学校转型时期的教育评价功能变革研究

发布时间：2018-08-09 13:32

【摘要】： 我国当前的基础教育改革实践中，关于评价改革的现实纷争主要聚焦于两类基本问题：教育评价改革内部的选拔性评价体系与发展性评价体系之间的对立；评价改革外部的教育改革与评价改革之间的对立。其本质在于，多数人倾向性认为评价改革是教育改革的前提性问题，企图用评价改革替代教育自身的改革过程，而且将评价改革与教育内部变革过程割裂开来，孤立地分析评价改革。在改革实践中，“标准本位论”、“双向两难问题论”、“回归原位论”都不能有效解决现实的评价问题。为此，学校变革评价在创设研究变革、推进转型的新评价功能的基础上，不仅在评价改革自身层面上对评价系统进行结构性重组，而且还探究了它与教育改革更深层次的关系，即两类改革如何在相互构成、随程转型中推进学校变革过程。“新基础教育”研究基于学校变革推进性评价的新功能转换，提供了解决上述问题的一种新思考。仔细回顾教育评价功能变革历史，可以发现既有外在形态——评价体系(评价主体、评价内容、评价标准、评价方式等)的改造，也有内在依据——评价观念和评价关系的更新。在教育评价发展的不同历史时期，各种性质的评价功能因中心地位转换而相应地成为功能主旨。传统教育评价在评价管理功能的形成过程中，比较有效率的、适于大规模的笔试替代了口试。进入现代教育评价发展后，价值认识时期，管理性评价的根本需要是获取客观证据以便作出科学的证明，其本质在于“价值认识”，价值关系被视为“客观存在”，评价主体作为“评价机器”企图客观描述评价对象，这需要对评价体系进行科学化改造；价值建构时期，服务性评价的功能旨在提供有用信息以便满足不同利益攸关者的需要，其本质在于“价值建构”，价值关系被视为主体间的交互作用的过程，评价主体作为价值主体可以对客体的价值或意义进行“主体建构”，这需要评价体系的价值化改造；自我判断时期，发展性评价在学生或教师评价领域中的目的就是提供个体的主体参与机会，其本质在于自我判断意义上的“价值选择”，尽管教师、学生是价值客体，但是他们既能作为价值主体在评价活动中表达自己的价值需求，也可以作为评价主体进行自我判断，教师或学生个体正是在此意义上获得发展，这需要对评价体系进行主体化改造。深入至评价关系、价值关系及其相互间交互作用的分析表明了，这三种评价观共同存在着一个根本性的价值论问题：教育价值要么是客观存在的要么是心理建构的。无论是哪一种，都没有关涉到教育实践或教育变革过程，，然而这却是教育价值和意义的不可或缺的创生过程。我国长期以来，在特殊的评价实践的历史背景下，形成了以教育选拔为主旨的传统评价功能体系。在当前基础教育改革中，通过引介、借鉴西方评价理论，针对选拔性传统评价功能，倡导并试图构建发展性评价体系。事实上，此种评价改革仍难以满足推进学校变革过程的实践需要。在学校转型时期，变革实践中成长起来的研究者与实践者，作为功能主体极其需要评价直接指向教育改革过程，研究变革实践以推进变革过程。此种推进性评价功能的实践需要愈来愈凸现。这是涉及到全新的评价改革实践和评价理念的探索，在此我们称之为学校变革推进性评价，其功能是在日常教育实践的变革中用评价来推进学校转型、既成事又成人；其本质在于评价主体在实践关系中进行价值创生。推进性功能下的学校变革评价在与学校转型随程推进中对评价体系进行着实践化改造，其内在特征主要表现为：实践性、复合性、生成性、研讨性。学校变革推进性评价在价值系统、评价体系上具有着更新性差异，体现了教育评价的当代发展趋势。学校变革推进性评价在学校转型中进行着具体的实践探索。在日常化评价中，“听-说-评课”和“问-答-议事”是其中的两种主要结构模型，以非正式形态渗透于学校研究性变革实践中，在不断的“学习—策划、设计—实施—反思、评议—研讨、重建—再实践”的提升性循环过程中推进学校变革。在自评和他评的交互作用中，通过日常化评价：发现、形成变革中涌现的问题；提炼、形成变革中创生的新质；促进变革实践的综合抽象、理论提升；促进变革理论在实践中具体化、丰富化。中期评估则是在学校变革过程的承启的节点，“集中式”推进学校变革过程。规范化的中期评估使得研究者对实践者丰富的创造性变革实践进行理论提升、清晰化和系统总结，进而以评价指标的物化形式实现系统具化，成为实践者日常变革过程的指导力量、实践要素；同时，也使得实践者有意识、有能力地、自主地对自身变革实践的经验创造、问题分析和发展策划进行研讨分析、系统梳理。在个人发展层面上，强化自己的内在理论改造和自身日常实践行为的关联性体验；在学校变革层面上，通过学校变革状态的自我清晰有效地进行下一步工作策划。中期评估在指向变革过程的同时，也指向了评估之前的一个阶段中学校变化状态、已经达到的水平、主要问题和经验，即是兼有过程与形成性评价的功能。但是，就其最终指向而言，中期评估仍然归一于推进性功能。在“新基础教育”研究中，日常化评价和中期评估在推进学校变革过程的评价功能主旨上是一致的，只是在作用方式、作用机制等方面存在着具体运作的不同。当然，学校变革评价的推进性功能并非是对评价的管理性功能、服务性功能、发展性功能的替代，而是在功能整合基础上有效推进学校变革过程、成事成人。
[Abstract]:In the current practice of basic education reform in China, the actual disputes about the evaluation reform mainly focus on the two basic problems: the opposition between the selection evaluation system and the development evaluation system in the reform of the education evaluation reform, and the opposition between the reform of the evaluation reform and the reform of the evaluation. The essence lies in the tendency of the majority. It is considered that evaluation reform is the precondition of educational reform. It attempts to replace the reform process of education itself with evaluation reform, and separates evaluation reform from the process of internal reform in education and analyzes evaluation reform in isolation. In the practice of reform, "standard standard theory", "two-way dilemma" and "back to situ theory" can not be used. Therefore, on the basis of creating research changes and promoting the new evaluation function of transformation, the school reform evaluation not only reconstructs the evaluation system on the level of evaluation reform itself, but also explores its relationship with the deeper level of education reform, that is, how the two types of reform are formed and followed by the course of reform. The new basic education research is based on the new function transformation of the school reform propulsive evaluation, which provides a new thinking to solve the above problems.
Reviewing the history of educational evaluation function change, we can find the transformation of the external form - Evaluation System (evaluation subject, evaluation content, evaluation standard, evaluation mode, etc.), and also the internal basis - the renewal of the evaluation concept and the relationship of evaluation. In the different historical period of the development of educational evaluation, the evaluation function of various properties is the center of the evaluation. In the process of the formation of evaluation management function, the traditional education evaluation is more efficient and suitable for large-scale written examination instead of oral examination. After the development of modern education evaluation, the fundamental need of management evaluation is to obtain objective evidence so as to make scientific proof. The quality lies in "value understanding" and the value relationship is regarded as "objective existence". The evaluation subject is an objective description of the evaluation object as a "evaluation machine", which requires a scientific transformation of the evaluation system. In the period of value construction, the function of the service evaluation is designed to provide useful information to meet the needs of different stakeholders. The quality lies in the "value construction", and the value relationship is regarded as the process of intersubjective interaction. The evaluation subject, as a value subject, can "construct the subject" of the value or meaning of the object, which requires the value transformation of the evaluation system; the purpose of the developmental evaluation in the field of students and teachers' evaluation is to raise the purpose of the evaluation of the students or teachers. The essence of the individual's participation in the opportunity is the "value choice" in the sense of self judgment. Although the teacher and the student are the object of value, they can not only express their value needs in the evaluation activities, but also act as the evaluation subjects for self judgment. The teachers or students are in this sense. To develop, it is necessary to make a subjective transformation of the evaluation system. The analysis of the evaluation relationship, the value relationship and the interaction of each other shows that the three views have a fundamental question of value: the value of education is either objective or psychological. No matter which one, it is not closed. It involves the process of educational practice or educational transformation, but this is an indispensable process of creating educational value and meaning.
In the historical background of special evaluation practice, China has formed a traditional evaluation function system with the main purpose of education selection. In the current basic education reform, the introduction, the western evaluation theory, the selection of traditional evaluation function, and the attempt to build a developing evaluation system. In fact, this kind of evaluation reform It is still difficult to meet the practical needs of promoting the process of school reform. In the period of school transformation, the researchers and practitioners in the reform practice, as functional subjects, need to be evaluated directly to the process of education reform, and to study the practice of change in order to promote the process of change. This practice of the propulsive evaluation function needs more and more prominence. It is the exploration of the new evaluation reform practice and the evaluation idea. Here we call it the school reform propulsive evaluation. The function is to promote the school transformation with evaluation in the change of the daily educational practice. The essence lies in the value creation of the evaluation subject in the practice. The evaluation system of school transformation is carried out in practice and reform with the course of school transformation. Its intrinsic characteristics are as follows: practical, complex, generative and argumentative. The evaluation system of the school reform has a renewed difference in the value system and the evaluation system, which embodies the current trend of the development of education evaluation.
The school transformation propulsive evaluation is carried out in the school transformation. In the daily evaluation, the "listening, speaking, evaluation class" and "question and answer" are the two main structural models, which permeate in the practice of the school research reform in informal form, and in the continuous "learning planning, design implementation reflection, review" In the process of the promotion cycle of the discussion, the reconstructive and repractice, the reform of the school is promoted. In the interaction of the self evaluation and his evaluation, through the daily evaluation, the problems emerging in the change are found, the new quality of the creation in the change is refined, the comprehensive abstraction of the reform practice is promoted, the theory is promoted and the theory of change is promoted in practice. The medium-term assessment is the node of the process of reform in the school and the "centralized" process of promoting the reform process of the school. The medium-term evaluation of the standardization makes the researchers improve the theory of creative reform practice rich in practice, clear and systematic summary, and implement the system in the form of the materialized form of evaluation index. It becomes the guiding force and practical element of the practitioner's daily change process. At the same time, it also makes the practitioners consciously, capable and independent of the experience creation of their own reform practice, the analysis of problem analysis and development planning, and the systematic combing. At the level of individual development, the internal theoretical transformation and the daily practice are strengthened. At the level of school change, the next step of work planning is carried out through the self clarity of the state of the school change. While pointing to the process of change, the mid-term assessment also points to the state of change in the school before the evaluation, the leveling, the main problems and the experience, that is, the process and the form. The function of sexual evaluation is, however, in terms of its ultimate direction, the medium-term assessment is still classified as a propulsive function.
In the study of the "new basic education", the daily evaluation and the medium-term evaluation are consistent in the evaluation function of the process of promoting the reform of the school, but only in the ways of action and the mechanism of action. Of course, the propelling function of the evaluation of the school reform is not the management function and the service function of the evaluation. Instead of developing functions, we should effectively promote the process of school transformation and become adults on the basis of functional integration.
【学位授予单位】：华东师范大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2007
【分类号】：G40-058.1

【相似文献】