Developing evaluative judgement: A self-regulated learning perspective (original) (raw)
Related papers
2024
In the current landscape marked by the emergence of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI), our educational methods and assessment strategies are confronting unprecedented challenges. A prevailing worry centers on the possible erosion of a vital educational endeavor-the cultivation of evaluative judgment. This concern stands out as one of the most significant issues in contemporary education, as the insufficiency of students' 'capability to make decisions about the quality of work of self and others' (Tai et al., 2018, p.471). To elucidate the concept of evaluative judgment, this volume, edited by Boud and colleagues, stands as the inaugural work exclusively centered on the theory and practices pertaining to this subject. The book is structured into four sections, including 'conceptualising evaluative judgement', 'alternative theoretical perspectives on evaluative judgement', 'approaches to developing evaluative judgement', and 'evaluative judgement for practice and work'. Section 1 begins with a chapter by Ajjawi, Tai, Dawson, and Boud, delving into the significance, characteristics, historical evolution, and strategies for cultivating evaluative judgement. In the contemporary landscape, higher education confronts a pressing demand to provide graduates with the ability to learn and adapt amidst unprecedented rates of change. Proficient evaluative judgement is imperative for decision-making within the professional sphere and for effective functioning. In contrast to self-assessment as a confined activity, evaluative judgement is distinguished by its capacity to transcend individual perspectives and immediate tasks. While this perspective may seem innovative, its roots trace back to Sadler's (1989) exploration of the role of formative assessment in shaping students' 'evaluative knowledge' and 'evaluative expertise'. Adopting a social constructivist standpoint, additional strategies for nurturing evaluative judgement encompass the use of rubrics, exemplars, self-assessment, peer assessment, and feedback. The application of these strategies is expounded upon in Sections 3 and 4 of this book. In Chapter 2, Dall'Alba explores issues pertaining to the cultivation of evaluative judgement in a digitally enabled world, considering both epistemological and ontological dimensions. The epistemological dimension centers on the enhancement of students' knowledge and competence, whereas the ontological dimension focuses on their development as human beings. The amalgamation of these dimensions in enhancing evaluative judgement in a digitally enabled world entails the utilization of technologies for pedagogical objectives.
Developing evaluative judgement: enabling students to make decisions about the quality of work
Higuer Education, 2018
Evaluative judgement is the capability to make decisions about the quality of work of oneself and others. In this paper, we propose that developing students ’evaluative judgement should be a goal of higher education, to enable students to improve their work and to meet their future learning needs: a necessary capability of graduates. We explore evaluative judgement within a discourse of pedagogy rather than primarily within an assessment dis- course, as a way of encompassing and integrating a range of pedagogical practices. We trace the origins and development of the term ’evaluative judgement’ to form a concise definition then recommend refinements to existing higher education practices of self-assessment, peer assessment, feedback, rubrics, and use of exemplars to contribute to the development ofevaluative judgement. Considering pedagogical practices in light of evaluative judgement
The role played by the grading process in education is ubiquitous and self-defeating. Every teacher knows the dilemmas faced at grading and/or report time. In this article I will interrogate the grading process in critical depth and will propose an alternative way of evaluating academic work. I have theorised about the corrosive impact of competition in education and in everyday life, showing how the competitive ethic is counter-productive and corrosive, and that it is deeply implicated in the maintenance of regimes of exploitation and of global capitalism. I suggested there that if we are to take seriously the impending environmental and economic crises that are threatening civilisation, we needed to abandon the competitive ethic in education as a matter of extreme urgency. In addition, I have elsewhere investigated the role played by Behaviouristic ideologies in the process of student evaluation and have attempted to demonstrate how these ideologies are manifest in extrinsic reward systems which do not address issues of “deep learning”. I have suggested in contrast that these extrinsic reward systems are responsible for the formation of student identities that are characterised by quiescence, conformity and subservience to authority, and that, together with the ethos of competition they constitute perhaps a pervasive obstacle to environmental, social and cultural transformation and healing. The implication of all of this is that at all levels of Education we need urgently to introduce systems of non-competitive learning that are based upon intrinsic, rather than extrinsic reward systems. In this essay, I will describe some of the issues that need to be addressed in the creation of such a system, and will briefly outline examples from teaching practice in higher education that have been tried and tested . These projects were carried out using the so-called Ward Method of creative consensus building which has also been described elsewhere. There, I advocated and described the basis for a methodology to be used in the context of critical pedagogy praxis. Some authors have argued against the use or application of method in that context, maintaining that it stifles the free flow of critical discourse and circumscribes possible dialogical challenges to the form and content of the learning encounter. I have argued on the contrary that the use of an appropriate method can be the basis for stimulating and sustaining just such critiques in a creative project. The essential issue in critical pedagogy remains one of power, and as long as the methodology in question requires and ensures that power is distributed evenly among the teacher-learner participants, then there is nothing to fear and much to gain from its application. In addition to the power that flows and ebbs throughout any successful group praxis, there remains another, essential, seat of power – perhaps the most powerful and significant that must be addressed for transformative education to take place – the power to evaluate, judge and grade the project outcomes and the work of individual participants. In a normative educational setting, this power resides exclusively with the teacher, and his or her power to grade is fiercely defended by the institutions of education in which they work – from kindergarten to University. In most educational institutions in the modern world it is expressly forbidden for students to evaluate their own work, or for teachers to allow students to influence the grading process. This is largely because educational standards are set with the intention of providing willing workers with assessed minimum qualifications to fit the employment needs and opportunities in the “outside” world – a world that requires recognisable, measurable and risk-free standards. Despite the modern progressive rhetoric about educating to realise personal potential, the real and ultimate goal of educational evaluations is to provide standardised graduates to fit jobs in commerce and industry.
Ileana Felipe Santos, 2020
Abstract For literacy learning to be referred to as essential, one must incorporate evaluation as a teaching technique. Evaluation can be defined as a technique applied by both teachers and parents to quantify the level of understanding of a student. The evaluation also aids in the development of a student's literacy and containment. It is important to note that even students can evaluate themselves; this is referred to as self-evaluation. Self-evaluation is achieved when a student reviews their writing folder their own convent time and tries to reflect on what they learned and to what extent they understand what they learned. Another type of evaluation is when a parent looks over the student's report card to track their performance graph (Harlen, 2017). Keywords: assessment, technology, reliability, adaptive test, self-assessment, portfolio