Advertisement

International Review of Education

, Volume 54, Issue 1, pp 99–112 | Cite as

A Proposed Model For Assessing Quality Of Education

  • Stafford A. Griffith
Article

Abstract

This paper proposes a framework for assessing the quality of education, based on the outcomes defined in educational standards. The author takes the view that educational standards reflect the mission that schools must fulfill. He explains that the classroom curriculum, derived from educational standards, must customize the learning process to respond to the teaching–learning environment. Defining quality as the extent to which the delivery of the school curriculum realises the learning outcomes defined in the educational standards, the author proposes that quality in education should be evaluated using two approaches: relative achievement assessment and absolute achievement assessment. In elaborating on the two dimensions of assessment on which the model is based, the author highlights the need for greater attention to be paid to values and attitudes in assessing quality of education.

Keywords

Formative Assessment School Community Summative Assessment Proposed Model Educational Standard 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Résumé

UN MODÈLE PROPOSÉ POUR ÉVALUER LA QUALITÉ DE L'ÉDUCATION – Cet article propose un cadre d’Évaluation de la qualitÉ de l’Éducation, basÉ sur des rÉsultats dÉfinis au sein de normes Éducatives. L’auteur soutient que le programme d’Études en salle de classe, dÉrivÉ de normes Éducatives, doit façonner le processus d’apprentissage afin de rÉpondre à l’environnement enseignement-apprentissage. Il propose que la qualitÉ dans l’Éducation soit mesurÉe selon deux niveaux d’Évaluation : Évaluation relative des acquis et Évaluation absolue des acquis. En outre, Il accentue la nÉcessitÉ d’accorder une plus grande attention aux valeurs et aux attitudes afin d’Évaluer la qualitÉ de l’Éducation.

Zusammenfassung

EIN MODELLENTWURF ZUR BEURTEILUNG VON QUALITÄT IM BILDUNGSBEREICH – Der Beitrag stellt einen Beurteilungsrahmen für die QualitÄt von Bildung auf der Grundlage von Ergebnissen definierter Bildungsstandards vor. Nach Meinung des Autors spiegeln sich in den Bildungsstandards die Aufgaben wieder, die von den Schulen erfüllt werden müssen. Er führt aus, dass aus den Bildungsstandards abgeleitete KlassenlehrplÄne in individueller Abstimmung mit der Lehr-Lern-Umgebung gestaltet werden müssen. Der Autor definiert QualitÄt als den Grad, bis zu dem bei der Durchführung der SchullehrplÄne die Lernziele der Bildungsstandards realisiert werden und schlÄgt vor, die QualitÄt von Bildung durch zwei Herangehensweisen zu bewerten: relative Leistungsbeurteilung und absolute Leistungsbeurteilung. Der Autor führt diese beiden, dem Modell zugrundeliegenden Beurteilungkriterien im einzelnen aus und betont die Notwendigkeit, bei der QualitÄtsbeurteilung von Bildung größere Aufmerksamkeit auf Werte und Einstellungen zu legen.

Resumen

UN MODELO PROPUESTO PARA EVALUAR LA CALIDAD DE LA EDUCACIÓN – Este trabajo propone un marco para evaluar la calidad de la educaciÓn, basado sobre los resultados definidos en estándares educativos. El autor sostiene que un currículum de aula, derivado de estándares educativos, debe delinear un proceso de aprendizaje que responda al entorno de enseñanza-aprendizaje. Propone que la calidad en la educaciÓn debería medirse en concordancia con dos niveles de evaluaciÓn: una evaluaciÓn de rendimiento relativo y una evaluaciÓn de rendimiento absoluto. Además, realza la necesidad de otorgar una mayor atenciÓn a los valores y actitudes en la evaluaciÓn de la calidad de la educaciÓn.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Airasian, Peter. 1997. Classroom Assessment. New York: McGraw HillGoogle Scholar
  2. Assessment Reform Group. 2002. Assessment for Learning: 10 principles – Research Based Principles to Guide Classroom Practice. Cambridge: Faculty of Education, University of CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  3. Assessment Systems for the Future. 2005. Aims and Outcomes of the First Year’s Work of the Project. http://www.arg.educ.cam.ac.uk/images/ASF Working Paper Draft 10. pdf, accessed November 20, 2005
  4. Caribbean Examinations Council (CXC). 2005. Annual Report 2005. St. Michael, Barbados: CXCGoogle Scholar
  5. Cheng, Yin C. 2003. Quality Assurance in Education: Internal, Interface and Future. Quality Assurance in Education, 11 (4): 203–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Darling-Hammond Linda, Beverly Falk. 1997. Using Standards and Assessment to Support Student Learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 79 (3): 190–199Google Scholar
  7. Griffith, Stafford A. 2006. Curricula, Standards and Assessment of the Quality of Education. Invited Paper presented at the II Meeting of the Intergovernmental Committee of the Regional Education Project for Latin America and the Caribbean (PRELAC) Atton Santiago Hotel, Santiago, Chile, May 11–13, 2006Google Scholar
  8. Klieme, Eckhard, Hermann Avenarius, Werner Blum, Peter Dobrich, Hans Gruber, Manfred Prenzel, et al. 2004. Development of national education standards: An expertise. Berlin: Federal Ministry of Education and ResearchGoogle Scholar
  9. Living Values Education. 2005. Overview, April 2005. http://www.livingvalues.net/pdf/lvoverview.pdf, accessed 28 April, 2006
  10. Maxwell, Graham S. 2004. Progressive Assessment for Learning and Certification: Some Lessons from School-based Assessment in Queensland. Paper presented at the Third Conference of the Association of Commonwealth Examination and Assessment Boards, Nadi, Fiji, March 2004Google Scholar
  11. McLeod, Douglas B., Robert E. Stake, Bonnie Schappelle, Melissa Mellissinos, and Mark J. Gierl. 1996. Setting the Standards: NCTM’s Role in the Reform of Mathematics Education. In: Bold Ventures: U.S. Innovations in Science And Mathematics Education. Vol 3: Cases in Mathematics Education, ed. by Senta A. Raizen and Edward D. Britton, 13–132. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: KluwerGoogle Scholar
  12. Ministry of Education, Youth and Culture. n.d. Student Assessment, http://www.moec.gov.jm/divisions/ed/assessment/, accessed 28 April, 2006
  13. Nitko, Anthony. 1994. Curriculum-based Criterion-referenced Continuous Assessment: A Framework for Concepts and Procedures Using Continuous Assessment for Formative and Summative Evaluation of Student Learning. Paper presented at the International Meeting of the Association for the Study of Educational Evaluation, Pretoria, South Africa, July, 1994Google Scholar
  14. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). 2003. Ministerial Communique: Ministerial Round Table Meeting on Quality Education on October 3 and 4, 2003. Available online at http://www.unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001319/131991e.pdf, accessed 28 April, 2006
  15. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). 1990. World Declaration on Education for All – Meeting Basic Learning Needs. Paris: UNESCOGoogle Scholar
  16. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). 2000a. The Dakar Framework for Action: Education for All – Meeting our Collective Commitments. Paris: UNESCOGoogle Scholar
  17. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). 2000b. World Education Report 2000: The Right to Education: Towards Education for All Throughout Life. Paris: UNESCOGoogle Scholar
  18. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). 2005. EFA Global Monitoring Report 2005. Paris: UNESCOGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of EducationUniversity of the West Indies Kingston 7Jamaica

Personalised recommendations