Performansa Dayalı Ölçümler: Teori ve Uygulama
Yıl: 2008 Cilt: 5 Sayı: 1 Sayfa Aralığı: 113 - 134 Metin Dili: Türkçe İndeks Tarihi: 29-07-2022
Performansa Dayalı Ölçümler: Teori ve Uygulama
Öz: Gelişen teknoloji ve toplumun ihtiyaçlarının da etkisiyle değişen bilimsel bilginin edinilmesi anlayışı müfredata entegre edildiğinde, kullanılan ölçme yöntemleri de bu anlayışı yansıtmalıdır. Bu bağlamda, öğrencilerin yüksek seviyede düşünme, akıl yürütme ve problem çözme becerilerinin ve kavramları anlamalarının ölçülmesi gündeme gelmiştir. Bu çalışmada, bütünleştirici yaklaşımın desteklediği ve öğrencilerin öğrenme süreci içinde ölçülmesine imkân veren performansa dayalı ölçümlere yer verilmiştir. Belgesel tarama yöntemi kullanılarak yapılan çalışmanın sonunda, performansa dayalı ölçümlerin kullanımının önemi geniş bir literatürle desteklenmiştir. Performansa dayalı ölçme yöntemlerinden verilen örnekler de bu makalenin kapsamı içindedir. Makalenin bitiminde reform sürecinde olan eğitim sistemimizde performansa dayalı ölçme yöntemlerinin kullanılması ile ilgili bazı önerilerde bulunulmuştur.
Anahtar Kelime: Konular:
Performance Based Assessments: Theory and Practice
Öz: In conjunction with the current educational reform movements, there has been an interest in assessing higher-order thinking, reasoning, problem solving, and conceptual understanding of scientific knowledge. Consequently, implementation of performance based assessments that require thinking skills and are consistent with cognitive theories of learning has emerged as a need (Maeroff, 1991).
Anahtar Kelime: Konular:
Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
- Adams, N., Cooper, G., Johnson, L. & Wojtysiak, K. (1996). Improving student engagement in learning activities. Master’s thesis, Saint Xavier University, Lincolnshire, IL. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED40076). Alternative Assessments in Math and Science: Moving Toward a Moving Target (1992). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 355 256). Baki, A. & Birgin, O. (2004). Alternatif değerlendirme aracı olarak bilgisayar destekli bireysel gelişim dosyası uygulamasından yansımalar: bir özel durum çalışması. The Turkish Online Journal of Education Technology – TOJET, 3(3), Article 11, http://www.tojet.net/articles/3311.htm Briscoe, C. & Wells, E. (2002). Reforming primary science assessment practices: a case study of one teacher’s professional development through action research. Science Education, 86, 417-435. Carter, C. (1994). Evaluating the quality and equity of alternative assessments. Improving science and mathematics education: A toolkit for professional developers: Alternative assessment issues (pp. 243-323). Regional Educational Laboratory Network Program on Science and Mathematics Alternative Assessment for Oregon. Century, D. N. (2002). Alternative and traditional assessments: their comparative impact on students’ attitudes and science learning outcomes: an exploratory study. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Temple , USA. Cole, N. (1988). A realist’s appraisal of prospects for unifying instruction and assessment. C. V. Bunderson (Ed.), Assessment in the Service of Learning issues (pp. 103-117). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Çakan, M. (2004). Öğretmenlerin ölçme-değerlendirme uygulamaları ve yeterlik düzeyleri: ilk ve ortaöğretim. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 37(2), 99-114. Delandshere, G. & Jones, J. H. (1999). Elementary teachers’ beliefs about assessment in mathematics: a case of assessment paralysis. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 14(3), 216-240. Dori, Y. J. & Herscovitz, O. (2005). Case-based long-term professional development of science teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 27(12), 1413-1446. Enger, S. & Yager, R. E. (1998). The Iowa assessment handbook. Iowa City: Science Education Center of the University of Iowa. Farr, R. & Tone, B. (1994). Portfolio and performance assessment: helping students evaluate their progress as readers and writers. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace College Publishers. Gainen, J. & Locatelli, P. (1995). Assessment for the new curriculum: a guide for professional accounting programs. Florida: American Accounting Association. Graue, M. (1994). Connecting visions of authentic assessment in the realities of educational practice. T. A. Romberg (Ed.), Assessment in school mathematics issues. Albany: State University of New York Press. Hamilton, L. S. (1994, April). Validating hands-on science assessments through an investigation of response process. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans. Henessey, G. S. (1995, April). Teaching with students’ ideas in mind. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco. Herman, J. L., Aschbacher, P. R. & Witner, L. (1992). A practical guide to alternative assessment. Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Developments. Jensen, K. (1995). Effective rubric design. The Science Teacher, 62(5), 34-37. Johnsen, S. (1996). What are alternative assessments?, Parenting the Gifted, 19(4), 12-15. Karasar, N. (2003). Bilimsel araştirma yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel Yayın. Kamen, M. (1991). Use of drama to evaluate elementary school students. In G. Kulm & S. Malcolm (Eds.), Science Assessment in the Service of Reform issues. Washington, D.C.: American Association for Advancement of Science. Korkmaz, H. & Kaptan, F. (2005). Fen eğitiminde öğrencilerin gelişimini değerlendirmek için elektronik portfolyo kullanımı üzerine bir inceleme. The Turkish Online Journal of Education Technology–TOJET, 4(1), Article 13, http://www.tojet.net/articles/4113.htm Maclellan, E. (2004). How convincing is alternative assessment for use in higher education? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29 (3), 311-321. Maeroff, G.I. (1991). Assessing alternative assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 73(4), 272-281. McMillan, J. H. (1997). Classroom assessment: principles and practice for effective instruction. Needham, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Mertler, C. A. (2001). Designing scoring rubrics for your classroom. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 7(25). Moskal, B. M. (2003). Recommendations for developing classroom performance assessments and scoring rubrics. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 8(14). Nickelson, D. (2004). Portfolios in physics. The Science Teacher, 52-55. Nitko, A. J. (2001). Educational assessment of students. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill. Novak, J. D., Mintzes, J. J. & Wandersee, J. H. (2000). Learning, teaching, and assessment: a human constructivist perspective. In J. J. Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee & J. J. Novak (Eds.), Assessing science understanding: A human constructivist view issues (pp. 1-13). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Ogan-Bekiroglu, F. (2004). Ne kadar başarılı? Klasik ve alternatif ölçme-değerlendirme yöntemleri ve fizikte uygulamalar, Ankara: Nobel Yayın. Ogan-Bekiroglu, F. (in press). Assessing assessment: examination of pre-service physics teachers’ attitudes towards assessment and factors affecting their attitudes. International Journal of Science Education. doi: 10.1080/09500690701630448 Palmer, J. (1994). Integrating assessment with curriculum and instruction. Improving Science and Mathematics Education: A Toolkit for Professional Developers: Alternative Assessment issues (pp. 112-182). Regional Educational Laboratory Network Program on Science and Mathematics Alternative Assessment for Oregon. Pate, E. P., Homestead, E. & McGinnis, K. (1993). Designing rubrics for authentic assessment. Middle School Journal, 25-27. Pierce, L. V. & O’Malley, J.M. (1992). Performance and portfolio assessment for language minority students. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education. Pilcher, J. K. (2001, March). The standards and integrating instructional and assessment practices. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, Texas, IL. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED451190). Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback. Behavioural Science, 28(1), 4-13. Reichel, A. (1992). Performance assessment: five practical approaches. Science and Children, 32(2), 21-25. Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, 145-165. Shavelson, R. J. & Ruiz-Primo, M. A. (2000). On the psychometrics of assessing science understanding. J. J. Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee & J. D. Novak (Eds), Assessing science understanding: A human constructivist view issues (pp. 303-341). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Shepard, L. (1991). Psychometricians’ beliefs about learning. Educational Researcher, 20(7), 21-27. Slater, T. F. (1996). Portfolio assessment strategies for grading first-year university physics students in the USA. Physics Education, 31, 82-86. Slater, T. F., Ryan, J. M. & Samson, S. L. (1997). Impact and dynamics of portfolio assessment and traditional assessment in a college physics course. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(3), 255-271. Sluijsmans, D. M. A., Brand-Gruwel, S., van Merrienbore, J. J. G. & Bastiaens, T. J. (2003). The training of peer assessment skills to promote the development of reflection skills in teacher education. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 29, 23-42. Smith, C. B. (2003). Alternative forms of assessment. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED482404). Stiggins, R. (1995). Student-centered classroom assessment. New York: Macmillan. Stiggins, R. (1999). Evaluating classroom assessment training in teacher education programs. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 18(1), 23-27. Tamir, P. (2003). Assessment and evaluation in science education: opportunities to learn and outcomes. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International Handbook of Science Education issues (pp. 761-789). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Taras, M. (2002). Using assessment for learning and learning from assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(6), 501-510. Wiggins, G. (1989). A true test: toward more authentic and equitable assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 70, 703-713. Wiggins, G. (1993). Assessing student performance: exploring the purpose and limits of teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Wiggins, G. (1996). Practicing what we preach in designing authentic. Educational Leadership, 54(4), 18-25. Wilson, L. D. (1994, April). A theoretical framework linking beliefs with assessment practices in school mathematics: assessment reforms in search of a theory. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, IL. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED377215). Valdez, P.S. (2001). Alternative assessment: a monthly portfolio project improves student performance. Science Teacher, 68(8), 41-43. Vitale, M. R. & Romance, N. R. (2000). Portfolios in science assessment: a knowledge-based model for classroom practice. J. J. Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee & J. D. Novak (Eds), Assessing Science Understanding: A Human Constructivist View issues (pp. 167-196). San Diego, CA: Academic Press Zollman, A. & Jones, D. L. (1994, February). Accommodating assessment and learning: utilizing portfolios in teacher education with preservice teachers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Research Council on Diagnostic and Prescritive Mathematics, Texas, IL. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED368551). Zwicky, F. (1969). Discovery invention and research through the morphological approach. New York: Macmillan.
| APA | OGAN BEKİROĞLU F (2008). Performansa Dayalı Ölçümler: Teori ve Uygulama. , 113 - 134. |
| Chicago | OGAN BEKİROĞLU Feral Performansa Dayalı Ölçümler: Teori ve Uygulama. (2008): 113 - 134. |
| MLA | OGAN BEKİROĞLU Feral Performansa Dayalı Ölçümler: Teori ve Uygulama. , 2008, ss.113 - 134. |
| AMA | OGAN BEKİROĞLU F Performansa Dayalı Ölçümler: Teori ve Uygulama. . 2008; 113 - 134. |
| Vancouver | OGAN BEKİROĞLU F Performansa Dayalı Ölçümler: Teori ve Uygulama. . 2008; 113 - 134. |
| IEEE | OGAN BEKİROĞLU F "Performansa Dayalı Ölçümler: Teori ve Uygulama." , ss.113 - 134, 2008. |
| ISNAD | OGAN BEKİROĞLU, Feral. "Performansa Dayalı Ölçümler: Teori ve Uygulama". (2008), 113-134. |
| APA | OGAN BEKİROĞLU F (2008). Performansa Dayalı Ölçümler: Teori ve Uygulama. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 5(1), 113 - 134. |
| Chicago | OGAN BEKİROĞLU Feral Performansa Dayalı Ölçümler: Teori ve Uygulama. Journal of Turkish Science Education 5, no.1 (2008): 113 - 134. |
| MLA | OGAN BEKİROĞLU Feral Performansa Dayalı Ölçümler: Teori ve Uygulama. Journal of Turkish Science Education, vol.5, no.1, 2008, ss.113 - 134. |
| AMA | OGAN BEKİROĞLU F Performansa Dayalı Ölçümler: Teori ve Uygulama. Journal of Turkish Science Education. 2008; 5(1): 113 - 134. |
| Vancouver | OGAN BEKİROĞLU F Performansa Dayalı Ölçümler: Teori ve Uygulama. Journal of Turkish Science Education. 2008; 5(1): 113 - 134. |
| IEEE | OGAN BEKİROĞLU F "Performansa Dayalı Ölçümler: Teori ve Uygulama." Journal of Turkish Science Education, 5, ss.113 - 134, 2008. |
| ISNAD | OGAN BEKİROĞLU, Feral. "Performansa Dayalı Ölçümler: Teori ve Uygulama". Journal of Turkish Science Education 5/1 (2008), 113-134. |
