设计有效的经济学课程评估:指导原则

IF 1.7 4区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS Journal of Economic Education Pub Date : 2023-10-14 DOI:10.1080/00220485.2023.2265941
Gina C. Pieters
{"title":"设计有效的经济学课程评估:指导原则","authors":"Gina C. Pieters","doi":"10.1080/00220485.2023.2265941","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AbstractUsed correctly, assessments play a vital role in the success of a course: they provide valuable feedback to students regarding their knowledge gaps, encourage deeper understanding of the material, help students to develop critical thinking, and guide students to accomplish a course’s learning goals. They also provide a signal to future employers, graduate programs, or future course instructors about the quality of a student’s understanding of the material. Used incorrectly, assessments likely achieve none of these. To avoid the latter outcome, this article’s author helps new instructors by (1) summarizing pedagogical theory of sound assessment design, (2) applying it to assessment design in economics courses, and (3) assembling examples of assessments from the economics literature for instructors who may wish to experiment with different assignments.Keywords: Assessmentscritical thinkingeconomicsgradingpedagogyJEL CODES: A2A20A22 AcknowledgmentsThe author thanks Chris Clapp, Joe Hardwick, Nazanin Khazra, Hyunmin Park, and the members and participants of the 2022 AEA session “If You Only Had Two Hours—Best Advice for New Instructors of Economics” for their insightful comments and perspectives on early drafts of this article.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.Notes1 The original Perry framework in Perry et al. (Citation1968) and Perry (Citation1970) developed nine positions to organize relationships between students and their understanding of knowledge, solutions, and authority (“the instructor” in this article) based on the male undergraduate Harvard students. Belenky et al. (Citation1986) refined the Perry framework into the “Women’s Way of Knowing” framework (WWK) by placing the nine positions into four aggregated levels and adding a level of complete disconnect from knowledge (“silence”), resulting from their studies incorporating women of a variety of ages (16–60), educational history, socio-economic class, and ethnicity. This article presents the hybrid of the two frameworks, WWK + Perry, which merges the two frameworks (“levels” and “positions”) and interprets them in the context of a standard economics class environment (table 2). The WWK model is helpful in the simplicity of having only four levels encountered in higher education settings (individuals in level zero don’t seek higher education) and is helpful as the starting point for a new instructor trying to determine their students’ critical thinking development. However, the granularity of the Perry model can help further hone interventions and highlights the variation of behavior possible even within a level (early multiplicity and late multiplicity, for example).","PeriodicalId":51564,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Education","volume":"71 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Designing effective assessments in economics courses: Guiding principles\",\"authors\":\"Gina C. Pieters\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00220485.2023.2265941\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"AbstractUsed correctly, assessments play a vital role in the success of a course: they provide valuable feedback to students regarding their knowledge gaps, encourage deeper understanding of the material, help students to develop critical thinking, and guide students to accomplish a course’s learning goals. They also provide a signal to future employers, graduate programs, or future course instructors about the quality of a student’s understanding of the material. Used incorrectly, assessments likely achieve none of these. To avoid the latter outcome, this article’s author helps new instructors by (1) summarizing pedagogical theory of sound assessment design, (2) applying it to assessment design in economics courses, and (3) assembling examples of assessments from the economics literature for instructors who may wish to experiment with different assignments.Keywords: Assessmentscritical thinkingeconomicsgradingpedagogyJEL CODES: A2A20A22 AcknowledgmentsThe author thanks Chris Clapp, Joe Hardwick, Nazanin Khazra, Hyunmin Park, and the members and participants of the 2022 AEA session “If You Only Had Two Hours—Best Advice for New Instructors of Economics” for their insightful comments and perspectives on early drafts of this article.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.Notes1 The original Perry framework in Perry et al. (Citation1968) and Perry (Citation1970) developed nine positions to organize relationships between students and their understanding of knowledge, solutions, and authority (“the instructor” in this article) based on the male undergraduate Harvard students. Belenky et al. (Citation1986) refined the Perry framework into the “Women’s Way of Knowing” framework (WWK) by placing the nine positions into four aggregated levels and adding a level of complete disconnect from knowledge (“silence”), resulting from their studies incorporating women of a variety of ages (16–60), educational history, socio-economic class, and ethnicity. This article presents the hybrid of the two frameworks, WWK + Perry, which merges the two frameworks (“levels” and “positions”) and interprets them in the context of a standard economics class environment (table 2). The WWK model is helpful in the simplicity of having only four levels encountered in higher education settings (individuals in level zero don’t seek higher education) and is helpful as the starting point for a new instructor trying to determine their students’ critical thinking development. However, the granularity of the Perry model can help further hone interventions and highlights the variation of behavior possible even within a level (early multiplicity and late multiplicity, for example).\",\"PeriodicalId\":51564,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Economic Education\",\"volume\":\"71 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Economic Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.2023.2265941\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Economic Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.2023.2265941","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要正确使用评价对课程的成功与否起着至关重要的作用:它为学生的知识空白提供有价值的反馈,鼓励学生对材料有更深的理解,帮助学生培养批判性思维,并指导学生完成课程的学习目标。他们还向未来的雇主、研究生项目或未来的课程教师提供了一个关于学生对材料理解质量的信号。如果使用不当,评估很可能无法实现这些目标。为了避免后一种结果,本文作者通过以下方式帮助新教师:(1)总结健全评估设计的教学理论,(2)将其应用于经济学课程的评估设计,以及(3)从经济学文献中收集评估示例,供可能希望尝试不同作业的教师使用。作者感谢Chris Clapp, Joe Hardwick, Nazanin Khazra, Hyunmin Park,以及2022年AEA会议“如果你只有两个小时-经济学新导师的最佳建议”的成员和参与者,感谢他们对本文早期草稿的深刻评论和观点。披露声明作者未报告潜在的利益冲突。注1 Perry et al. (Citation1968)和Perry (Citation1970)的原始Perry框架以哈佛大学男本科生为基础,发展了九种位置来组织学生与他们对知识、解决方案和权威(本文中的“指导者”)的理解之间的关系。Belenky等人(Citation1986)将Perry框架细化为“女性的认知方式”框架(WWK),他们将九个职位分为四个汇总级别,并添加了一个与知识完全脱节的级别(“沉默”),这是他们的研究结果,纳入了不同年龄(16-60岁)、教育历史、社会经济阶层和种族的女性。本文介绍了两个框架的混合:WWK + Perry,它合并了两个框架(“层次”和“位置”),并在标准经济学课堂环境的背景下对它们进行解释(表2)。WWK模型有助于简化高等教育环境中只有四个层次的情况(处于零层次的个人不寻求高等教育),并且有助于作为试图确定学生批判性思维发展的新教师的起点。然而,Perry模型的粒度可以帮助进一步完善干预措施,并强调甚至在一个级别内(例如,早期多重性和晚期多重性)可能发生的行为变化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Designing effective assessments in economics courses: Guiding principles
AbstractUsed correctly, assessments play a vital role in the success of a course: they provide valuable feedback to students regarding their knowledge gaps, encourage deeper understanding of the material, help students to develop critical thinking, and guide students to accomplish a course’s learning goals. They also provide a signal to future employers, graduate programs, or future course instructors about the quality of a student’s understanding of the material. Used incorrectly, assessments likely achieve none of these. To avoid the latter outcome, this article’s author helps new instructors by (1) summarizing pedagogical theory of sound assessment design, (2) applying it to assessment design in economics courses, and (3) assembling examples of assessments from the economics literature for instructors who may wish to experiment with different assignments.Keywords: Assessmentscritical thinkingeconomicsgradingpedagogyJEL CODES: A2A20A22 AcknowledgmentsThe author thanks Chris Clapp, Joe Hardwick, Nazanin Khazra, Hyunmin Park, and the members and participants of the 2022 AEA session “If You Only Had Two Hours—Best Advice for New Instructors of Economics” for their insightful comments and perspectives on early drafts of this article.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.Notes1 The original Perry framework in Perry et al. (Citation1968) and Perry (Citation1970) developed nine positions to organize relationships between students and their understanding of knowledge, solutions, and authority (“the instructor” in this article) based on the male undergraduate Harvard students. Belenky et al. (Citation1986) refined the Perry framework into the “Women’s Way of Knowing” framework (WWK) by placing the nine positions into four aggregated levels and adding a level of complete disconnect from knowledge (“silence”), resulting from their studies incorporating women of a variety of ages (16–60), educational history, socio-economic class, and ethnicity. This article presents the hybrid of the two frameworks, WWK + Perry, which merges the two frameworks (“levels” and “positions”) and interprets them in the context of a standard economics class environment (table 2). The WWK model is helpful in the simplicity of having only four levels encountered in higher education settings (individuals in level zero don’t seek higher education) and is helpful as the starting point for a new instructor trying to determine their students’ critical thinking development. However, the granularity of the Perry model can help further hone interventions and highlights the variation of behavior possible even within a level (early multiplicity and late multiplicity, for example).
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
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
11.10%
发文量
32
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Economic Education offers original articles on teaching economics. In its pages, leading scholars evaluate innovations in teaching techniques, materials, and programs. Instructors of introductory through graduate level economics will find the journal an indispensable resource for content and pedagogy in a variety of media. The Journal of Economic Education is published quarterly in cooperation with the National Council on Economic Education and the Advisory Committee on Economic Education of the American Economic Association.
期刊最新文献
Who does (and does not) take introductory economics? Educational technology for teaching economics–where to start and how to grow? Student engagement and interaction in the economics classroom: Essentials for the novice economic educator Designing effective assessments in economics courses: Guiding principles The study of economics at HBCUs and PWIs
×
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