教师对国家大规模评估的看法:教学维度

IF 3.1 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Rinat Arviv Elyashiv, Orit Avidov-Ungar
{"title":"教师对国家大规模评估的看法:教学维度","authors":"Rinat Arviv Elyashiv, Orit Avidov-Ungar","doi":"10.1080/00131911.2023.2256996","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTLarge-scale assessments have become a basic national policy for educational improvement encouraging standards, decentralisation and school accountability. The current study focuses on the pedagogical dimension of large-scale assessments, examining its uses as a policy instrument for effecting pedagogical change. The paper presents and discusses the case of the Israeli NLSA (national large-scale assessment) regime – the Meitzav (Hebrew acronym for: Growth and Effectiveness Measures for Schools) tests. Although it aimed to design a low-stakes testing regime, its implementation was a top-down procedure which, in practice, restricts principals’ and teachers’ autonomy. Using qualitative and quantitative methods, the findings showed that the Meitzav test results are barely used as a means leading to pedagogical change to improve learning. Teachers considered these tests an unreliable assessment tool that in the main, does not reflect the school curriculum or student learning, while producing a high level of pressure on the teaching routine. In consequence of the Meitzav test results, the most common pedagogical change in practice chosen by teachers was: “teaching to the test”. Other pedagogical changes following the Meitzav were implemented to a minor extent. Policy implications are discussed.KEYWORDS: Large-scale assessmentsschool accountabilitypedagogical change Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).","PeriodicalId":47755,"journal":{"name":"Educational Review","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Teachers’ perceptions of national large-scale assessment: the pedagogical dimension\",\"authors\":\"Rinat Arviv Elyashiv, Orit Avidov-Ungar\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00131911.2023.2256996\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACTLarge-scale assessments have become a basic national policy for educational improvement encouraging standards, decentralisation and school accountability. The current study focuses on the pedagogical dimension of large-scale assessments, examining its uses as a policy instrument for effecting pedagogical change. The paper presents and discusses the case of the Israeli NLSA (national large-scale assessment) regime – the Meitzav (Hebrew acronym for: Growth and Effectiveness Measures for Schools) tests. Although it aimed to design a low-stakes testing regime, its implementation was a top-down procedure which, in practice, restricts principals’ and teachers’ autonomy. Using qualitative and quantitative methods, the findings showed that the Meitzav test results are barely used as a means leading to pedagogical change to improve learning. Teachers considered these tests an unreliable assessment tool that in the main, does not reflect the school curriculum or student learning, while producing a high level of pressure on the teaching routine. In consequence of the Meitzav test results, the most common pedagogical change in practice chosen by teachers was: “teaching to the test”. Other pedagogical changes following the Meitzav were implemented to a minor extent. Policy implications are discussed.KEYWORDS: Large-scale assessmentsschool accountabilitypedagogical change Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).\",\"PeriodicalId\":47755,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Review\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2023.2256996\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2023.2256996","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

摘要

摘要大规模评估已成为促进教育标准化、分权化和学校问责制的一项基本国策。目前的研究集中在大规模评价的教学方面,审查其作为影响教学改革的政策工具的用途。本文介绍并讨论了以色列NLSA(国家大规模评估)制度- Meitzav(希伯来语首字母缩略词:学校成长和有效性措施)测试的案例。虽然它旨在设计一个低风险的考试制度,但它的实施是一个自上而下的程序,在实践中限制了校长和教师的自主权。使用定性和定量方法,研究结果表明,Meitzav测试结果很少被用作导致教学变革以提高学习的手段。教师们认为这些测试是一种不可靠的评估工具,主要不能反映学校课程或学生的学习情况,同时给教学常规带来很大的压力。由于Meitzav测试的结果,教师在实践中选择的最常见的教学变化是:“应试教学”。Meitzav之后的其他教学变化在很小程度上得到了实施。讨论了政策影响。关键词:大规模评估;学校问责;教学改革披露声明作者未报告潜在的利益冲突。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Teachers’ perceptions of national large-scale assessment: the pedagogical dimension
ABSTRACTLarge-scale assessments have become a basic national policy for educational improvement encouraging standards, decentralisation and school accountability. The current study focuses on the pedagogical dimension of large-scale assessments, examining its uses as a policy instrument for effecting pedagogical change. The paper presents and discusses the case of the Israeli NLSA (national large-scale assessment) regime – the Meitzav (Hebrew acronym for: Growth and Effectiveness Measures for Schools) tests. Although it aimed to design a low-stakes testing regime, its implementation was a top-down procedure which, in practice, restricts principals’ and teachers’ autonomy. Using qualitative and quantitative methods, the findings showed that the Meitzav test results are barely used as a means leading to pedagogical change to improve learning. Teachers considered these tests an unreliable assessment tool that in the main, does not reflect the school curriculum or student learning, while producing a high level of pressure on the teaching routine. In consequence of the Meitzav test results, the most common pedagogical change in practice chosen by teachers was: “teaching to the test”. Other pedagogical changes following the Meitzav were implemented to a minor extent. Policy implications are discussed.KEYWORDS: Large-scale assessmentsschool accountabilitypedagogical change Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Educational Review
Educational Review EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
3.00%
发文量
105
期刊介绍: Educational Review is a leading journal for generic educational research and scholarship. For over seventy years it has offered scholarly analyses of global issues in all phases of education, formal and informal. It publishes peer-reviewed papers from international contributors across a range of education fields and or perspectives including pedagogy and the curriculum, history, philosophy, psychology, sociology, international and comparative education and educational leadership. Articles offer original insights to formal and informal educational policy, provision, processes and practice and the experiences of all those involved in many countries around the world. The editors welcome high quality, original papers which encourage and enhance debate on social justice and critical enquiry in education, besides innovative new theoretical and methodological scholarship. The journal offers six editions a year. The Board invites proposals for special editions as well as commissioning them.
×
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