Loading...
Please wait, while we are loading the content...
Similar Documents
A Conceptual Framework for Assessment: The Process/Outcome Evaluation Model.
| Content Provider | Semantic Scholar |
|---|---|
| Author | Kovalik, Cindy L. Dalton, David W. |
| Copyright Year | 1997 |
| Abstract | The adoption of alternative pedagogical philosophies in the classroom has led to an increased use of technology to expand and enhance authentic, contextual learning environments. Correspondingly, these new approaches have also led to a growing dissatisfaction with existing evaluation methodologies to evaluate knowledge. This paper proposes such an evaluation model based on the premise that evaluation strategies should reflect the full range of the experiences of learning. The model incorporates evaluation strategies that provide a.composite picture of learning by examining both the learning process and the learning outcome. D믭 the Process/Outcome Evaluation Model (POEM), the model expands and integrates existing evaluation models by providing the tools that can help decode, interpret, and assess not only what is learned, but also how the learning occurred. The evaluation matrix of POEM contains four categories of measurements: hard-outcome, hard-process, soft-outcome, and soft-process. By analyzing data from each measurement component singly, then collectively, evaluation using POEM becomes more comprehensive than traditional outcome-based testing strategies. (Contains 47 references.) (AEF) ******************************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. ******************************************************************************** A Conceptual Framework for Assessment: The Process/Outcome Evaluation Model U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Research and Improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) Cindy L. Kovalik This document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization 00 David W. Dalton originating it. Minor changes have been made to 00 Kent State University improve reproduction quality. ON Points of view or opinions stated in this document do not necessarily represent :1* official OERI position or policy. Jr-) Abstract The adoption of alternative pedagogical philosophies in the classroom has led to an increased use of technology to expand and enhance authentic, contextual learning environments. Correspondingly these new approaches have also led to a growing dissatisfaction with existing evaluation methodologies to evaluate knowledge. In this paper the Process/Outcome Evaluation Model (POEM) is proposed to guide in the development of more holistic evaluations of both the learning process and the resultant outcomes of that process. POEM consists of four components that employ multiple evaluation techniques and strategies resulting in a composite assessment of the totality of a learning experience. Introduction Traditionally, evaluation consists of a measurable test of learner knowledge, usually based on specified or implied learning objectives (Carey, 1988). On test day the learner is placed into an artificial testing environment, with no access to resources, and asked to answer a series of questions. Test results are calculated, compared to acceptable levels of performance, and assigned a grade or ranking. This measure of knowledge essentially evaluates only one dimension of knowledge; the ability of the learner to reproduce, recall, or recognize the teacher's or test designer's knowledge (Choi & Hannafin, 1995). In this scenario, what is learned is determined by what is measured (Jonassen, 1996) and since the assessment procedures are restrictive in scope, the learning outcomes and processes are commensurately limited. In order to reflect the multifaceted nature of learning, many educators believe assessment should encompass more than a single dimension of learning (Engel, 1994). This expanded view of evaluation is often referred to as authentic, performance-based evaluation (Darling-Hammond, 1994b). Traditional evaluation is described as secretive (Wiggins, 1989), expedient (Engel, 1994), and decontextualized (Jonassen, 1991), concentrating on discrete facts and rewarding convergent thinking. In contrast, authentic evaluation is seen as public (Wiggins, 1989), cumulative (Engel, 1994), and contextualized (Jonassen, 1991), integrating disciplines and enabling the learner to create original and unique problem solutions. However, even with authentic evaluation, educators are still confronted with the question of how to assess the totality of learning. This paper proposes an evaluation model based on the premise that evaluation strategies should reflect the full range of the experiences of learning. The model incorporates evaluation strategies that provide a composite picture of learning by examining both the learning process and the learning outcome. Termed the Process/Outcome Evaluation Model (POEM), the model expands and integrates existing evaluation models by providing tools that can help decode, interpret, and assess not only what is learned, but also how the learning occurred. Evaluation, Alternative Pedagogies, and Technology The continuous and cyclical nature of educational testing makes evaluation pervasive and significant for learners and educators. Even though tests serve multiple purposes, including assessing student knowledge, teacher/lesson effectiveness, and curriculum content (Carey, 1988), evaluation results most directly effect learners. Test scores are used to allow or deny access to educational opportunity. Learners are effected by decisions made based on test results that shape their educational future and by a curriculum that is dictated by test content. Since the focus is often achievement of specified test results, evaluation results can become the driving force behind educational strategies (Worthen & Spandel, 1991). Levels of test achievement frequently define what is taught (Haney & Madaus, 1989). While supposed or real deficiencies in basic skills or knowledge may be overcome through emphasis on 17, traditional subjects such as reading, writing, and computation, critics of the current educational system argue that students are unable to apply knowledge and skills learned in school to nonschool situations (see, for example, 00 Brandt, 1993). In other words, some educators question whether schools are teaching the skills necessary for the work O "PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS , MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY T COPY AVAILABLE 161 2 M. Simonsen tTO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES -I INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)." of scientists, mathematicians, artists, engineers, writers, educators, and the other professionals (Resnick, 1987). Constructivist theories of learning recognize the learner as chief architect of knowledge creation through the application of unique experiences and beliefs to the learning process. Alternative pedagogies based on these assumptions focus on the individual while fostering skills in higher-order thinking and problem-solving strategies. Salient features of constructivist learning approaches include an emphasis on a) authenticity (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989; Cronin, 1993); b) group work (Savery & Duffy, 1995; Slavin, 1991; English & Hill, 1994); c) learner definition and control of the learning experience (Jonassen, Campbell, & Davidson, 1994; Kinzie & Sullivan, 1989); d) the teacher as guide, facilitator, coach (Cognition &Technology Group at Vanderbilt, 1993); e) divergent learning outcomes (Bransford, Sherwood, Hasselbring, Kinzer, & Williams, 1990); and 0 the use of supportive learning environments that are, in themselves, authentic, ecologically valid, and learner-centered (Krovetz, Casterson, McKowen, & Willis, 1993; Newmann & Wehlage, 1993; Stepien & Gallagher, 1993; Morrison & Collins, 1995; Wilson, 1995; Laszlo & Castro, 1995). Frequently, the use of ill-structured, unresolved social problems such as devising a solution to the nuclear waste problem form the basis of constructivist learning environments (Stepien & Gallagher, 1993) where learner solutions are evaluated not by their adherence or nonadherence to factual data, but by how well the solution solves the problem being investigated. Technology figures prominently in these learning environments since technology enables both knowledge exploration (Jonassen, 1988; Locatis, Letourneau, & Banvard, 1989; Marchionini, 1988) and knowledge creation (Harris & Cady, 1988; Jonassen, 1988; Jonassen, 1996; Lehrer, Erickson, & Connell, 1994) without the traditional reliance on teacher and textbook as primary providers of knowledge. Technology is adaptable to less traditional educational purposes including individual learning, hypermedia development, and information exploration. In addition, technology can facilitate evaluation by gathering continuous information of learner progress, providing a readily usable storage device for evaluation results, and creating realistic microenvironments where learners are asked to solve problems that mirror reality. The incorporation of alternative pedagogical models has begun to shift the emphasis away from simple, one-shot evaluation measurements to a broader array of assessment methodologies. Alternative forms of evaluation tend to encourage the use of multiple vehicles for showcasing student achievement including portfolios, skill demonstrations, student performances, artistic works, and computer-relatedprojects. Although much attention has been directed to alternative forms of evaluating student progress (DarlingHammond, 1994a; Darling-Hammond, 1994b; Engle, 1994), educational evaluation, in practice, still generally focuses on only one dimension of learning; the learning outcome. Evaluating the learning process must also be an integral part of evaluation strategies (Choi & Hannafin, 1995; English & Hill, 1994; Jonassen, 1991; Jonassen, 1996; Kumar, 1994; Kumar, Helgeson, & White, 1994; Marchionini, 1988; Webb, 1995). Evaluation of Learning Process and Learning Outcome Jonassen (1988) defines learning as the reorganization of cognitive structure, or, the expansion of the learner's semantic network. This definition implies th |
| File Format | PDF HTM / HTML |
| Alternate Webpage(s) | https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED409848.pdf |
| Language | English |
| Access Restriction | Open |
| Content Type | Text |
| Resource Type | Article |
