首页> 外文学位 >Visual Art Teachers' Ranges of Understanding and Classroom Practices of Assessment for Student Learning In Visual Art Education.
【24h】

Visual Art Teachers' Ranges of Understanding and Classroom Practices of Assessment for Student Learning In Visual Art Education.

机译:视觉艺术教师对视觉艺术教育中学生学习评估的理解范围和课堂实践。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The purpose of this qualitative research study was to gain comprehension of visual art teachers' ranges of understanding about and classroom practices in assessment for student learning in art education. Twelve art teachers from traditional public schools; teaching in elementary, middle, or high schools; from three school districts from three states in the United States participated in this study. The setting for the study was their art education classrooms. This study was constructed around individual, guided, and semi-structured interviews with the art teachers. These interviews were supported by multiple sources of information including pre-site visit questionnaires, artifacts, and field notes from one-day observations within the art teacher's classroom. The interview and pre-site visit questionnaire protocols were developed through field-tests with over 50 art teachers.;The analytical framework for interpretation was developed around feminist principles of assessment (Shapiro, 1992). Aligned to this framework were assessment practices from the literature in visual art education: Wilson (1992); Beattie (1997a); National Board of Professional Teaching Standards (2000, 2001); Dorn, Madeja, and Sabol (2004); and National Art Education Association (2009a). This framework had two themes: Student-Centered Assessment and Assessment as a Professional Practice of the Art Teacher. Analytical coding was used in the analysis the units of data of the research sub-questions questions. Findings included a range of awareness of assessment practice, different purposes of art teacher comments to students, a progression of including the student in assessment towards role of the student in shared power, and influences of school district support.;For those art teachers who both had a greater awareness of their assessment practices and used a wider variety of assessment tools for information for improving student learning, connections were found to their amount of professional development in assessment, inclusion in school-wide assessment practices, and use of an up-to-date art curriculum guide. Conversely, the art teachers who were unaware or uncertain of their assessment practices and had not been provided professional development or a current art curriculum guide, used fewer assessment strategies to inform their practice, did not utilize the assessment tools correctly or completely, and often equated assessment with grading.;It was found when the art teachers focused on improving their students' art product, they used a limited range of assessment strategies, issued directives on how to fix artwork without checking for student understanding, and their students produced similar looking artwork. When the art teachers' focus centered on their students' learning skills and knowledge in art, they applied a larger variety of assessment strategies, including student self-assessment, checked understanding before providing comments to support learning, and their students created more individualized looking artwork.;Art teachers' assessment practices were either supported or hindered by decisions made by those in power external to the art classroom was found. Art teachers from districts that provided professional development and a current art curriculum guide used more of the best practices of assessment in art education and focused on student learning in art.
机译:这项定性研究的目的是为了理解视觉艺术老师对艺术教育中学生学习评估的理解范围和课堂实践。传统公立学校的十二位美术老师;在小学,初中或高中教学;来自美国三个州的三个学区的学生参加了这项研究。研究的地点是他们的艺术教育教室。这项研究是围绕对美术老师的个人,指导和半结构化访谈进行的。这些访谈得到了多种信息来源的支持,包括现场访问前的问卷调查,文物和美术老师教室中一日观察的现场笔记。访谈和现场访问前问卷调查表协议是通过对50多位美术老师进行的现场测试而制定的。解释的分析框架是围绕女权主义的评估原则开发的(Shapiro,1992)。与该框架相一致的是视觉艺术教育文献的评估实践:Wilson(1992);贝蒂(1997a);国家专业教学标准委员会(2000年,2001年); Dorn,Madeja和Sabol(2004);和国家美术教育协会(2009a)。该框架有两个主题:以学生为中心的评估和作为美术老师的专业实践的评估。分析编码用于分析研究子问题的数据单位。调查结果包括对评估实践的认识,美术老师对学生的不同目的的评论,包括让学生参与评估以评估学生在共同权力中的作用以及学区支持的影响等方面的进步。对他们的评估实践有更深入的了解,并使用了各种各样的评估工具来提供信息以改善学生的学习,发现他们在评估中的专业发展,与全校范围的评估实践相结合以及使用最新的日期的艺术课程指南。相反,艺术老师对自己的评估实践不了解或不确定,他们没有得到专业发展或最新的艺术课程指南,使用较少的评估策略来指导自己的实践,没有正确或完全利用评估工具,并且经常等同于有等级评估;发现美术老师专注于改进学生的美术产品时,他们使用了有限的评估策略,发布了如何在不检查学生理解的情况下固定艺术品的指令,他们的学生创作了相似的艺术品。当美术老师的注意力集中在学生的学习技能和艺术知识上时,他们应用了各种各样的评估策略,包括学生自我评估,在提供评论以支持学习之前进行检查理解,并且学生创作了更具个性化外观的艺术品。;发现美术教室外部当权者的决定支持或阻碍了美术老师的评估做法。来自各地区的艺术老师提供了专业发展和最新的艺术课程指南,他们更多地使用了艺术教育评估的最佳实践,并专注于学生在艺术方面的学习。

著录项

  • 作者

    Lutz, Constance A.;

  • 作者单位

    The Ohio State University.;

  • 授予单位 The Ohio State University.;
  • 学科 Art education.;Pedagogy.;Educational evaluation.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2014
  • 页码 512 p.
  • 总页数 512
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-17 11:53:52

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号