CÁC CHIẾN LƯỢC ĐÁNH GIÁ QUÁ TRÌNH VÌ SỰ TIẾN BỘ CỦA NGƯỜI HỌC

Các tác giả

  • Tăng Thị Thu Thùy Trường Đại học Giáo dục - Đại học Quốc gia Hà Nội, Việt Nam
  • Nguyễn Thị Cẩm Lệ Trường Đại học An ninh Nhân dân, Việt Nam

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51453/2354-1431/2021/511

Từ khóa:

Đánh giá quá trình, đánh giá người học, chiến lược đánh giá, sự tiến bộ.

Tóm tắt

Bài viết này nhằm mục đích tổng quan và làm rõ khái niệm và vai trò của đánh giá quá trình (ĐGQT) đối trong hoạt động kiểm tra đánh giá kết quả học tập, trong đó nhấn mạnh năm chiến lược ĐGQT vì sự tiến bộ của NH. Các chiến lược này bao gồm: chia sẻ mục tiêu dạy học, thu thập minh chứng, tự đánh giá, đánh giá đồng đẳng, phản hồi (Leahy, Lyon, Thompson và Wiliam, 2005). Kết quả cho thấy có nhiều nghiên cứu chỉ ra rằng giáo viên/giảng viên (GV) sử dụng các chiến lược ĐGQT này ở các cấp học đã làm tăng kết quả học tập của người học (NH) và vì sự tiến bộ của người học. Vì thế việc sử dụng các chiến lược đánh giá quá trình là cần thiết và nên được khuyến nghị để giáo viên/ giảng viên các cấp học sử dụng.

Tải xuống

Dữ liệu tải xuống chưa có sẵn.

Tài liệu tham khảo

[1] Anthony, M. C., Lewis, D. (2008). Alternative Assessment: An Action Research Study on the use of Peer Assessment as a Learning Tool for Education Students in a University in Jamaica. Retrieved November 10, 2008, form Proquest from: http://www.waikato.ac.nz.

[2] Biggs, J. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning: a role for summative assessment? Assessment in Education, 5: 103-110.

[3] Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B. & Wiliam, D. (2003). Working inside the black box: Assessment for learning in the classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 86: 9–21.

[4] Black, P., Jones, J. (2006). Formative assessment and the learning and teaching of MFL: sharing the language learning road map with the learners. Language Learning Journal, 34(1): 4-9.

[5] Black, P., Wiliam, D. (1998a). Assessment and Classroom Learning. Assessment in Education. 5(1): 7 - 71.

[6] Black, P., Wiliam, D. (1998b). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2): 139-148.

[7] Black, P., Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80 (2), 139-148.

[8] Black, P., Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1): 5-31.

[9] Bloom, B. S. (1969). Mastery learning evaluation comment (Vol. 1, no 2, May). Los Angeles, CA: University of California at Los Angeles Center for the Study of Evaluation of Instructional Programs

[10] Ministry of Education and Training. (2012). Vietnam Education Development Strategy 2011-2020.

[11] Buchanan, T. (2000). The efficacy of a World-Wide Web mediated formative assessment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 16: 193-200.

[12] Cizek, G. J., Fitzgerald, S. M., Rachor, R. E. (1995). Teachers’ assessment practices: preparation, isolation and the kitchen sink. Educational Assessment, 3: 159–179.

[13] Chappuis, S., Stiggins, R. (2002). Classroom Assessment for Learning. Educational Leadership Journal. Association for supervision and curriculum development. Retrieved May 20, 2008, from Proquest from:http://www.waikato.ac.nz.

[14] Clark, I. (2011). Formative Assessment: Policy, Perspectives and Pratices. Florida Journal of Educational Administration & Policy, 4(2): 158-180.

[15] Crooks, T. J. (1988). The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational Research, 58(4): 438-481.Heritage, M., Kim, J., Vendlinski, T., Herman, J. L. (2008). From evidence to action: A seamless process of formative assessment? Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 28(3): 1-16.

[16] Crooks, T. J. (2001). The Validity of Formative Assessment. Educational Assessment Unit. University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. A paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, University of Leeds, 13-15 September 2001.

[17] Dochy, F., Segers, M. (1999). The use of self-peer and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in higher Education, 23(3), 331-350.

[18] Fontana, D., Fernandes, M. (1994). Improvements in mathematics performance as a consequence of self-assessment in Portuguese primary school pupils. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 64: 407-417.

[19] Gipps, C., Tunstall, P. (1996). Teacher feedback to young children in formative assessment: A typology. British Educational Research Journal, 22(4): 389-404.

[20] Gregory, K, Cameron, C., Davis, A. (2000). Self-assessment and Goal Setting. Connections publishing, Merville, British Columbia, Canada.

[21] Harlen, Wynne., James, Mary. (1997). Assessment and Learning: differences and relationships between formative and summative assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 4(3): 365 - 379.

[22] Hattie, J. (1999). Influences on student learning. University of Auckland, New Zealand: Inaugural professorial lecture. In Crooks, T. (2001), The Validity of Formative assessment. Educational Assessment Research unit, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.

[23] Henly, D. C. (2003). Use of Web-based formative assessment to support student learning in a metabolism/nutrition unit. European Journal of Dental Education, 7: 116-122

[24] Heritage, M. (2007). Formative assessment: What do teachers need to know and do? Phi Delta Kappan, 89(2): 140-146.

[25] Herman, J., Osmundson, E., Silver, D. (2010). Capturing quality in formative assessment practice: Measurement challenges (Report No. 770). Los Angeles: University of California, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST).

[26] Heywood, J. (2000). Assessment in higher education: Student learning, teaching, programs and institutions. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

[27] Hill, M. (1995). Self-assessment in primary school: A response to student teacher questions. Waikato Journal of Education. Department of Professional Studies, University of Waikato.

[28] Leahy, S., Lyon, C., Thompson, M., & Wiliam, D. (2005). Classroom Assessment: Minute by Minute, Day by day. Educational Leadership Journal. 63(3).

[29] Marzano, R. J. (2010). Formative Assessment & Standards-Based Grading. Bloomington, IN: Marzano Research Laboratory.

[30] Moss, C., Brookhart, S. (2009). Advancing formative assessment in every classroom: A guide for instructional leaders. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

[31] Nicol, D.J., Macfarlane, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education. 31(2): 99-218.

[32] Noonan, B. & Duncan, C.R. (2005). Peer and Self-assessment in High Schools. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation. University of Saskatchewan, 10(17): 1-8, ISSN 1531-7714. Available online: http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=10&n=17

[33] Olsen, S. J., Shields-Ramsey, P. (2010). Learning 360 Framework Participants Guide: Creating a Powerful Learning System. Midvale, UT: School Improvement Network, Inc.

[34] Osmond, P., Mery, S., Reiling, K. (2002). The use of exemplars and formative feedback when using students derived marking criteria in peer and self- assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. 27(4): 309- 323.

[35] Ramaprasad, A. (1983) On the definition of feedback. Behavioural Science, 28: 4 – 13.

[36] Rushton, A. (2005). Formative assessment: a key to deep learning? Medical Teacher. 27(6): 509 – 513.

[37] Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2): 119–144. doi:10.1007/BF00117714.

[38] Sadler, D. R. (1998). Formative assessment: Revisiting the territory. Assessment in education, 5(1): 77-84.

[39] Scriven, M. (1967). The methodology of evaluation. In R. W. Tyler, R. M. Gagne, and M. Scriven (Eds.), Perspectives of curriculum evaluation, I: 39-83. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.

[40] Shepard, L., Hammerness, K., Darling-Hammond, L., Rust, F. (2005). Assessment. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (275-326). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

[41] Stiggins, R. (2005). New assessment beliefs for a new school mission. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(1).

[42] Stiggins, R. (2007). Assessment through the student's eyes. Educational Leadership, 64(8), 22-26.

[43] Stiggins, R., Arter, J., Chappuis, J., & Chappuis, S. (2006). Classroom Assessment for Student Learning: Doing It Right - Using It Well. Portland, OR: Educational Testing Service.

[44] Stiggins, R., DuFour, R. (2009). Maximizing the power of formative assessments. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(9): 640-644.

[45] Taras, M. (2005). Assessment-summative and formative-some theoretical reflection. British Journal of Educational Studies, 53(4): 466-478.

[46] Wininger, R. S. (2005). Using your tests to teach: Formative summative assessment. Teaching Psychology, 32(2): 164-166.

[47] Young, E. (2005). Assessment for Learning: Embedding and extending. Assessment is for Learning. Retrieved October 10th, 2008, from Proquest, from: http://www.waikato.ac.nz.

Tải xuống

Đã Xuất bản

2021-12-08

Cách trích dẫn

Tăng Thị, T. T., & Nguyễn Thị, C. L. (2021). CÁC CHIẾN LƯỢC ĐÁNH GIÁ QUÁ TRÌNH VÌ SỰ TIẾN BỘ CỦA NGƯỜI HỌC. TẠP CHÍ KHOA HỌC ĐẠI HỌC TÂN TRÀO, 7(23). https://doi.org/10.51453/2354-1431/2021/511

Số

Chuyên mục

Khoa học Xã hội và Nhân văn