Whose and what values? Advancing and illustrating explicit specification of evaluative criteria in education

IF 2.6 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Studies in Educational Evaluation Pub Date : 2024-02-06 DOI:10.1016/j.stueduc.2024.101335
Emily F. Gates , Rebecca M. Teasdale , Clara Shim , Haylea Hubacz
{"title":"Whose and what values? Advancing and illustrating explicit specification of evaluative criteria in education","authors":"Emily F. Gates ,&nbsp;Rebecca M. Teasdale ,&nbsp;Clara Shim ,&nbsp;Haylea Hubacz","doi":"10.1016/j.stueduc.2024.101335","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper addresses the theoretical and practical question of how to specify criteria used in educational evaluations. People and groups involved in and affected by an educational initiative typically bring different values to bear on the question of what a quality or successful initiative means. This poses a challenge of balancing and prioritizing between differing values when specifying criteria. To address this challenge, we present a framework and process that involves systematic consideration of multiple sources of criteria (i.e., who and where) and domains (e.g., design, outcomes) followed by explicitly defining criteria within an evaluation. We illustrate our use of this framework in three evaluations: a high school mathematics teacher program, K-12 principal professional development initiatives, and a graduate-level online healthcare administration program. Together, the framework and illustrations provide guidance and highlight future directions for strengthening explicit criteria specification in educational evaluation.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47539,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Educational Evaluation","volume":"81 ","pages":"Article 101335"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Educational Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191491X24000142","RegionNum":2,"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: 0

Abstract

This paper addresses the theoretical and practical question of how to specify criteria used in educational evaluations. People and groups involved in and affected by an educational initiative typically bring different values to bear on the question of what a quality or successful initiative means. This poses a challenge of balancing and prioritizing between differing values when specifying criteria. To address this challenge, we present a framework and process that involves systematic consideration of multiple sources of criteria (i.e., who and where) and domains (e.g., design, outcomes) followed by explicitly defining criteria within an evaluation. We illustrate our use of this framework in three evaluations: a high school mathematics teacher program, K-12 principal professional development initiatives, and a graduate-level online healthcare administration program. Together, the framework and illustrations provide guidance and highlight future directions for strengthening explicit criteria specification in educational evaluation.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
谁的价值观和什么价值观?推进和说明教育评价标准的明确规定
本文探讨了如何明确教育评估标准这一理论和实践问题。参与教育活动并受其影响的人和团体,通常会对优质或成功的活动意味着什么这一问题持不同的价值观。这就提出了一个挑战,即在制定标准时如何平衡不同的价值观并确定其优先次序。为了应对这一挑战,我们提出了一个框架和流程,其中包括系统地考虑标准的多个来源(即谁和在哪里)和领域(如设计、结果),然后在评价中明确定义标准。我们举例说明了这一框架在三项评估中的应用:高中数学教师项目、K-12 校长职业发展计划以及研究生水平的在线医疗保健管理项目。该框架和图示共同为加强教育评价中的明确标准规范提供了指导,并强调了未来的发展方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
6.50%
发文量
90
审稿时长
62 days
期刊介绍: Studies in Educational Evaluation publishes original reports of evaluation studies. Four types of articles are published by the journal: (a) Empirical evaluation studies representing evaluation practice in educational systems around the world; (b) Theoretical reflections and empirical studies related to issues involved in the evaluation of educational programs, educational institutions, educational personnel and student assessment; (c) Articles summarizing the state-of-the-art concerning specific topics in evaluation in general or in a particular country or group of countries; (d) Book reviews and brief abstracts of evaluation studies.
期刊最新文献
A systematic literature review on authentic assessment in higher education: Best practices for the development of 21st century skills, and policy considerations Preservice teachers’ pedagogical and psychological knowledge: Structure and learning opportunities The effects of peer feedback provision and reception on lower-proficiency EFL learners’ writing development Assessment as learning: Evidence based on meta-analysis and quantitative ethnography research Teaching quality and student achievement inequalities in low- and middle-income countries: A hierarchical linear model analysis
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1