高等教育质量测评新动向——美国大学生学习评价升级版CLA+ 被引量：6

CLA+:The Enhanced Version of Collegiate Learning Assessment

下载PDF

导出

摘要美国大学生学习评价(Collegiate Learning Assessment,CLA)的升级版CLA+针对CLA的不足,在评估内容、评估工具、结果报告、用途等方面进行完善。CLA+不仅通过完善题目类型、增加分项分数提高问卷的信效度,而且设定了技能掌握的级别标准,进一步拓宽了用途范围。CLA+作为一种评价学生学习效果的直接标准化工具,其评价理念、方法等都对我国高等教育质量测评的开展具有多层次的启示意义。 As the enhanced version of Collegiate Learning Assessment （CLA）, CLA＋ includes new subscores, criterion-referenced Mastery Levels, and reliable information about performance at both student and institutional levels to play a greater role in the development of higher education institutions and college students. The idea and method of CLA ＋ provides a valuable reference for the evaluation of teaching and learning in Chinese higher education institutions.

作者梁会青魏红

机构地区北京师范大学高等教育研究所

出处《复旦教育论坛》 CSSCI 北大核心 2016年第2期93-98,共6页 Fudan Education Forum

基金 2010年度全国教育科学"十一五"规划一般课题"我国高校教育服务学生满意度和高校改进管理研究"(BIA100077)

关键词学习效果美国大学生学习评价 CLA+ Learning Outcome Collegiate Learning Assessment CLA＋

分类号 G649.712 [文化科学—高等教育学]

引文网络
相关文献

参考文献13

1赵婷婷,杨翊,刘欧,毛丽阳.大学生学习成果评价的新途径--EPP(中国)批判性思维能力试测报告[J].教育研究,2015,36(9):64-71. 被引量：38
2吴智泉.美国“大学生学习评价”(CLA)的特色与启示[J].黑龙江高教研究,2015,33(3):62-66. 被引量：8
3周海涛,景安磊.“高等教育学习结果评价”概述[J].高教发展与评估,2014,30(1):67-71. 被引量：18
4CAE. CLA+: Student Guide [EB/OL]. [2015-06-09].http://cae. org/images/uploads/pdf/CLA_Student_Guide_Individual.pdf.
5CAE. Comparing CLA to CLA+ [EB/OL].[2015-06-09].http://cae. org/images/uploads/pdf/cla vs cla_plus.pdf.
6CAE. CLA+: College Sample Assessment [EB/OL].[2015-06-09]. http://cae.org/images/uploads/pdf/CLA_Practice _Assessment.pdf.
7CAE. Reliability and Validity of CLA+[EB/OL].[2015-06-08].http: //cae.org/images/uploads/pdf/Reliability and_Validity_of_CLA_Plus. pdf.
8周廷勇,杜瑞军,张歇雨.美国大学生学习成果标准化评估工具的分析研究[J].复旦教育论坛,2014,12(5):84-90. 被引量：15
9李珍,辛涛,陈平.标准设定:步骤、方法与评价指标[J].考试研究,2010,6(2):83-95. 被引量：18
10CAE. Standard-Setting Study Final Report[EB/OL].[2015-06-08]. http://cae.org/images/uploads/pdf/cla_ss.pdf.

二级参考文献107

1Buckendahl, C. W. , Smith, R. W. , Impara, J. C. , & Plake, B. S. , A comparison of Angoff and Bookmark standard setting methods[J]. Journal of Educational Measurement,2002,39(3) ,253 -263.
2Beretvas, N. S. , Comparison of bookmark difficulty locations under different item response models[J]. Applied Psychological Measurement,2004,28 ( 1 ) , 25 - 47.
3Cizek, G. J. , Setting passing score [ J ]. Educational Measurement : Issues and Practice, 1996,15 ( 2 ) :20 - 31.
4Cizek, G. J. , Conjectures on the rise and call of standard setting: An introduction to context and practice. In G. J. Cizek ( Ed. ) , Setting performance standards : Concepts, methods, and perspectives ( pp. 3 - 17 ). Mahwah, NJ : Erlbaum. 2001.
5Cizek, G. J. , Bunch, M. B. , & Koons, H. , Setting performance standards : Contemporary methods [ J ]. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice,2004,23 (4), 31 - 50.
6I Clauser, B. E. , Harik, P. , Margolis, M. J. , et al, An Empirical Examination of the Impact of Group Discussion and Examinee Performance Information on Judgments Made in the Angoff Standard - Setting Procedure[ J]. Applied Measurement in Education ,2009,22 ( 1 ) : 1 - 21.
7Dawber, T. , Lewis, D. M. , & Rogers, W. T. , The cognitive experience of Bookmark standard setting participants. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. 2002.
8Egan, K. L. , Validity and defensibility of cut scores established by the Bookmark Standard Setting Method. Paper presented at the 2001 Council of Chief State School Officers Conference on Large - Scale Assessment, Houston, TX. 2001.
9Glazer, R. , & Klaus, D. J. , Proficiency measurement: Assessing human performance. In R. M. Gagne (Ed), Psychological principles in system development. New York:Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1962.
10Green, D. R. , Trimble, C. S. , & Lewis, D. M. , Interpreting the results of three different standard setting procedures. Educational Measurement : Issues and Practice,2003,22 ( 1 ), 22 - 32.