Evaluation of Instructional Outcomes: Extensions to Meet Current Needs

J. Finn
{"title":"Evaluation of Instructional Outcomes: Extensions to Meet Current Needs","authors":"J. Finn","doi":"10.2307/1179195","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"About forty years ago, Ralph Tyler formulated a systematic methodology for evaluating the outcomes of instruction. To date, Tyler's evaluation model has remained a predominant influence upon evaluation theory, surviving both a variety of interpretations for actual classroom practice and attacks upon its adequacy. The reasons for its survival are perhaps obvious but nevertheless important. For one, the model includes the more common evaluation practices actually employed by teachers in the classroom setting. These practices may be termed measurement rather than evaluation, as they frequently focus upon the assignment of grades or scores to pupils. They involve the construction and administration of unit or semester tests, and the assigning of course grades based upon the test results. For another, the Tyler model encompasses a number of practices that educators would like to apply, but that they usually do not have time for. These include the evaluation of the change that has taken place during a course rather than simply of the final status of the students. Diagnostic evaluation data obtained during a course that point to specific weaknesses in individual learning, or to weaknesses in instruction in particular areas, are rarely used fully. The data are often not employed for subsequent modification of the course methods and objectives to compensate for weaknesses--that is, for \"formative\" evaluation.","PeriodicalId":273582,"journal":{"name":"Curriculum Theory Network","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Curriculum Theory Network","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/1179195","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

About forty years ago, Ralph Tyler formulated a systematic methodology for evaluating the outcomes of instruction. To date, Tyler's evaluation model has remained a predominant influence upon evaluation theory, surviving both a variety of interpretations for actual classroom practice and attacks upon its adequacy. The reasons for its survival are perhaps obvious but nevertheless important. For one, the model includes the more common evaluation practices actually employed by teachers in the classroom setting. These practices may be termed measurement rather than evaluation, as they frequently focus upon the assignment of grades or scores to pupils. They involve the construction and administration of unit or semester tests, and the assigning of course grades based upon the test results. For another, the Tyler model encompasses a number of practices that educators would like to apply, but that they usually do not have time for. These include the evaluation of the change that has taken place during a course rather than simply of the final status of the students. Diagnostic evaluation data obtained during a course that point to specific weaknesses in individual learning, or to weaknesses in instruction in particular areas, are rarely used fully. The data are often not employed for subsequent modification of the course methods and objectives to compensate for weaknesses--that is, for "formative" evaluation.
教学成果评估:满足当前需求的延伸
大约四十年前,拉尔夫·泰勒提出了一套评估教学成果的系统方法。迄今为止,泰勒的评价模型在评价理论中仍然占据主导地位,既经受住了对实际课堂实践的各种解释,也经受住了对其充分性的攻击。它得以生存的原因或许显而易见,但也很重要。首先,该模型包括教师在课堂环境中实际使用的更常见的评估实践。这些做法可能被称为测量而不是评估,因为它们往往侧重于分配等级或分数给学生。它们涉及单元或学期测试的组织和管理,以及根据测试结果分配课程成绩。另一方面,泰勒模型包含了许多教育工作者想要应用的实践,但他们通常没有时间。这包括对课程中发生的变化的评估,而不仅仅是对学生的最终状态的评估。在课程中获得的诊断性评估数据指出了个人学习中的特定弱点,或指出了特定领域教学中的弱点,但这些数据很少得到充分利用。这些数据通常不用于后续的课程方法和目标的修改,以弥补缺点——也就是说,用于“形成性”评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信