为什么化学教师正在转向规格评分:感知的好处和挑战†

IF 3.2 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Ying Wang, Haleigh Machost, Brandon J. Yik and Marilyne Stains
{"title":"为什么化学教师正在转向规格评分:感知的好处和挑战†","authors":"Ying Wang, Haleigh Machost, Brandon J. Yik and Marilyne Stains","doi":"10.1039/D5RP00035A","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p >Previous research extensively explored factors that are associated with instructors’ adoption of evidence-based instructional practices. However, an overlooked yet important aspect is exploring instructors’ motivation for implementing pedagogical innovations that are seemingly popular yet lack evidence of effectiveness. One such innovation that is gaining attention in postsecondary chemistry education is specifications grading, which aims to emphasize the learning process while mitigating some of the drawbacks of traditional grading. This study aims to provide insights into chemistry instructors’ decision to adopt specifications grading. In particular, we interviewed 29 chemistry instructors from 24 academic institutions in the United States who currently use this alternative grading scheme. The goal of these semi-structured interviews was to characterize these instructors’ perceptions of the advantages of specifications grading, their potential dissatisfaction with traditional grading, and potential challenges associated with implementing specifications grading in their courses. Our results indicate that instructors adopted specifications grading as a means to address their dissatisfaction with traditional grading. The commonly cited relative advantages of specifications grading include a perception that specifications grading increases student learning gains and provides greater flexibility for students. These findings provide insights into the dissemination strategy of innovation, highlighting a need for direct alignment between perceived advantages of pedagogical innovations to instructors’ dissatisfaction and instructors’ expressed real-world needs and aspirations for their classroom.</p>","PeriodicalId":69,"journal":{"name":"Chemistry Education Research and Practice","volume":" 4","pages":" 846-866"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Why chemistry instructors are shifting to specifications grading: perceived benefits and challenges†\",\"authors\":\"Ying Wang, Haleigh Machost, Brandon J. Yik and Marilyne Stains\",\"doi\":\"10.1039/D5RP00035A\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p >Previous research extensively explored factors that are associated with instructors’ adoption of evidence-based instructional practices. However, an overlooked yet important aspect is exploring instructors’ motivation for implementing pedagogical innovations that are seemingly popular yet lack evidence of effectiveness. One such innovation that is gaining attention in postsecondary chemistry education is specifications grading, which aims to emphasize the learning process while mitigating some of the drawbacks of traditional grading. This study aims to provide insights into chemistry instructors’ decision to adopt specifications grading. In particular, we interviewed 29 chemistry instructors from 24 academic institutions in the United States who currently use this alternative grading scheme. The goal of these semi-structured interviews was to characterize these instructors’ perceptions of the advantages of specifications grading, their potential dissatisfaction with traditional grading, and potential challenges associated with implementing specifications grading in their courses. Our results indicate that instructors adopted specifications grading as a means to address their dissatisfaction with traditional grading. The commonly cited relative advantages of specifications grading include a perception that specifications grading increases student learning gains and provides greater flexibility for students. These findings provide insights into the dissemination strategy of innovation, highlighting a need for direct alignment between perceived advantages of pedagogical innovations to instructors’ dissatisfaction and instructors’ expressed real-world needs and aspirations for their classroom.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":69,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Chemistry Education Research and Practice\",\"volume\":\" 4\",\"pages\":\" 846-866\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Chemistry Education Research and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2025/rp/d5rp00035a\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"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":"Chemistry Education Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2025/rp/d5rp00035a","RegionNum":2,"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

先前的研究广泛探讨了与教师采用循证教学实践相关的因素。然而,一个被忽视的重要方面是探索教师实施看似流行但缺乏有效性证据的教学创新的动机。在中学后化学教育中引起关注的一项创新是规范评分,其目的是强调学习过程,同时减轻传统评分的一些缺点。本研究旨在提供化学教师决定采用规格评分的见解。特别是,我们采访了来自美国24个学术机构的29名化学教师,他们目前使用这种替代评分方案。这些半结构化访谈的目的是描述这些教师对规范评分优势的看法,他们对传统评分的潜在不满,以及在他们的课程中实施规范评分的潜在挑战。我们的研究结果表明,教师采用规范评分作为一种手段来解决他们对传统评分的不满。通常被引用的规范评分的相对优势包括规范评分可以增加学生的学习收益,并为学生提供更大的灵活性。这些发现为创新的传播策略提供了见解,强调了将教学创新的感知优势与教师的不满以及教师对课堂表达的现实需求和期望直接联系起来的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Why chemistry instructors are shifting to specifications grading: perceived benefits and challenges†

Previous research extensively explored factors that are associated with instructors’ adoption of evidence-based instructional practices. However, an overlooked yet important aspect is exploring instructors’ motivation for implementing pedagogical innovations that are seemingly popular yet lack evidence of effectiveness. One such innovation that is gaining attention in postsecondary chemistry education is specifications grading, which aims to emphasize the learning process while mitigating some of the drawbacks of traditional grading. This study aims to provide insights into chemistry instructors’ decision to adopt specifications grading. In particular, we interviewed 29 chemistry instructors from 24 academic institutions in the United States who currently use this alternative grading scheme. The goal of these semi-structured interviews was to characterize these instructors’ perceptions of the advantages of specifications grading, their potential dissatisfaction with traditional grading, and potential challenges associated with implementing specifications grading in their courses. Our results indicate that instructors adopted specifications grading as a means to address their dissatisfaction with traditional grading. The commonly cited relative advantages of specifications grading include a perception that specifications grading increases student learning gains and provides greater flexibility for students. These findings provide insights into the dissemination strategy of innovation, highlighting a need for direct alignment between perceived advantages of pedagogical innovations to instructors’ dissatisfaction and instructors’ expressed real-world needs and aspirations for their classroom.

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
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
26.70%
发文量
64
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal for teachers, researchers and other practitioners in chemistry education.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信