形成性评估的概念重构

出版时间：2012-7  出版社：北京大学出版社  作者：曹荣平  页数：202  字数：300000  

内容概要

曹荣平编著的《形成性评估的概念重构》旨在通过建立一个形成性评估的理论模型来弥补形成性评估理论研究的不足。该模型的认识论基础是控制论框架下评估和学习之间的关系。借鉴控制论有关复杂系统的思想，《形成性评估的概念重构》推出的形成性评估模型可用于解释评估与学习的关系和评估的形成性工作机理。该模型视评估为复杂的学习系统中的一个复杂的控制系统。该系统具开放性、非预决性和自律性特征。评估的控制性系统特质决定了其在学习系统中的建构作用，评估对学习的控制由信息反馈来实现。基于控制论思想对评估的推断和解释与现有形成性评估概念在内涵和外延上有着显著区别，从而支持了对形成性评估进行概念重构。概念重构的意义在于：（1）修正了形成性评估的内涵和外延；（2）淡化了形成性评估和终结性评估的对抗性；（3）指出了所有类型评估皆具形成性意义；（4）指出了评估的双刃剑特性和评估系统的可自律性；（5）指出了正确认识评估系统，进而管理好这个复杂系统的必要性和可行性。

书籍目录

Introduction
Chapter 1  Assessment and Learning
  1.1 The relatiohips between assessment and learning
  1.2 Mastery Learning aligned with Psychometrics
    1.2.1 The objectives model of curriculum
    1.2.2 Psychometrics
  1.3 Learning as a process: Assessment as research
    1.3.1 The progressive philosophy of learning
    1.3.2 The recotructionism philosophy of learning
    1.3.3 Curriculum design in learning as a process
    1.3.4 Teacher as researcher. What about assessment？
  1.4 Towards integrating assessment with itruction
    1.4.1 The invention of the formative concept
    1.4.2 Towards integrating assessment and itruction
    1.4.3 Behaviorist connectio of the formative concept
  1.5 Integrating assessment with learning
    1.5.1 The cotructivist claim
    1.5.2 AlL- Its ups and dow
    1.5.3 Advocating AfL
  1.6 Chapter summary and discussion
Chapter 2  Re-conceptualization of the formative role of assessment
  2.1 Redefining the relatiohip between FA and SA
  2.2 Redefining FA and AlL: Two different visio
  2.3 The formative role of assessment: A double-edged sword
  2.4 Summary-of the chapter
Chapter 3  Assessment as a cybernetic system
  3.1 Revisiting the meta-disciplinary character of cybernetics
  3.2 Control and feedback
  3.3 The features of assessment as a cybernetic system
    3.3.1 Assessment as an open, probabilistic system
    3.3.2 Assessment as a complex system
    3.3.3 Assessment as a self-regulatory system
    3.3.4 The implicatio of assessment being a cybernetic system
  3.4 Linking Chinese philosophy to cybernetics
    3.4.1 The Yin-Yang Doctrine
    3.4.2 The Doctrine of the Mean
    3.4.3 Discussion
  3.5 Towards a cybernetic model of assessment
    3.5.1 Theoretical assumptio
    3.5.2 The model
  3.6 Chapter summary
Chapter 4  Accommodating the cybernetic model in China's assessment
in education. A historical pepective
  4.1 The rationale and research methodology
  4.2 A cybernetic undetanding of China's assessment system
    4.2.1 Major themes in China's ancient assessment history
    4.2.2 China's assessment system since 1949
    4.2.3 The EFL education
  4.3 Discussion
    4.3.1 Assessment: A control system
    4.3.2 Assessment: A non-deterministic system
  4.4 Chapter summary
Chapter 5  Accommodating the model in classroom settings
  5.1 Cross-case analysis
    5.1.1 A general description of sources of data
    5.1.2 Unit of analysis
    5.1.3 Issue-based analyses
  5.2 Fitting the model in China's EFL tertiary education
  5.3 Chapter summary
Chapter 6  Winding up the research
References
Appendices
  Appendix 1a  Letter of Coent （for the IOE coues）
  Appendix 1b  Lette for informant review （some samples）
  Appendix 2  Sample session notes for Coue 2/SPSS
  Appendix 3  Lecturer's post-session email to CDD students
  Appendix 4  C1 Coue materials
  Appendix 5  An investigative questionnaire for C1, C2, C3 and C4

章节摘录

　　Cronbach （1986） even claims that Tyler invented formative evaluation in the sense of assessment by teachers， which reflects Tyler's "firm commitment to democracy-to the wisdom of the people， but most especially to the wisdom of teachers" （Cronbach 1986： 48）. He sees Tyler's ideas on measurement and evaluation as "the extension of Dewey" in Tyler's life （ibid. ）. Cronbach believes that "Ralph （Tyler） more than any other individual provided the extension of pragmatism into the higher reaches of education （p.49）" while what Dewey said" were fairly clear as a guide for the elementary school， [but] in secondary and higher education he had said little or nothing at all" （ibid.）. This link between formative evaluation and democracy reflects humanistic thoughts about assessment. In this sense， the relationship between assessment and learning is one of negotiation.　　Bloom （1986） identifies Tyler's attempt "'to introduce a completely new paradigm in education-a paradigm that would relate curriculum， instruction， and evaluation" （p. 36）. Bloom maintains that it was Tyler's major innovation of educational evaluation that "the evaluation process could be integrally related to the educational purposes of the classroom and the educational system" （p. 43）.According to Bloom， Tyler not only stresses the notion of educational objectives， but also introduces the importance of changes in interests， attitudes， and problem solving， as well as information （Bloom 1986： 37）. If we look into what was attributed to Tyler by Cronbach， Bloom， Scriven and others in the special issue of Journal of Thought in memory of Tyler's contribution to measurement and evaluation， we could only be left at 'a wonder about and admiration for Tyler's wide and deep vision of evaluation in his time.　　Bloom et al. （1971） were regarded as the first who extended "formative evaluation" to its generally accepted current meaning in contrast with "summative evaluation tests" （Wiliam & Black 1996， Black 8; Wiliam 2003）. They termed "formative evaluation" and defined it as a type of evaluation that is so useful in helping all who are involved-student， teacher， curriculum maker-to improve what they wish to do （Bloom et al. 1971）.　　Interestingly， this contrastive understanding of formative evaluation and summative tests has a root in works of these authors best known as psychometricians， who belong to a camp called neo-behaviorists （Stobart 2008）.Su cha view of assessment is associated with the mastery learning model of curriculum （Stobart 2008） ， which is a radical application of the objectives model.　　……

媒体关注与评论

　　本项研究有两个亮点，我很欣赏。一是我第一次听说所有的评估都应当是形成性评估。的确，我赞同形成性评估应当包括所有的评估。二是我注意到了该研究对评估的社会性的讨论。　　——邹为诚　　　　这个选题非常好。控制论视角在评估领域的运用是一个全新的课题，本研究应用了控制论的几个关键概念来帮助重构形成性评估的内涵和外延，非常好。我同意邹老师对两个重要观点的肯定意见：一是所有评估都对学习有形成性作用，这对澄清概念非常有利；二是评估对学习的双刃剑作用，这对解决终结性评估和形成性评估在已有研究里面的矛盾很有用。作者在理论上的探索很好。中国外语教育界缺乏理论研究，她的努力是一个非常有意义的尝试，电是作者最生要的贡献。　　——张绍杰　　　　形成性评估是教育评价研究领域的前沿课题，然而对它的研究近年来出现瓶颈。曹荣平在其作品中指出，突破瓶颈的关键在于对形成性评估的理论建构。据此，该作品从控制论视角对形成性评估进行了概念重构，继而推出了以评估和学习之间关系作为纽带的形成性评估理论模型。作品的理论贡献已经引起该领域国际学者的重视，推动了相关研究的发展；作品的宽阔学术视野不仅展现了作者对学习理论、课程理论、（语言）评测理论、系统论与控制论等跨学科研究领域的基础理论和专业知识的良好把握，而且指出了形成性评估理论研究的重要导向。　　——吴一安