评估对学习还能做什么,也应该做什么?来自新加坡“成功学习环境”的观察

IF 1.2 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
W. Leong, Kelvin Tan
{"title":"评估对学习还能做什么,也应该做什么?来自新加坡“成功学习环境”的观察","authors":"W. Leong, Kelvin Tan","doi":"10.1080/09585176.2014.970207","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Singapore has earned accolades as one of the leading education systems in the world, based on its record in international assessments, including TIMMS and PISA. This has contributed to the entrenchment of ‘assessment’ becoming an institutional authority of standards, teaching (performativity) and classroom learning. It is against, and amidst such contexts, that this article traces how the notion and discourse of formative assessment and Assessment for Learning (AfL) are widely introduced and used formally across all Singaporean schools, particularly after a recent introduction of new ‘Holistic and Balanced Assessment’ policies. We argue that the very institutional authority of successful high-stake examination results, which served as critical standards of performativity of teaching and learning in the classroom, is being challenged. The changing assessment context of Singaporean schools, therefore serves as an interesting case study site for studying how formative assessment and AfL can be adapted and understood when ‘learning’ is already seen to be successful.","PeriodicalId":46745,"journal":{"name":"Curriculum Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2014-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/09585176.2014.970207","citationCount":"28","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What (more) can, and should, assessment do for learning? Observations from ‘successful learning context’ in Singapore\",\"authors\":\"W. Leong, Kelvin Tan\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09585176.2014.970207\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Singapore has earned accolades as one of the leading education systems in the world, based on its record in international assessments, including TIMMS and PISA. This has contributed to the entrenchment of ‘assessment’ becoming an institutional authority of standards, teaching (performativity) and classroom learning. It is against, and amidst such contexts, that this article traces how the notion and discourse of formative assessment and Assessment for Learning (AfL) are widely introduced and used formally across all Singaporean schools, particularly after a recent introduction of new ‘Holistic and Balanced Assessment’ policies. We argue that the very institutional authority of successful high-stake examination results, which served as critical standards of performativity of teaching and learning in the classroom, is being challenged. The changing assessment context of Singaporean schools, therefore serves as an interesting case study site for studying how formative assessment and AfL can be adapted and understood when ‘learning’ is already seen to be successful.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46745,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Curriculum Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/09585176.2014.970207\",\"citationCount\":\"28\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Curriculum Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2014.970207\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Curriculum Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2014.970207","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 28

摘要

新加坡在包括TIMMS和PISA在内的国际评估中的记录,赢得了世界领先教育体系之一的赞誉。这有助于巩固“评估”成为标准、教学(表现)和课堂学习的机构权威。正是在这样的背景下,本文追溯了形成性评估和学习评估(AfL)的概念和话语是如何在所有新加坡学校中被广泛引入和正式使用的,特别是在最近引入新的“整体和平衡评估”政策之后。我们认为,作为课堂教学绩效的关键标准,成功的高风险考试成绩的制度性权威正在受到挑战。因此,新加坡学校不断变化的评估环境可以作为一个有趣的案例研究站点,用于研究当“学习”已经被视为成功时,如何适应和理解形成性评估和AfL。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
What (more) can, and should, assessment do for learning? Observations from ‘successful learning context’ in Singapore
Singapore has earned accolades as one of the leading education systems in the world, based on its record in international assessments, including TIMMS and PISA. This has contributed to the entrenchment of ‘assessment’ becoming an institutional authority of standards, teaching (performativity) and classroom learning. It is against, and amidst such contexts, that this article traces how the notion and discourse of formative assessment and Assessment for Learning (AfL) are widely introduced and used formally across all Singaporean schools, particularly after a recent introduction of new ‘Holistic and Balanced Assessment’ policies. We argue that the very institutional authority of successful high-stake examination results, which served as critical standards of performativity of teaching and learning in the classroom, is being challenged. The changing assessment context of Singaporean schools, therefore serves as an interesting case study site for studying how formative assessment and AfL can be adapted and understood when ‘learning’ is already seen to be successful.
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
Curriculum Journal
Curriculum Journal EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
6.20%
发文量
48
×
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