当评估的类型抵消了理解的教学

Q2 Social Sciences
Jasmin Leber, A. Renkl, M. Nückles, K. Wäschle
{"title":"当评估的类型抵消了理解的教学","authors":"Jasmin Leber, A. Renkl, M. Nückles, K. Wäschle","doi":"10.1080/23735082.2017.1285422","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT According to the model of constructive alignment, learners adjust their learning strategies to the announced assessment (backwash effect). Hence, when teaching for understanding, the assessment method should be aligned with this teaching goal to ensure that learners engage in corresponding learning strategies. A quasi-experimental field study with 81 university students was conducted to test whether “downward misalignment” – such as using and announcing a fact-oriented test when trying to teach for understanding – reduces learners’ use of sophisticated learning strategies, learning motivation, and learning outcomes in terms of understanding. We found that learners in the alignment condition applied more elaboration strategies and revealed better learning outcomes in terms of understanding. The well-aligned learning situation also led to higher perceived competence and less feeling of being under pressure. These findings confirm the backwash effect. For classroom practice, they underline the importance of carefully aligning teaching goals and assessment when teaching for understanding.","PeriodicalId":52244,"journal":{"name":"Learning: Research and Practice","volume":"19 1","pages":"161 - 179"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"When the type of assessment counteracts teaching for understanding\",\"authors\":\"Jasmin Leber, A. Renkl, M. Nückles, K. Wäschle\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23735082.2017.1285422\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT According to the model of constructive alignment, learners adjust their learning strategies to the announced assessment (backwash effect). Hence, when teaching for understanding, the assessment method should be aligned with this teaching goal to ensure that learners engage in corresponding learning strategies. A quasi-experimental field study with 81 university students was conducted to test whether “downward misalignment” – such as using and announcing a fact-oriented test when trying to teach for understanding – reduces learners’ use of sophisticated learning strategies, learning motivation, and learning outcomes in terms of understanding. We found that learners in the alignment condition applied more elaboration strategies and revealed better learning outcomes in terms of understanding. The well-aligned learning situation also led to higher perceived competence and less feeling of being under pressure. These findings confirm the backwash effect. For classroom practice, they underline the importance of carefully aligning teaching goals and assessment when teaching for understanding.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52244,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Learning: Research and Practice\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"161 - 179\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"15\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Learning: Research and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2017.1285422\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning: Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2017.1285422","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

摘要

根据建设性对齐模型,学习者根据公布的评估结果调整自己的学习策略(反洗效应)。因此,在为理解而教学时,评估方法应与这一教学目标保持一致,以确保学习者采取相应的学习策略。我们对81名大学生进行了一项准实验实地研究,以测试“向下错位”——比如在试图为理解而教学时使用和宣布以事实为导向的测试——是否会减少学习者在理解方面使用复杂的学习策略、学习动机和学习成果。我们发现,在对齐条件下,学习者使用更多的阐述策略,并在理解方面显示出更好的学习效果。良好的学习环境也会导致更高的感知能力和更少的压力感。这些发现证实了反冲洗效应。在课堂实践中,他们强调了在为理解而教学时仔细调整教学目标和评估的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
When the type of assessment counteracts teaching for understanding
ABSTRACT According to the model of constructive alignment, learners adjust their learning strategies to the announced assessment (backwash effect). Hence, when teaching for understanding, the assessment method should be aligned with this teaching goal to ensure that learners engage in corresponding learning strategies. A quasi-experimental field study with 81 university students was conducted to test whether “downward misalignment” – such as using and announcing a fact-oriented test when trying to teach for understanding – reduces learners’ use of sophisticated learning strategies, learning motivation, and learning outcomes in terms of understanding. We found that learners in the alignment condition applied more elaboration strategies and revealed better learning outcomes in terms of understanding. The well-aligned learning situation also led to higher perceived competence and less feeling of being under pressure. These findings confirm the backwash effect. For classroom practice, they underline the importance of carefully aligning teaching goals and assessment when teaching for understanding.
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
Learning: Research and Practice
Learning: Research and Practice Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
×
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