How hermeneutics can guide grading in integrated STEAM education: An evidence-informed perspective

IF 3 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Christopher DeLuca, Michelle Dubek, Nathan Rickey
{"title":"How hermeneutics can guide grading in integrated STEAM education: An evidence-informed perspective","authors":"Christopher DeLuca,&nbsp;Michelle Dubek,&nbsp;Nathan Rickey","doi":"10.1002/berj.3979","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Addressing calls to develop assessment theories for integrated teaching and learning, we propose an evidence-informed perspective on grading in Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts and Mathematics (STEAM) education. We leveraged a qualitative collective case study design to generate rich profiles of three exemplary STEAM teachers' grading approaches and practices. Data sources included semi-structured interviews and artefacts of teachers' instruction and assessment practice. We analysed qualitative data from interviews and artefacts using a general inductive approach. The teachers in our study pushed back against ‘objective’ views of grading, whereby grades are composites of summative assessments, in favour of informed and contextualised grading, which aims to document and support a negotiated understanding of each student's learning journey. Teachers' grading practices aligned with a hermeneutic approach to classroom assessment validity: the teachers (a) collected and interpreted a wide range of evidence of student (re)learning; (b) centred students' perspectives and evidences; and (c) employed their professional judgement to determine students' grades. Teachers characterised grading as a process of accounting for all available evidence, blurring the boundaries between formative and summative assessment. Documenting the learning process, rather than focusing on products, can support deeply integrated learning. Importantly, the teachers supported students in documenting their own learning and negotiating their grades with reference to self-generated evidence. This practice stands to reduce power imbalances between students and teachers and foster students' self-regulated learning. Our findings inform a framework which STEAM educators can use to guide grading in integrated classrooms, an enduring challenge for integrated learning.</p>","PeriodicalId":51410,"journal":{"name":"British Educational Research Journal","volume":"50 3","pages":"1263-1280"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Educational Research Journal","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3979","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Addressing calls to develop assessment theories for integrated teaching and learning, we propose an evidence-informed perspective on grading in Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts and Mathematics (STEAM) education. We leveraged a qualitative collective case study design to generate rich profiles of three exemplary STEAM teachers' grading approaches and practices. Data sources included semi-structured interviews and artefacts of teachers' instruction and assessment practice. We analysed qualitative data from interviews and artefacts using a general inductive approach. The teachers in our study pushed back against ‘objective’ views of grading, whereby grades are composites of summative assessments, in favour of informed and contextualised grading, which aims to document and support a negotiated understanding of each student's learning journey. Teachers' grading practices aligned with a hermeneutic approach to classroom assessment validity: the teachers (a) collected and interpreted a wide range of evidence of student (re)learning; (b) centred students' perspectives and evidences; and (c) employed their professional judgement to determine students' grades. Teachers characterised grading as a process of accounting for all available evidence, blurring the boundaries between formative and summative assessment. Documenting the learning process, rather than focusing on products, can support deeply integrated learning. Importantly, the teachers supported students in documenting their own learning and negotiating their grades with reference to self-generated evidence. This practice stands to reduce power imbalances between students and teachers and foster students' self-regulated learning. Our findings inform a framework which STEAM educators can use to guide grading in integrated classrooms, an enduring challenge for integrated learning.

诠释学如何指导 STEAM 综合教育中的分级工作:循证观点
为了响应为综合教学发展评估理论的号召,我们提出了一个关于科学、技术、工程、艺术和数学(STEAM)教育评分的循证观点。我们利用定性集体案例研究设计,对三位堪称典范的 STEAM 教师的评分方法和实践进行了丰富的剖析。数据来源包括半结构式访谈以及教师教学和评估实践的人工制品。我们采用一般归纳法对访谈和人工制品中的定性数据进行了分析。在我们的研究中,教师们反对 "客观 "的评分观点,即分数是终结性评价的综合,而倾向于有依据的、情境化的评分,其目的是记录和支持对每个学生学习历程的协商理解。教师的评分实践与课堂评价有效性的诠释学方法相一致:教师(a)收集和解释学生 (再)学习的各种证据;(b)以学生的观点和证据为中心;以及(c)运用他们的专业判 断来确定学生的成绩。教师认为评分是一个考虑所有可用证据的过程,模糊了形成性评价和终结性评价的界限。记录学习过程,而不是关注产品,可以支持深度综合学习。重要的是,教师支持学生记录自己的学习过程,并参考自己生成的证据来协商自己的成绩。这种做法有助于减少师生之间的权力失衡,促进学生的自我调节学习。我们的研究结果为 STEAM 教育工作者提供了一个框架,可用来指导综合课堂的评分工作,这是综合学习面临的一个长期挑战。
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
British Educational Research Journal
British Educational Research Journal EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
8.70%
发文量
71
期刊介绍: The British Educational Research Journal is an international peer reviewed medium for the publication of articles of interest to researchers in education and has rapidly become a major focal point for the publication of educational research from throughout the world. For further information on the association please visit the British Educational Research Association web site. The journal is interdisciplinary in approach, and includes reports of case studies, experiments and surveys, discussions of conceptual and methodological issues and of underlying assumptions in educational research, accounts of research in progress, and book reviews.
×
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