反思學(xué)習(xí)的評(píng)估外文翻譯

畢業(yè)論文（設(shè)計(jì)）外文翻譯AssessingreflectivelearningTomBournerTheauthorTombournerisProfessorofPersonalandProfessionalDevelopmentinBrightonBusinessSchool,UniversityofBrighton,Brighton,UK.KeywordsHighereducation,Assessment,Criticalpathanalysis,Learningstyles,ThinkingstylesAbstractThepurposeofthispaperistoidentitythemainproblemsinassessingreflectivelearningandtoseekwaysoftacklingthem。LessonsaresoughtfromHE'slongengagementwithcriticalthinkingthatcanbetransferredtoreflectivelearning.Asolutiontotheproblemisofferedthatisbasedonaquestioningapproachtoreflectivelearning.Insodoing,thepaperexploresthenatureofreflectivelearningandadvancestheideathatthedistinctionbetween"surface"and"deep"learningcanbegeneralisedtothedomainofreflectivelearning.Itconcludeswithsomeimplicationsfordevelopmentofreflectivelearning.ElectronicaccessTheEmeraldResearchRegisterforthisjournalisavailableat/resrarchregisterThecurrentissueandfulltextarchiveofthisjournalisavailableat/0040-0912.htmIntroductionThepurposeofthispaperistoidentifythemainproblemsinassessingreflectivelearningandtoproposehowtheymightberesolved.Insodoing,thepaperlooksatthenatureofreflectivelearningandthereasonsforassessingreflectivelearning.Thecorestrategyofthepaperistolookatwhatwecanlearnfromtheassessmentofcriticalthinkingthatistransferabletothedomainofreflectivelearning.First,however,itisnecessarytoestablishthesignificanceofreflectivelearninginhighereducation(HE)today.Overthelastdecade,reflectivelearninghasmadeincreasinginroadsintotheHEcurriculum.Recognitionoftheacceleratingpaceandimpactoftechnologicalchange,economicchangeandsocialchangehascreatedawarenessoftheneedforgraduatestobelifelonglearners.InsofarasHEseekstopreparestudentsforworkandforlifeitincreasinglyseekstodeveloptheircapacityforlifelonglearning.Lifelonglearningcanbepartitionedintoplannedlearningandunplannedlearning.Muchlearningacrossthelifespanisunplanned,experientialandemergent.Thekeytothissortoflearningisreflection,whichturnsexperienceintolearning(Boudetal.,1985).Developingstudents’capacityforreflectivelearningispartofdevelopingtheircapacitytolearnhowtolearn.Reflectivelearninghasbecomeincreasinglyimportantinpostgraduateprogrammes,wherereflectivelearningisoftencombinedwithtaughtandresearchelements.AccordingtotheQualityAssuranceAgencyforHigherEducation(QAAHE):Progressionwithinpostgraduatestudyhastraditionallyimpliedanincreasinglynarrow,andincreasinglyresearch-dependentdeepeningofknowledgeinaspecificfield.TheHarrisReview…h(huán)owever,notedthatthedistinctionbetweentaught,researchandreflectiveelementsofpostgraduatestudyhadbecomeblurredandthatprogrammeswereincreasinglycombiningtwoormoreoftheseelements(QAAHE,1998,p.4).Thisisparticularlytrueinthoseacademicdisciplinesmostcloselyrelatedtohigherprofessionallearningsuchasnursingandeducation.Inthoseareas,Schon’snotionofthe“reflectivepractitioner”hasbeenveryinfluential(Schon,1983).Inthoseareas,aHEnormallyseekstodevelopreflectivepractitioners.AnothertributarybringingreflectivelearningintotheHEcurriculumistheworkofeducationaldevelopmentunitsinuniversitiesandotherinstitutionsofHE.Thisworkhasexpandedrapidlyoverthelastdecade(Gosling,2001).Acoreelementoftheworkistheprovisionofcoursesforstaffdevelopmentinteachingandsupportingstudentlearning.Arecentsurveyofthepromotionalliteratureonthesecoursessuggestedthattheconceptualunderpinningsofthesecoursesweredominatedbytwoideas:Kolb’sexperientiallearningcycle;andSchon’sreflectivepractitioner(Bourneretal.,2000).Reflectivelearningplaysakeyroleinbothideas.ThecoursesareintendedtoprepareanddevelopteachersfromacrossthespectrumofthesubjectdisciplinesofHE.Insodoing,theybringtheconceptofreflectivelearningintoacademicsubjectsacrosseverypartoftheacademy.WhetherHEispreparingstudentsforlifelonglearning,deliveringCPDtoexperiencedpractitionersorpreparingacademicsforteachinginHE,theroleofreflectivelearningisincreasing.Thispaperlooksatproblemsinassessingreflectivelearningarisingfromthesubjectivenatureoftheknowledgeoutcomesofreflectivelearning,seekslessonsfromHE’slongengagementwithcriticalthinkingandoffersasolutionbasedonaquestioningapproachtoreflectivelearning.Whyassessreflectivelearning?Itisimportanttoassessreflectivelearningtobeabletoprovidefeedbacktostudentsandtobeabletocertifythatstudentshavedevelopedthecapacitytolearnthroughreflection.Ifalearningoutcomeofacourseistodevelopthecapacityforreflectivepracticethenassessmentisnecessaryforcertificationthatthelearningoutcomeshavebeenachieved.IfasignificantpartofthepurposeofacourseofHEistoproducereflectivepractitioners,thenitisdifficulttoknowifthecourseisachievingitspurposeunlessreflectivelearningisassessed.Ifreflectivelearningisnotassesseditismostlikelytobeneglected.Assessmenthasbeendescribedas“thetailthatwagsthedog”.Attentionfollowsassessmentandbehaviourfollowsattention.Moststudentspaymostattentiontowhatisassessed.Thatwhichisnotassessedismostlikelytobemostneglected.Withintheacademyassessmentconferslegitimacy.Theacademyisreluctanttoaccreditthatwhichcannotbeassessed.Agoodrecentexampleofthisprincipleistheaccreditationofwork-basedlearningwithinHE(BrennanandLittle,1996).Theaccreditationofwork-basedlearninghasfollowedthedevelopmentofformsofassessmentofwork-basedlearning;thelegitimacyofwork-basedlearninginHEdependedonitsaccreditation.Untilrelativelysecuremethodsofassessmentforwork-basedlearningweredevelopeditremainedonthemarginsofHE.Reflectivelearningwillnotachievefulllegitimacywithintheacademyuntiltheassessmentofreflectivelearningissecure.Whatarethemainobstaclestoassessingreflectivelearning?Themainimpedimenttoassessingreflectivelearningisthatasignificantandvariableproportionofthelearningoutcomesofreflectionissubjectiveknowledgeratherthanobjectiveknowledge.Onlythepersondoingthereflectioncanassesswhetherlearninghasoccurredthatissignificanttothem.However,thenotionofsecureassessmentimpliessomeformofevaluationagainstanindependentstandard.Iftherestoftheworldistofindtheassessmentuseful,thestandardofassessmentmustbeexplicit.Inthecaseofpersonallearning,itisdifficulttoseewhatexternalstandardcanbeusedformeasuringtheworthofthelearning.Thereisanotherrelatedobstaclethatimpedesassessmentofreflectivelearning.Assessmentnormallyinvolvesajudgementoftheextenttowhichplannedlearningoutcomeshavebeenachievedbystudents.Reflectionistheprocessofturningexperienceintolearningandthatlearningisemergentratherthanplanned.Itisdifficulttospecify,apriori,plannedlearningoutcomesforaprocessthatyieldsemergentlearningoutcomes.Intheabsenceofplannedlearningoutcomesthereisnothingagainstwhichtoassessthelearning.Facedwiththesetwosubstantialobstaclestotheassessmentofreflectivelearningthestrategyofthispaperistolookforawayforwardbytransferringideasfromtheareawhichhasbeenwellthought-throughinHE,thedomainofcriticalthinking.Whatcanwelearnfromcriticalthinking?In1991,SirDouglasHague,whowaschairoftheEconomicandSocialResearchCouncilformuchofthe1980s,wrotethatcriticalthinking,theabilitytojudgeideasandevidence,istheprimaryaimofHE:Academicsmustbelievethatacquiringtheabilitytotestideasandevidenceistheprimarybenefitofauniversityeducation(Hague,1991,p.64).Thisstatementisprobablyanaccuratereflectionoftheviewofmostuniversityacademicsduringmostofthetwentiethcentury.Certainlythemajoritywouldhaveagreedwiththepropositionthatahallmarkofauniversitygraduateisthattheyhavewell-honedcriticalfaculties.Animplicationisthatwehaveagreatdealofexperienceindetectingthepresenceorabsenceofcriticalthinkinginassessingtheworkofstudents.Howdowerecognisethepresenceofcriticalthinkingwhenweareassessingstudents’work?Whatistheevidenceofcriticalthinkingthatwelookforinassessingtheworkofstudents?Traditionally,wehavelookedforevidencethatthestudenthasaskedsearchingquestionsofthematerialwithwhichtheyhaveengagedandoftheirownideas.Whatsortofsearchingquestionsdoescriticalthinkingimply?TableIcontainsadozenquestionsthatwemightrecogniseasthetoolsofthecriticalthinkerintheprocessofinterrogatingideas,evidenceandassertions.Whenweassessstudentworkandwespotevidenceoftheuseofthesesortsofquestionswecanreasonablyconcludethatthestudenthasdevelopedthecapacityforcriticalthinking.Therestofthispaperaddressesthequestion:canwetransferthisapproachfromtheassessmentofcriticalthinkingtotheassessmentofreflectivelearning?Inotherwords,wearelookingforcorrespondencebetweenthegenericprocessesofcriticalthinkingandreflectivelearning.Thefirststepistonoticethedifferenceinterminologybetween“criticalthinking”and“reflectivelearning”.Werarelyspeakof“criticallearning”or“reflectivethinking”.Noticingthisdifferentuseoflanguageallowsustomaketheadjustmentinourpursuitofparallels;fromnowonwewillbelookingforsimilaritiesbetween“criticalthinking”and“reflectivethinking”.Replacingtheterm“reflectivelearning”by“reflectivethinking”isalsoimportant,becauseitseparatesouttheprocessofreflection(i.e.reflectivethinking)fromthecontentofthatthinkinganditisthesubjectivenatureofthecontentthatisamajorbarriertotheassessmentofreflectivelearning.Whenapersoninterrogatessomepastexperiencebyaskingsearchingquestionsofthatexperiencetheyarethinkingaboutitreflectively.Simplyreviewingwhathappeneddoesnotconstitutereflectivethinking;itisaspossibletoreviewanexperienceunreflectivelyasitistoreadabookuncritically.Justastheprocessofcriticalthinkingimpliesaskingsearchingquestions,sotheprocessofreflectivethinkingimpliesaskingsearchingquestions.Whatdistinguishesreflectivethinkingaboutanexperiencefromunreflectivethinkingistheprocessofinterrogatingtheexperiencingwithsearchingquestions.Whatsortofsearchingquestionsdoreflectivethinkersusetointerrogatetheirexperience?TableIcomprisedasetofquestionsofthekindthatcharacterisecriticalthinking;TableIIcontainsasetofquestionsofthekindthatcharacterisereflectivethinking.Whenweassessstudentworkandwespotevidenceoftheuseofthesesortsofquestionswecanreasonablyconcludethatthestudenthasdevelopedthecapacityforreflectivethinking.Inotherwords,thesolutiontotheproblemofassessingreflectivelearningproposedinthispaperistobaseitonevidenceofthecapacitytointerrogateexperiencewithsearchingquestions.Asisthecasewhenweassessthecapacityforcriticalthinking,sometimesthosequestionswillbeexplicitandsometimestheywillbeimplicitinthestudents’work.Howdoesthissolutiondealwiththeobstaclestotheassessmentofreflectivelearning:thesubjectivenatureofreflectivelearningandtheabsenceofpriorlearningoutcomesagainstwhichtoassessreflectivelearningwhichisemergentratherthanplanned.Althoughthecontentofreflectivelearningmaybesubjective,theprocessofreflectivelearningisnot.Thisisbecause:thecoreofthereflectivelearningprocessisinterrogatingexperiencewithsearchingquestions;andwecanidentifysearchingquestionsindependentlyofthecontentofthereflection.Reflectivelearningisnotwhathappenstoastudent,itiswhatthestudentdoeswithwhathashappened.Whenweassessreflectionitisimportantthatwedonotassessthecontentofanexperiencebutratherthatweassesswhatthestudenthasdonewiththecontent.Thereisaparallelherewithprojectwork.Studentsareoftenallowedtoselectthetopiccontentoftheirownprojectsand,despitethis,westillfeelconfidentinmarkingtheirprojectreports.Thisisbecauseweareassessingtheprocessesemployedinundertakingtheprojectasevidencedinprojectreportsratherthentheprojectcontentperse.Intermsoftheeducationofstudents,wearemoreconcernedwithhowtheydiditthanthecontentoftheprojectoutcomes.Likewisewithreflectivelearning,wearelessconcernedwiththecontentofexperiencethanhowthestudentsprocessit.Weshouldbemostconcernedwithwhethertheytaketheexperienceatfacevalueorasksearchingquestionsofit.Thecontentofastudent’sexperiencemaybesubjective,buttheprocessofreflectivethinkingisnot.反思學(xué)習(xí)的評(píng)估TomBourner作者英國(guó)布萊頓商業(yè)學(xué)校個(gè)人職業(yè)發(fā)展教授TomBourner關(guān)鍵字高等教育評(píng)定關(guān)鍵路徑分析學(xué)習(xí)風(fēng)格思考風(fēng)格摘要這篇論文的目的是在評(píng)估反思學(xué)習(xí)方面進(jìn)行主要問(wèn)題的鑒別和尋找抓住主要問(wèn)題的方法。從男孩帶著評(píng)判性思維進(jìn)行長(zhǎng)期約會(huì)獲得的經(jīng)驗(yàn)教訓(xùn)，可以作為反思學(xué)習(xí)。解決這個(gè)問(wèn)題的方法已被提供，它是以問(wèn)答策略為基礎(chǔ)的反思學(xué)習(xí)。這樣做，論文探討了自然反思學(xué)習(xí)，并提出了這樣的看法：“表面學(xué)習(xí)”和“深度學(xué)習(xí)”之間的區(qū)別可以歸納到反思學(xué)習(xí)領(lǐng)域。它以一些關(guān)于反思學(xué)習(xí)發(fā)展的含義為結(jié)束。電子通道這個(gè)期刊的翡翠研究登記從/researchregister獲得這個(gè)期刊的當(dāng)前問(wèn)題和全文檔案網(wǎng)址：/0040-0912.htm獲得介紹本文件的目的是確定評(píng)估反思性學(xué)習(xí)中的主要問(wèn)題，并提出可能如何解決。在這樣做時(shí)，紙看的性質(zhì)反思性學(xué)習(xí)和評(píng)估反思學(xué)習(xí)的理由?？纯次覀兛梢越梃b的是轉(zhuǎn)移到反思學(xué)習(xí)的域的批判性思維的評(píng)估文件的核心戰(zhàn)略。第一次，但是，有必要建立高等教育（他）今日（星期五）反思學(xué)習(xí)的重要意義。十年反思性學(xué)習(xí)取得了何課程增加進(jìn)入。加快步伐的識(shí)別和技術(shù)變革、經(jīng)濟(jì)的變化和社會(huì)變革的影響已創(chuàng)建畢業(yè)生成為終身學(xué)習(xí)者的需要的認(rèn)識(shí)。只要他旨在培養(yǎng)學(xué)生的工作和生活越來(lái)越多地致力于發(fā)展終身學(xué)習(xí)的能力。終身學(xué)習(xí)可以分成計(jì)劃的學(xué)習(xí)和計(jì)劃外的學(xué)習(xí)。多跨壽命的學(xué)習(xí)是計(jì)劃外、經(jīng)驗(yàn)和急診。這種學(xué)習(xí)的關(guān)鍵是打開(kāi)經(jīng)驗(yàn)學(xué)習(xí)（1985年債券等人）的思考。若要了解如何學(xué)習(xí)能力開(kāi)發(fā)的一部分發(fā)展反思性學(xué)習(xí)的學(xué)生的能力。反思性學(xué)習(xí)已經(jīng)成為越來(lái)越重要的研究生課程，通常與結(jié)合反思學(xué)習(xí)教和研究元素。根據(jù)質(zhì)量保證局高等教育(QAAHE)：在研究生研究進(jìn)展傳統(tǒng)上已隱含知識(shí)特定字段中一個(gè)越來(lái)越窄，越來(lái)越多地依賴于研究的深化。哈里斯進(jìn)展……然而，注意到這種區(qū)分之間教，研究和研究生研究的反思元素變得模糊和方案被越來(lái)越多地合并兩個(gè)或多個(gè)這些元素(QAAHE，1998，第4頁(yè)）。這是在這些護(hù)理和教育等較高專(zhuān)業(yè)學(xué)習(xí)與最密切相關(guān)的學(xué)科的情況尤其如此。在這些的領(lǐng)域的"反光醫(yī)生"Schon的概念已很有影響力(1983Schon）。在這些的領(lǐng)域有何通常旨在發(fā)展反思的從業(yè)人員。另一支流使反思學(xué)習(xí)到何課程是何的高校教育發(fā)展單位的工作和其他機(jī)構(gòu)。這項(xiàng)工作已在過(guò)去的十年（2001年，鵝)迅速擴(kuò)大。提供課程的教學(xué)和學(xué)習(xí)的學(xué)生支持工作人員發(fā)展工作的核心要素。這些課程的宣傳文獻(xiàn)的最近一項(xiàng)調(diào)查建議這些課程的概念基礎(chǔ)由兩個(gè)觀念：科爾布的經(jīng)驗(yàn)學(xué)習(xí)周期；和Schon的反思醫(yī)生（2000Bourner等人）。反思式學(xué)習(xí)關(guān)鍵作用在這兩種思想。該課程被為了準(zhǔn)備和學(xué)科的他整個(gè)發(fā)展的教師。在這樣做時(shí)，他們帶到學(xué)科的反思性學(xué)習(xí)的概念跨學(xué)院的每個(gè)部分。他是否是準(zhǔn)備終身學(xué)習(xí)的學(xué)生，經(jīng)驗(yàn)豐富的專(zhuān)業(yè)人員提供持續(xù)專(zhuān)業(yè)發(fā)展或?qū)W術(shù)界人士準(zhǔn)備在他，教學(xué)反思性學(xué)習(xí)的作用越來(lái)越大。這份文件看評(píng)估所產(chǎn)生的反思式學(xué)習(xí)的知識(shí)成果的主觀性質(zhì)的反思性學(xué)習(xí)中存在的問(wèn)題、經(jīng)驗(yàn)教訓(xùn)的目的，是從他是批判性思維的長(zhǎng)時(shí)間接觸，提供了一個(gè)解決方案基于一個(gè)提問(wèn)的反思式的學(xué)習(xí)方法。為什么評(píng)估反思性學(xué)習(xí)？它是重要評(píng)估反思學(xué)習(xí)能夠向?qū)W生提供反饋意見(jiàn)，并能夠證明學(xué)生已通過(guò)反思學(xué)習(xí)能力。如果要發(fā)展的反思性實(shí)踐能力的一門(mén)課程的學(xué)習(xí)成果，然后評(píng)估是必要的認(rèn)證取得的學(xué)習(xí)成果。如果他一項(xiàng)課程的目的很大一部分產(chǎn)生反思從業(yè)人員很難知道如果課程實(shí)現(xiàn)其目的，除非反思學(xué)習(xí)評(píng)估。如果反思學(xué)習(xí)沒(méi)有評(píng)估它是最容易被忽視。評(píng)估已被描述為"搖狗的尾巴"。注意以下評(píng)估和行為遵循注意。大多數(shù)學(xué)生最關(guān)注什么評(píng)估。這不是評(píng)估是最有可能最被忽視的。在學(xué)院內(nèi)評(píng)估賦予的合法性。學(xué)院不愿意認(rèn)可，不能進(jìn)行評(píng)估。最近的一個(gè)好例子的這一原則是基于工作學(xué)習(xí)何（布仁立爵士和小1996年）內(nèi)的認(rèn)可。認(rèn)可的工作為基礎(chǔ)的學(xué)習(xí)一直遵循的形式的工作為基礎(chǔ)的學(xué)習(xí)；評(píng)估的發(fā)展在何工作學(xué)習(xí)的合法性取決于其認(rèn)可。直到相對(duì)安全方法的評(píng)估工作為基礎(chǔ)的學(xué)習(xí)了它仍然在邊緣的何。直到反思學(xué)習(xí)的評(píng)估是安全反光學(xué)習(xí)將不會(huì)取得充分的合法性，在學(xué)院內(nèi)。評(píng)估反思學(xué)習(xí)的主要障礙是什么？評(píng)估反思學(xué)習(xí)的主要障礙是思考的重大和可變的比例的學(xué)習(xí)成果是思考的主觀的知識(shí)，而不是思考的客觀的知識(shí)。只有做思考的人可以評(píng)估是否發(fā)生，是重要的是他們的學(xué)習(xí)。但是，安全評(píng)估的概念意味著某種形式的一種獨(dú)立的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)對(duì)評(píng)價(jià)。如果有用評(píng)估世界各地標(biāo)準(zhǔn)必須是評(píng)估的顯式的。在個(gè)人的學(xué)習(xí)的情況下很難看到什么外部標(biāo)準(zhǔn)可以用