共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 156 毫秒
1.
增值评价在教育学领域,是通过衡量增加的价值来看学生、学校的进步幅度,具有弱化横向比较,注重学生素养的纵向增值发展,将评价与绩效、责任紧密相连,发挥评价的诊断与反馈功能等特点.在当前考试评价改革背景下,学校和教师要积极探索增值评价,借助大数据支持,关注学生学习的过程,提升教师的学科教学与评价能力. 相似文献
2.
在概括绩效审计基本概念、实践发展和研究现状的基础上,指出目前我国的经济责任审计实践应更多地着眼于领导干部直接责任的评价,从绩效层面对领导干部的经济责任做出客观公正的评价具有重要的现实意义。通过总结我国绩效审计实践经验和借鉴国外先进绩效审计理念,从建立健全绩效审计规范、拓展经济责任审计项目中绩效审计的领域、制定经济责任审计中绩效评价指标、培养复合型审计工作人员等四个方面阐述在经济责任审计项目中推进绩效审计的对策。 相似文献
3.
绩效责任制度是保障与提高义务教育质量的关键.义务教育质量的保障与提高是一个系统工程,政府、学校、社区、家长和学生都是重要的责任主体,都应该对义务教育质量负责.建立有效的义务教育绩效责任制度,需要确立明确的绩效标准和期望,在责任与自主之间保持张力,提供必要的协助与支持条件,发挥教育绩效责任制度的激励与发展功能. 相似文献
4.
学习评价是体育课程教学中的重要环节.评什么,怎样评,用什么评,事关学生的进步与发展.我国中小学体育课程在新一轮课改中,学习评价无论是在评价的理念,还是在评价的内容、方法上,都发生了很大的变化,充分调动了学生学习的积极性,促进了学生不断进步和发展.但是在实际操作中,具有可推广的学习评价方法还没有形成共识.新课标要求对“五个领域目标“进行学习评价,对于其中的运动技能领域和身体健康领域相对“硬指标“而言,教师可根据以往熟悉的评价指标体系进行评价,而对于学生运动参与,心理健康,社会适应领域的评价,没有一个统一的标准,给广大教师带来了一些疑惑和分歧.笔者在教学中对学生的学习评价进行了一些思考和实践,在此提出与同仁商榷.…… 相似文献
5.
世纪之交以来,美国教师培养面临内部质量提升和外部质量问责的双重压力.在此背景下,伴随数据系统和分析方法的发展以及教师增值评价的推广,教师培养项目的增值评价应运而生.教师培养项目增值评价基于教师培养项目→教师教学质量→学生学业成绩的因果逻辑,通过统计计量模型来评估教师培养项目对学生成绩的贡献度.其中项目效能的证据选择、效能测量以及效能增值结果的意义阐释构成教师培养项目增值评价的关键内容.教师培养项目增值评价虽然在一定程度上响应了公众对于强化教师教育绩效责任的呼声,但依然存在着信效度和适用范围等问题. 相似文献
6.
特许学校是美国近十年发展起来的一种新型公立学校形式。本文在介绍绩效责任理论含义和特许学校运动发展的基础上,从“立法”和“特许”的角度论述了特许学校新型的绩效责任制度,并结合图表分析了它与传统公立学校绩效责任的差异,最后简单说明了特许学校是如何发展内外部绩效责任的。 相似文献
7.
美国基础教育学生评价新进展述评 总被引：4，自引：0，他引：4
文章从校本学生评价体系、家长参与评价、校本质性评价方式、评价反馈、校本绩效责任制五个方面对美国的基础教育学生评价进行评述和剖析，以求从中得到对我国学生评价改革的一些启示。 相似文献
8.
《绵阳师范学院学报》2016,(1):45-52
本文根据美国波多里奇国家质量奖的《绩效优异教育标准》,设计了当前我国研究生教育质量评价的测量题项,从学生、教师、学校管理者与用人单位等高校相关利益者的角度,通过问卷调查与访谈,从领导、战略策划、学生、利害相关者和市场重心、测量、分析、知识管理、教职员重心、过程管理和组织绩效结果 7个方面对我国高校研究生教育质量管理实践进行评价,让我们站在学校组织层的高度识别学校的核心竞争力和可持续发展因素。 相似文献
9.
自从审议通过《不让一个孩子掉队》法案以来,美国的基础教育正在发生着一场变革。该法案以实施"绩效责任"来改进学生的学习成果。绩效责任的主要内容包括:中小学生英语、数学两科的测验分数达到熟练程度的比例、高中生毕业率,以及适任教师的比例。基于这个法案,美国各州又制订出了自己州的评价指标,在加州,对公立中小学学生学业评价的主要指标有学业表现指数 相似文献
10.
教师评价实践:美国的经验和启示 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
教师评价反映学校教育责任,与教师绩效管理和专业发展紧密相关.有效的教师评价以提高教师质量为目标.美国诸州在教师评价标准建设以及教师评价模式上的实践创新对今日我国教育领域中开展教师评价具有相当的借鉴意义. 相似文献
11.
纽约市从2007年在全市公立中小学中开始实施进步报告。进步报告从学生进步、学生成绩和学校环境三个方面对学校的教学质量进行评价,同时对学校在促进每一位学生进步方面进行质量审核。进步报告作为一种对中小学教育教学质量评价和问责的工具和手段,其中所体现的评价指导思想和评价方法,对于我们反思我国中小学的教育教学质量评价不无启发和借鉴作用。 相似文献
12.
Most states have adopted assessment and accountability systems that involve common measures of student performance. A state assessment system that allows school districts to choose the specific strategies they use to measure student performance on state-adopted content standards presents a unique state accountability challenge. The authors propose an accountability model that addresses this challenge using a combination of student performance, technical quality, and noncognitive indicators of performance. They also describe a study that evaluated the proposed model using data from all school districts in a southern state. 相似文献
13.
Gavin T. L. Brown 《Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice》2004,11(3):301-318
Teachers' conceptions of assessment can be understood in terms of their agreement or disagreement with four purposes to which assessment may be put, specifically, (a) improvement of teaching and learning, (b) school accountability, (c) student accountability, or (d) treating assessment as irrelevant. A 50‐item Teachers' Conceptions of Assessment (COA‐III) questionnaire was completed by New Zealand primary school teachers and managers (n=525). The COA‐III, based on the four main purpose‐defined conceptions of assessment, was analysed with structural equation modelling and showed a close fit of the data to a hierarchical, multi‐dimensional model (χ2=3217.68; df=1162; RMSEA=.058; TLI=.967). On average, participants agreed with the improvement conceptions and the school accountability conception, while rejecting the view that assessment was irrelevant. However, respondents disagreed that assessment was for student accountability. Improvement, school, and student accountability conceptions were positively correlated. The irrelevance conception was inversely related to the improvement conception and not related to the system accountability conception. Surprisingly, no statistically significant differences were found in mean scale scores for each conception regardless of teacher (age, gender, role, assessment training, or assessment practices) or school (size, location, or socio‐economic status) variables. Implications for the use of the COA‐III for policy implementation and teacher professional development are discussed. 相似文献
14.
Gavin W. Fulmer Kelvin H. K. Tan Iris C. H. Lee 《Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice》2019,26(2):166-183
This study examines teachers’ conceptions of assessment and related contextual factors at the classroom, school and national levels. A representative survey of Singaporean secondary school teachers resulted in a final sample consisting of 229 teachers from 9 secondary schools. Findings on that, teachers endorse views of assessment for school accountability, student accountability and student improvement, but little endorsement of assessment as irrelevance. Teachers report feeling capable and qualified to use assessments, but concerned about how much they are trusted as assessors at school and national levels. Follow-up latent class analysis identified groups of teachers based on their responses to the irrelevance of assessment; teachers who found assessment irrelevant were present across all schools and subjects, but showed lower sense of preparation for assessment, school-level support and importance of academic success in society. 相似文献
15.
School accountability and student assessment are closely associated in educational jurisdictions’ attempts to monitor student achievement, focus instruction, and improve subsequent student and school performance. The research reported in this article examines the School Effectiveness Framework in Ontario, Canada, exploring the foundations upon which the framework is based and educators’ efforts to use assessment information to monitor the effectiveness of their reform efforts. Through document analysis and interviews, the researchers highlight the challenges and opportunities surrounding the accountability and assessment partnership. 相似文献
16.
Matthew Militello Jason Schweid Stephen G. Sireci 《Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability》2010,22(1):29-52
Recent legislative and local school accountability efforts have placed a premium on the collection, analysis, and use of student
assessment data for educational improvement. As a result, schools have sought assessments that will provide additional information
about student performance. In response, a burgeoning boon industry formed—formative educational assessment systems. In this
study we describe how districts search for and acquire formative assessment systems to meet their needs. We focus on three
school districts that adopted three different formative assessment systems. Our findings suggest the fit between a system’s
characteristics and a school district’s intended use is the most important consideration in instituting a successful formative
assessment system that will have a positive impact on teacher education and student learning. 相似文献
17.
Pat Roschewski 《Educational Measurement》2004,23(2):9-11
Nebraska's approach to standards, assessment, and accountability, the School-based Teacher-led Assessment and Reporting System (STARS) is based upon local control and the belief that classrooms and teachers must be at the heart of student learning and accountability. STARS relies on locally-developed assessment systems to accurately measure and report student performance on state content standards. Each local system in Nebraska's 500+ school districts is reviewed for technical quality, and districts are publicly rated for assessment quality and student performance. The purpose of this article is to establish the historical background. 相似文献
18.
Sarah Lindstrom Johnson Ray E. Reichenberg Kathan Shukla Tracy E. Waasdorp Catherine P. Bradshaw 《Educational Measurement》2019,38(4):99-107
The U.S. government has become increasingly focused on school climate, as recently evidenced by its inclusion as an accountability indicator in the Every Student Succeeds Act. Yet, there remains considerable variability in both conceptualizing and measuring school climate. To better inform the research and practice related to school climate and its measurement, we leveraged item response theory (IRT), a commonly used psychometric approach for the design of achievement assessments, to create a parsimonious measure of school climate that operates across varying individual characteristics. Students (n = 69,513) in 111 secondary schools completed a school climate assessment focused on three domains of climate (i.e., safety, engagement, and environment), as defined by the U.S. Department of Education. Item and test characteristics were estimated using the mirt package in R using unidimensional IRT. Analyses revealed measurement difficulties that resulted in a greater ability to assess less favorable perspectives on school climate. Differential item functioning analyses indicated measurement differences based on student academic success. These findings support the development of a broad measure of school climate but also highlight the importance of work to ensure precision in measuring school climate, particularly when considering use as an accountability measure. 相似文献
19.
Contemporary educational accountability systems, including state‐level systems prescribed under No Child Left Behind as well as those envisioned under the “Race to the Top” comprehensive assessment competition, rely on school‐level summaries of student test scores. The precision of these score summaries is almost always evaluated using models that ignore the classroom‐level clustering of students within schools. This paper reports balanced and unbalanced generalizability analyses investigating the consequences of ignoring variation at the level of classrooms within schools when analyzing the reliability of such school‐level accountability measures. Results show that the reliability of school means cannot be determined accurately when classroom‐level effects are ignored. Failure to take between‐classroom variance into account biases generalizability (G) coefficient estimates downward and standard errors (SEs) upward if classroom‐level effects are regarded as fixed, and biases G‐coefficient estimates upward and SEs downward if they are regarded as random. These biases become more severe as the difference between the school‐level intraclass correlation (ICC) and the class‐level ICC increases. School‐accountability systems should be designed so that classroom (or teacher) level variation can be taken into consideration when quantifying the precision of school rankings, and statistical models for school mean score reliability should incorporate this information. 相似文献