ФОРМАТИВНОЕ ОБУЧЕНИЕ: СДВИГ ПАРАДИГМЫ, ВОЗНИКАЮЩИЙ ИЗ «МОДЕЛИ ОЦЕНКИ»
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46991/ai.2023.2.143Ключевые слова:
формативное обучение, модель оценивания, суммативное тестирование, трансформационное образование, трансформационная педагогика, формирующее оцениваниеАннотация
В 1989 году автор стал соучредителем в британском Манчестерском университете первого Исследовательского центра исследований формативного оценивания (CFAS). Целью первоначального исследовательского центра было исследование и подтверждение доступных личностоно-ориентированных моделей и методологий формативного преподавания и обучения, которые сделают оба этих процесса более эффективными для всех учащихся. Стимулом к данному обзору литературы послужила предыдущая работа исследователей по формирующим педагогическим моделям и разработке соответствующих учебных программ, наблюдения и анализ реализации и эффекта нынешнего всплеска интереса к «трансформационной педагогике».
При беглом прочтении данный обзор литературы, спустя 34 года после начала работы первоначального Исследовательского центра, показывает, с точки зрения глобальных исследований, насколько трудно было за прошедшие годы интегрировать данную формирующую модель транзакционного преподавания и обучения в общее пользование.
Одной из основных проблем было доминирование на международном политическом уровне модели суммативного тестирования «с высокими ставками» или накопления («фермерство») низкоуровневых данных целых когорт в качестве «быстрого и грязного» показателя успеваемости учащихся, эффективности учителей и институциональной успеваемости. Литература об ошибочности этой модели обширна, но оборонительная, отступаюшая позиция, занимаемая международными министерствами образования, обычно такова: «Родители ожидают увидеть оценки и были бы разочарованы, если бы мы не сохранили эту модель».
Библиографические ссылки
Gato. J.T. (2017) Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling. New Society Publishers: Canada
Xuan. Q. Cheung. A. & Sun. D. (2022) The effectiveness of formative assessment for enhancing in K-12classrooms: A meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 13.
Bloom, B. S. (1968). Learning for mastery. Evaluation Comment (UCLA/CSEIP)
Bloom, B. S., Hastings, J. T., &Madaus, G. F. (1971). Handbook on formative and summative evaluation of student learning. McGraw Hill.
Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science
Allal. L. (2021). Involving primary school students in the co-construction of formative assessment in support of writing. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice
Coffey. J. Hammer, D. levin, D. M. & Grant, T. (2011). The missing disciplinary substance of formative assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching
Popham. J. (2008) Transformative assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision & Curriculum Development.
Stanja. J. Gritz. W. Krugel. J. Hoppe. A. &Dannerman. S. (2023) Formative assessment strategies for students’ conceptions. The potential of learning analytics. British Journal of Educational Technology
Boyle. B. & Charles. M. (2013) Formative Assessment for Teaching & Learning. SAGE, London.
Berisha. F. Vula. E. Gisewhite. R. & McDuffie. H. (2023) The effectiveness and challenges implementing a formative assessment professional development program.
Yin. Z. & Chiu. M.M. (2022) The relationship between formative assessment and reading achievement: A multilevel analysis of students in 19 countries/regions. BERJ Educational Research Journal
Hidayat. N. &Irdiyansyah. I. (2023) Optimizing academic achievement through comprehensive integration of formative assessment into teaching. European Journal of Educational Research
Hattie. J. & Timperley. H. (2007) The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77 (1), pp. 81-112.
Pablo. A. (2022) Mastery mathematics: pedagogically powerful or massively misunderstood?
Cornell. D. & Drew. C. (2023) Mastery Learning: Ten examples, strengths and Limitations.
Dweck. C. (2015) Carol Dweck revisits the Growth mindset. Education Week
Gulled. Y.M. (2023) Paradigms for contextualizing competency-based curriculum in Africa: Inferences from the OECD countries. Education Quarterly Reviews
Erausquin. C. Basualdo. M. E. Garcia. L. Ortega. G. Y. &Meschman. C. (2008) Mental models and activity systems for developing psychologists competencies to teach psychology: Experiences and cognitions of tutors and students at university apprenticeship. XXIX International Congress of Psychology. International Union of Psychological Science (IUPYS), Berlin.
Bloom. B. (1968) Learning for mastery. Evaluation Comment
Perrenoud Philippe (2001) Développer la pratique réflexive dans le métier d´enseignant. Professionalisation et raison pédagogique
Perrenoud. P. (1999) Construir as competênciasdesdeaescola. Porto Alegre: Artmed.
DeLuca. C. Willis. J. Dorji. K. & Sherman. A. (2023) Cultivating reflective teachers: Challenging power and promoting pedagogy of self-assessment in Australian, Bhutanese, and Canadian teacher education programs. Power and Education
Gozzi. F. AlicandroBordin. R. Urpia. A. (2020). Philippe Perrenoud and the discourse of competence in education. International Journal of Development in Research
Hanefar. S. B. M. Anny. N. Z. & Rahman. M. S. (2022) Enhancing teaching and learning in higher education through formative assessment: Teachers’ perceptions. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education
Karma. U. (2015) Formative assessment practices in Bhutanese secondary schools and its impact on quality of education.
Dorji. S. (2022) Teachers’ perception on the feasibility of formative assessment in Bhutan. Bhutan Journal of Management
Boyle. B. & Charles. M. (2013) Formative Assessment for Teaching & Learning. SAGE: London.
Charles. M. & Boyle. B. (2014) Using Multiliteracies and Multimodalities to support young children’s learning. SAGE: London.
Boyle. B. & Charles. M. (2008) Are we doing it right? A review of the assessment for learning strategy. Primary Leadership Today
Goossens. N. A. M. C. Camp. G. Verkoeijen. P. P. J. L. Tabbers. H. K. Bouwmeester. S. & Zwaan. R. A. (2016) Distributed practice and retrieval practice in primary school vocabulary learning: A multi-classroom study. Applied Cognitive Psychology, pp. 1-24.
Mcadamis. S. (2001) Teachers tailor their instruction to meet a variety of students’ needs. Journal of Staff Development
Boyle. B. & Charles. M. (2012) David, Mr Bear and Bernstein: searching for an equitable pedagogy through guided group work. The Curriculum Journal, 23 (1), pp. 117-133.
Williams. P. (2008) Independent review of mathematics teaching in early years settings and primary schools. Final Report. DCSF: Nottingham.
Wong. H. W. Kwek. D. & Tan. K. (2020) Changing assessments and the examination culture in Singapore: A review and analysis of Singapore’s assessment policies. Asia Pacific Journal of Education
Kaur. K. & Lim-Ratnam (2022) Implementation of formative assessment in the English language classroom: insights from three primary schools in Singapore. Educational Research for Policy and Practice
Hayward. L. Priestley. M. & Young. M. (2004) Ruffling the clam of the ocean floor: merging practice, policy, and research in assessments in Scotland. Oxford Review of Education
Ratnam-Lim. C. T. L & Tan. K H. K. (2015) Large-Scale implementation of formative assessment practices in an examination-oriented culture. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice
Swedish National Agency for Education. (2011/2018). Läroplan för grundskolan, förskoleklassenochfritidshemmet: reviderad 2018 (Fifth edition, ed.) [Curriculum for the Compulsory School, Preschool Class, and School-age Educare]. Skolverket.
“Since 2011, students with grade F in the core subjects have not been eligible for the national programmes at the upper secondary school level. In the last decade, between 13-14% of the students in the final year of compulsory school (year 9, aged 15) have not been admitted to the national upper secondary programmes due to having obtained grade F in the core subjects (Swedish National Agency for Education. a. Statistics 2011–2021.
Swedish National Agency for Education. (2022). Läroplan för grundskolan, förskoleklassenochfritidshemmet (Fifth edition, ed.) [Curriculum for the Compulsory School, Preschool Class, and SchoolageEducare]. Skolverket.
Swedish National Agency for Education. (2017). Kommentarmaterial till kursplanenisvenska 2011: [Comment Material to the Course Plan in Swedish 2011: revised 2017] Stockholm:Skolverket.
In Kohn (2013) De-testing & de-grading schools. Peter Lang: New York.
Charles. M. & Boyle. B. (2014) Using Multiliteracies and Multimodalities to support young children’s learning. SAGE: London.
Bostrum. E. & Palm. T. (2023) The effect of a formative assessment practice on student achievement in mathematics. Frontier Education
Wiliam, D., and Thompson, M. (2008). “Integrating assessment with learning: what will it take to make it work?” in The Future of Assessment: Shaping Teaching and Learning. ed. C. A. Dwyer (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates)
Canfarotta. D. &Lojacono. C. (2022) Formative assessment and key competences for a conscious recovery after COVID-19: An action-research at a school in Italy to enhance reflection starting from mistakes. The Journal of Classics Teaching
In formative pedagogical language ‘mistake’ is actually a miscue. Teacher then uses ‘miscue analysis’ to plan specific next steps.
Resurreccion. D. M. Jimenez. O. Menor. E. & Ruiz-Aranda. D. (2021) The Learning To Be Project: An intervention for Spanish students in primary Education. Frontiers in Psychology
Xuan. Q. Cheung. A. & Sun. D. (2022) The effectiveness of formative assessment for enhancing in K-12classrooms: A meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology
Slavin, R. E., Cheung, A. C. K., Holmes, G., Madden, N. A., and Chamberlain, A. (2013). Effects of a data-driven district reform model on state assessment outcomes. Educational Research Journal
Boyle. B & Charles. M. (2007) Taking bricks from the wall: how the revised framework is influencing planning across the globe. Primary Leadership Today
Kyttala. M. Bjorn. P. M. Rantamaki. M. Lehesvuori. S. Narhi. V. Aro. M. &Lerkkanen. M. K. (2022) Assessment conceptions of Finnish pre-service teachers. European Journal of Teacher Education
Alonzo. D. Leverett. J. &Obsioma. E. (2021) Leading an assessment reform: Ensuring a whole-school approach for decision-making.Frontiers in Education
Freire P (2021) Education for Critical Consciousness. Bloomsbury Academic: New York
Dziubian C, Graham C.R, Moskal P.D, Norberg. A & Sicilia N. (2018) Blended Learning: the new normal & emerging technologies. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education
Charles M & Boyle B (2020) Decolonising the Curriculum through Theory & Practice: Pathways to Empowerment for Children, Parents & Teachers. McKelly Books: Liverpool, UK.
Haberman. M. (2010) The Pedagogy of Poverty versus Good Teaching. Phi Delta Kappan
Boyle B [2014] Pre-service Module for classroom assessment’ in The development of the Student Assessment System in the Republic of Armenia: Achievements, Challenges and Lessons Learned. Editors Bethell G & Harutyunyan K. The World Bank.
Загрузки
Опубликован
Как цитировать
Выпуск
Раздел
Лицензия
Copyright (c) 2023 William Boyle, Marie Charles
Это произведение доступно по лицензии Creative Commons «Attribution-NonCommercial» («Атрибуция — Некоммерческое использование») 4.0 Всемирная.
