基于学习进展的评估:对学生和教师使用的系统回顾

IF 8.3 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
L. Harris, L. Adie, Claire Wyatt-Smith
{"title":"基于学习进展的评估:对学生和教师使用的系统回顾","authors":"L. Harris, L. Adie, Claire Wyatt-Smith","doi":"10.3102/00346543221081552","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This systematic review examined evidence of the utility of learning progression (LP)–based assessments to inform teaching and student learning in classroom contexts. Fifty-nine studies met inclusion criteria and were analyzed against four research questions. Evidence highlighted their potential for supporting judgments about learning, informing instructional and learning decisions, and improving teacher learning and development. Although 23 studies measured student achievement, reporting positive overall effects, only 6 adopted the experimental designs necessary for causal claims. Using LP-based assessment for formative purposes was well supported. Limited evidence was found regarding summative and accountability uses. Findings show that LP-based assessment design and use requires trade-offs relating to standardization and scale. Teachers need opportunities for negotiation when making judgments and integrating LP-based assessments into existing curriculum and policy contexts. Future research should examine student use of LP assessments and find a balance between standardization and customization to meet the needs of diverse learners and local contexts.","PeriodicalId":21145,"journal":{"name":"Review of Educational Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Learning Progression–Based Assessments: A Systematic Review of Student and Teacher Uses\",\"authors\":\"L. Harris, L. Adie, Claire Wyatt-Smith\",\"doi\":\"10.3102/00346543221081552\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This systematic review examined evidence of the utility of learning progression (LP)–based assessments to inform teaching and student learning in classroom contexts. Fifty-nine studies met inclusion criteria and were analyzed against four research questions. Evidence highlighted their potential for supporting judgments about learning, informing instructional and learning decisions, and improving teacher learning and development. Although 23 studies measured student achievement, reporting positive overall effects, only 6 adopted the experimental designs necessary for causal claims. Using LP-based assessment for formative purposes was well supported. Limited evidence was found regarding summative and accountability uses. Findings show that LP-based assessment design and use requires trade-offs relating to standardization and scale. Teachers need opportunities for negotiation when making judgments and integrating LP-based assessments into existing curriculum and policy contexts. Future research should examine student use of LP assessments and find a balance between standardization and customization to meet the needs of diverse learners and local contexts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21145,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of Educational Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of Educational Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543221081552\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"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":"Review of Educational Research","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543221081552","RegionNum":1,"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: 3

摘要

这篇系统综述考察了基于学习进展(LP)的评估在课堂环境中为教学和学生学习提供信息的效用的证据。五十九项研究符合纳入标准,并针对四个研究问题进行了分析。证据强调了它们在支持对学习的判断、为教学和学习决策提供信息以及改善教师学习和发展方面的潜力。尽管有23项研究测量了学生的成绩,报告了积极的总体效果,但只有6项采用了因果关系声明所需的实验设计。将基于LP的评估用于形成性目的得到了很好的支持。关于总结性和问责性用途的证据有限。研究结果表明,基于LP的评估设计和使用需要在标准化和规模方面进行权衡。教师在做出判断并将基于LP的评估纳入现有课程和政策背景时,需要谈判的机会。未来的研究应该检查学生对LP评估的使用,并在标准化和定制之间找到平衡,以满足不同学习者和当地环境的需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Learning Progression–Based Assessments: A Systematic Review of Student and Teacher Uses
This systematic review examined evidence of the utility of learning progression (LP)–based assessments to inform teaching and student learning in classroom contexts. Fifty-nine studies met inclusion criteria and were analyzed against four research questions. Evidence highlighted their potential for supporting judgments about learning, informing instructional and learning decisions, and improving teacher learning and development. Although 23 studies measured student achievement, reporting positive overall effects, only 6 adopted the experimental designs necessary for causal claims. Using LP-based assessment for formative purposes was well supported. Limited evidence was found regarding summative and accountability uses. Findings show that LP-based assessment design and use requires trade-offs relating to standardization and scale. Teachers need opportunities for negotiation when making judgments and integrating LP-based assessments into existing curriculum and policy contexts. Future research should examine student use of LP assessments and find a balance between standardization and customization to meet the needs of diverse learners and local contexts.
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
Review of Educational Research
Review of Educational Research EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
24.10
自引率
2.70%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The Review of Educational Research (RER), a quarterly publication initiated in 1931 with approximately 640 pages per volume year, is dedicated to presenting critical, integrative reviews of research literature relevant to education. These reviews encompass conceptualizations, interpretations, and syntheses of scholarly work across fields broadly pertinent to education and educational research. Welcoming submissions from any discipline, RER encourages research reviews in psychology, sociology, history, philosophy, political science, economics, computer science, statistics, anthropology, and biology, provided the review addresses educational issues. While original empirical research is not published independently, RER incorporates it within broader integrative reviews. The journal may occasionally feature solicited, rigorously refereed analytic reviews of special topics, especially from disciplines underrepresented in educational research.
×
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