评估博士生:全面和真实评估的背景

IF 0.8 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
A. G. Stewart-Wells, K. Keenan
{"title":"评估博士生:全面和真实评估的背景","authors":"A. G. Stewart-Wells, K. Keenan","doi":"10.1080/07377363.2020.1743950","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Comprehensive exams, or “comps,” are a staple of doctoral programs as a way for students to express their understanding of material, synthesize their learning, and apply that learning to their fields of study; further, comps are deemed a rite of passage prior to advancing to the dissertation stage of the doctoral degree. Literature reviewed on the benefits/challenges of comps reflects a theme questioning the fidelity of the exams. Does a high-stakes test reassure doctoral faculty that the doctoral student has the content capacity expected of one earning a doctorate? Are comps an indicator of successful navigation through the dissertation process? This article reflects an authentic assessment process of evaluation that has successfully been instituted within a doctoral program as well as the benefits/challenges of these assessments in lieu of traditional comps. Further, we share examples of how doctoral students have developed/implemented genuine learning experiences that synthesize both content and skills they learn/practice in their program, while propelling them forward into the field of scholarship.","PeriodicalId":44549,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Continuing Higher Education","volume":"68 1","pages":"100 - 84"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/07377363.2020.1743950","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing Doctoral Students: A Background on Comprehensive and Authentic Assessments\",\"authors\":\"A. G. Stewart-Wells, K. Keenan\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/07377363.2020.1743950\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Comprehensive exams, or “comps,” are a staple of doctoral programs as a way for students to express their understanding of material, synthesize their learning, and apply that learning to their fields of study; further, comps are deemed a rite of passage prior to advancing to the dissertation stage of the doctoral degree. Literature reviewed on the benefits/challenges of comps reflects a theme questioning the fidelity of the exams. Does a high-stakes test reassure doctoral faculty that the doctoral student has the content capacity expected of one earning a doctorate? Are comps an indicator of successful navigation through the dissertation process? This article reflects an authentic assessment process of evaluation that has successfully been instituted within a doctoral program as well as the benefits/challenges of these assessments in lieu of traditional comps. Further, we share examples of how doctoral students have developed/implemented genuine learning experiences that synthesize both content and skills they learn/practice in their program, while propelling them forward into the field of scholarship.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44549,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Continuing Higher Education\",\"volume\":\"68 1\",\"pages\":\"100 - 84\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/07377363.2020.1743950\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Continuing Higher Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/07377363.2020.1743950\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Continuing Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07377363.2020.1743950","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

摘要综合考试(comps)是博士课程的主要内容,是学生表达对材料的理解、综合学习并将其应用于研究领域的一种方式;此外,comps被认为是进入博士学位论文阶段之前的一种成人仪式。关于comps的好处/挑战的文献反映了一个质疑考试忠诚度的主题。高风险测试是否能让博士生确信,博士生具备获得博士学位所需的内容能力?comps是否是论文过程中成功导航的指标?这篇文章反映了一个在博士项目中成功建立的真实的评估过程,以及这些评估代替传统comps的好处/挑战。此外,我们还分享了博士生如何发展/实施真正的学习体验的例子,这些体验综合了他们在课程中学习/实践的内容和技能,同时推动他们进入学术领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessing Doctoral Students: A Background on Comprehensive and Authentic Assessments
Abstract Comprehensive exams, or “comps,” are a staple of doctoral programs as a way for students to express their understanding of material, synthesize their learning, and apply that learning to their fields of study; further, comps are deemed a rite of passage prior to advancing to the dissertation stage of the doctoral degree. Literature reviewed on the benefits/challenges of comps reflects a theme questioning the fidelity of the exams. Does a high-stakes test reassure doctoral faculty that the doctoral student has the content capacity expected of one earning a doctorate? Are comps an indicator of successful navigation through the dissertation process? This article reflects an authentic assessment process of evaluation that has successfully been instituted within a doctoral program as well as the benefits/challenges of these assessments in lieu of traditional comps. Further, we share examples of how doctoral students have developed/implemented genuine learning experiences that synthesize both content and skills they learn/practice in their program, while propelling them forward into the field of scholarship.
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
Journal of Continuing Higher Education
Journal of Continuing Higher Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
8.30%
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