycle reform // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2018. -Vol. 25 (3). - P. 310-326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2018.1441125
- Marchionni M., Vazquez E. The causal effect of an extra year of schooling on skills and knowledge in Latin America. Evidence from PISA // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2019. - Vol. 26 (4). - P. 489-515. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2018.1454401
- Marksteiner T., Kuger S., Klieme E. The potential of anchoring vignettes to increase intercultural comparability of non-cognitive factors // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2019. - Vol. 26 (4). - P. 516-536. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2018.1514367
- Nagy G., Nagengast B., Frey A., Becker M., Rose N. A multilevel study of position effects in PISA achievement tests: student- and school-level predictors in the German tracked school system // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2018. - P. 1-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2018.1449100
- Opposs D., Baird J-A., Chankseliani M., Stobart G., Kaushik A., McManus H. Governance structure and standard setting in educational assessment // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2020. - Vol. 27 (2). - P. 192-214. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2020.1730766
- Perry N. E., Lisaingo S., Yee N., (...) Wan X., Muis K. Collaborating with teachers to design and implement assessments for self-regulated learning in the context of authentic classroom writingtasks // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2020. - Vol. 27 (4). - P. 416443. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2020.1801576
- Pinger P., Rakoczy K., Besser M., Klieme E. Implementation of formative assessment-effects of quality of programme delivery on students' mathematics achievement and interest // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2018. - Vol. 25 (2). - P. 160-182. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2016.1170665
- Robitzsch A., Ludtke O. Linking errors in international large-scale assessments: calculation of standard errors for trend estimation // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2019. - Vol. 26 (4). - P. 444-465. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2018.1433633
- Rutkowski L., Rutkowski D., Liaw Y.-L. The existence and impact of floor effects for low-performing PISA participants // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2019. -Vol. 26 (6). - P. 643-664. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1577219
- Simons H. School self-evaluation in a democracy. School-Based Evaluation: An International Perspective, 2002. - Vol. 8. - P. 17-34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-7863(02)80005-9
- Spaull N. Who makes it into PISA? Understanding the impact of PISA sample eligibility using Turkey as a case study (PISA 2003-PISA 2012) // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2019. - Vol. 26 (6). - P. 397-421. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2018.1504742
- Tong Ch.-S., Lee Ch., Luo G. Assessment reform in Hong Kong: developing the HKDSE to align with the new academic structure // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2020. - Vol. 27 (2). - P. 232-248. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2020.1732866
- Tveit S. Ambitious and ambiguous: shifting purposes of national testing in the legitimation of assessment policies in Norway and Sweden (2000-2017) // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2018. - Vol. 25 (3). - P. 327-350. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2017.1421522
- von Davier M., Yamamoto K., Shin H. J., (... ) Kong N., Kandathil M. Evaluating item response theory linking and model fit for data from PISA 2000-2012 // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice. - 2019. - Vol. 26 (4). - P. 466-488. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1586642
- Баталова Ю. А. Анализ результатов оценочных процедур как способ совершенствования профессиональных компетенций педагогов // Наука и школа. - 2019. - № 2. - С. 73-79. URL: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=37844974
- Казакова И. А. Система оценивания знаний в историческом аспекте // Высшее образование в России. - 2011. - № 6. - С. 153-157. URL: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=16462211
- Стариченко Б. Е. Балльно-рейтинговая система оценивания учебной деятельности студентов: вопросы назначения // Педагогическое образование в России. - 2017. - № 5. - С. 116124. URL: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=29233699
- Талалова Л. Н. К пониманию функции знания в цифровую эпоху // Таврические студии. -2019. - № 20. - С. 49-55. URL: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=44066514
