Session Information
99 ERC SES 08 C, Sociologies of Education
Paper Session
Contribution
This study presents a quantitative analysis of empirical research on the objectivity of evaluation throughout the term's summative assessment in specialized schools.
In the field of education, evaluation is the process of determining the efficacy, caliber, or performance of curriculum, instructors, pupils, or organizations. The purpose of evaluation is to collect data that will enable decision-makers to make well-informed choices on the efficacy and enhancement of educational initiatives. Evaluation criteria may include time, purpose, evaluator, focus, criteria, kind of data, and level. The assessment based on timing is the main topic of the work.
In Kazakhstan's educational system, examinations are always very important. While each academic has given their own explanation of the importance of assessment, it is important to note the observations of S. Mirseitova, who supplied three definitions of assessment:
Evaluation: To make well-informed judgments, evidence must be gathered, analyzed, and interpreted. A wider range of tasks are included in evaluation with the goal of determining how well educational procedures and results work.
Assessment (Monitoring): This phrase refers to the ongoing monitoring and assessment of students' academic performance as they move through the learning process. Evaluation aids in monitoring modifications and modifying instructional tactics for improved outcomes.
Grade (Mark or Grade): This is the phrase used to describe the final assessment of a student's academic performance. A grade is an evaluation, either numerical or letter-based, that shows the student's degree of knowledge and proficiency in a certain area.
For the purpose of comprehending and evaluating the efficacy of Kazakhstan's educational system, each of these concepts is crucial. (2004)
In the event of examining the data and literature of researchers who have already defined and conducted studies regarding objective assessment of learners, it’s clear to observe that their conclusions match. “Although academics, instructors, and students are interested in this issue, the current method for measuring knowledge is far from flawless.” stated G. Romashkina (2005) and A. Slobodin (2002). “There is no absolutely objective evaluation.” concluded B. Walvoord (1998). When it came to defining objectivity as fairness or honesty, Robin Dee Tierney provided an expanded definition that was considered a crucial finding of the study. Fairness in educational evaluation is required by several imperatives, including pedagogical, technological, and democratic imperatives. Since fairness is neither binary nor a characteristic of an evaluation task or instrument, it is comparable to the measurement attributes of validity and reliability. (2013)
Two years ago, a new school in Kazakhstan opened its doors for the purpose of conducting the research. Overestimating the present school evaluation was a concern during the first academic year. In this sense, the current academic year saw the coding of summative works. We may make the following deductions after examining the acquired average indicators of quality and learning accomplishment throughout a two-year period of study: Learning success is at 100%. The degree of knowledge lies between excellent and acceptable. However, in the second academic year, the caliber of knowledge declines. In the first quarter the quality of knowledge amounted to 42.03%, in the second quarter it amounted to 62.55%. While in the last academic year it amounted to 70.19%.
The study's significance is defined by the necessity to enhance the present evaluation technique for students' knowledge and to identify students' current knowledge and abilities in dynamics.
Due to the large range of assessment methods, the research problem—the absence of impartiality in the evaluation of students' summative work—is pervasive.
The objective of this research is to quantify the development of evaluation objectivity and academic outcomes to the previous year after introducing and implementing new assessment methods, in particular “coding”, that can increase impartiality.
Method
The current study is being conducted in Nazarbayev Intellectual School in Turkestan city during the 2023-2024 academic year. There are 555 students and 111 teachers overall. To ensure triangulation, three research methods were used: questionnaires (after first and second terms), analyzing pedagogical reports, which reflect the correlation analysis between subjects, monitoring results, the gap between current assessment in school and observation of the procedure for checking summative works. Teachers were given an algorithm for evaluating pupils' work for the current academic year. The students' data was coded by the school principal for academic work at the start of the assessment week. Teachers collected the papers without student data after the summative week and went over them. To do this, they designated a location, and all of the instructors from that parallel took a seat to begin grading the work of the kids. A link to the online report card including student data was sent to the teacher leaders following the review of the summative assessments. Following verification of summative works, the heads of methodological associations were supplied with a connection to online declarations including student data. The outcomes of students' summative assessments for the quarter were statistically and psychometrically examined. Coding was implemented cautiously, and all educators and students were given advance notice. In the cover sheets of each quarterly test paper for each subject, there was no indent for learners’ names, but rather an indent for a special and individual code for each of them, the decoding of which was known only to the students themselves, the vice principal, and the teacher-organizer - curator of each class. As expected, the indicator of knowledge quality decreased significantly in percentage during the first quarter of the 2023-2024 academic year when compared to the fourth quarter of the 2022-2023 academic year, but this did not have a negative impact on students' behavior or psychology; rather, it motivated them to study the curriculum more thoroughly. 503 students and parents participated in the questionnaire. Students as well as their parents were surveyed at the conclusion of the first quarter to find out what they thought about coding. 92% of parents and students had good opinions, stating that the most reliable way for parents to determine their children's academic achievement and level of knowledge is through objective evaluation.
Expected Outcomes
The predicted performance discrepancy between the first and second quarters was already evident since this grading approach was quickly adopted. This time, however, the approach was changed in response to the recommendations and demands of a significant number of students (76.3%), who made such requests. On the cover page, a new column was introduced for verifying the teacher's signature in addition to the one for student input. This decision turned out to be the best one yet since the student gets in touch with the teacher who was reviewing his or her work after receiving it and asks for a detailed critical analysis. Consequently, most students were once again convinced that their work had been assessed impartially and objectively. Students started to believe in the assessment's objectivity, even though the workload has somewhat increased as a result of the decoding process taking a long time and because, for the most part, teachers tried to assign grades as well as provide a reasonable explanation for each additional point. They began to examine on their own how well they were mastering the offered course contents and how well they were achieving their educational objectives. Given the results of this study report, it is expected that summative assessments for the quarter will still be decided using coding checklists. Furthermore, throughout the upcoming quarters, a somewhat positive movement in the students' knowledge quality is anticipated. Second, in this method, both teachers and students may accurately offer feedback on how well learning objectives are met. Thirdly, we would want to draw attention to the positive effects that this assessment approach has on students' fundamental human values in both their academic and overall lives. One of the primary goals of every institute is to educate the well-rounded and truth worthy individual.
References
1. Мирсеитова, С. С. Транспозиция вопросительных предложений в современном английском языке. 2004 2. Ромашкина Г.Ф. Оценка качества образования: опыт эмпирического исследования. Университетское управление: практика и анализ, 2005, №5, c. 83–88. 3. Слободин А.В. Часовских В.П. Совершенствование оценки знаний методом тестирования. Телематика 2002. Труды Всероссийской научно-методической конференции. СПб., 2002. 4. Walvrood B.E. Effective Grading: A Tool for Learning and Assessment. 1998. 5. Tierney R.D. Fairness in Classroom Assessment. SAGE Handbook of Research on Classroom Assessment (J.H. McMillan, Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 2013.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.