高等教育调查性评估:学生的认知

Pub Date : 2022-04-03 DOI:10.1080/13596748.2022.2042911
Diana Pereira, I. Cadime, M. Flores
{"title":"高等教育调查性评估:学生的认知","authors":"Diana Pereira, I. Cadime, M. Flores","doi":"10.1080/13596748.2022.2042911","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Drawing upon a wider piece of research, this paper focuses on students’ views of assessment in higher education. It reports on data collected from a total of 5,549 students in five Portuguese public universities. The study aims to investigate the psychometric properties of two scales, one measuring the purposes and effects associated by students with assessment; and the other determining the most commonly used assessment methods. Both scales demonstrated adequate validity based on internal structure and acceptable reliability. Findings indicate that students reported more purposes and effects associated with a summative dimension of assessment than with a formative dimension. The most commonly used methods were written tests/exams and collective methods. Statistically significant differences were found in assessment methods, purposes and effects.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Investigating assessment in higher education: students’ perceptions\",\"authors\":\"Diana Pereira, I. Cadime, M. Flores\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13596748.2022.2042911\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Drawing upon a wider piece of research, this paper focuses on students’ views of assessment in higher education. It reports on data collected from a total of 5,549 students in five Portuguese public universities. The study aims to investigate the psychometric properties of two scales, one measuring the purposes and effects associated by students with assessment; and the other determining the most commonly used assessment methods. Both scales demonstrated adequate validity based on internal structure and acceptable reliability. Findings indicate that students reported more purposes and effects associated with a summative dimension of assessment than with a formative dimension. The most commonly used methods were written tests/exams and collective methods. Statistically significant differences were found in assessment methods, purposes and effects.\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13596748.2022.2042911\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13596748.2022.2042911","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要:本文在广泛研究的基础上,重点研究了高等教育中学生对评估的看法。它报告了从葡萄牙五所公立大学共5549名学生中收集的数据。本研究旨在探讨两个量表的心理测量性质,一个量表测量学生对评估的目的和效果;另一方面确定了最常用的评估方法。两种量表在内部结构和可接受信度上均表现出足够的效度。研究结果表明,学生报告的目的和效果与总结性维度的评估比与形成性维度的评估更多。最常用的方法是笔试/考试和集体方法。两组在评估方法、目的和效果上均有统计学差异。
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
Investigating assessment in higher education: students’ perceptions
ABSTRACT Drawing upon a wider piece of research, this paper focuses on students’ views of assessment in higher education. It reports on data collected from a total of 5,549 students in five Portuguese public universities. The study aims to investigate the psychometric properties of two scales, one measuring the purposes and effects associated by students with assessment; and the other determining the most commonly used assessment methods. Both scales demonstrated adequate validity based on internal structure and acceptable reliability. Findings indicate that students reported more purposes and effects associated with a summative dimension of assessment than with a formative dimension. The most commonly used methods were written tests/exams and collective methods. Statistically significant differences were found in assessment methods, purposes and effects.
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
×
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