МЕТОД EVIDENCECENTERED DESIGN Независимая оценка компетенций в цифровом мире
https://doi.org/10.22394/2078-838x-2020-3-52-59
Abstract
В статье рассмотрены основные понятия, этапы и примеры использования метода доказательной аргументации Evidence-Centered Design (далее — ECD) для разработки инструментов оценки компетенций. Актуальность применения метода ECD обусловлена потребностью в развитии у граждан компетенций цифровой экономики и необходимостью наличия у них минимального уровня цифровой грамотности. Компетенции цифровой экономики — сложносоставные и внепредметные. Требуются специальные методы для их оценки. По опыту зарубежных стран, признанным методом оценки таких компетенций является Evidence-Centered Design, или ECD. В статье рассмотрен опыт зарубежных и российских специалистов в применении метода ECD для оценки различных компетенций, отдельно выделены примеры использования метода в рамках игровой оценки (оценки компетенций и усвоения знаний посредством компьютерных игр).
About the Authors
Наталья Родина
«Университет Национальной технологической инициативы 2035»
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Алина Постовалова
«Университет Национальной технологической инициативы 2035»
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Александр Долматов
«Университет Национальной технологической инициативы 2035»
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. Avdeeva, S. M., Baryshnikova, M. Yu., Kovalenko, S. K., et al. (2009). About
2. the experience of implementing the ICT competence assessment model.
3. Informatization of Education and Science, 2, 62–71. (In Russian).
4. Avdeeva, S. M., Rudnev, M. G., Vasin, G. M., et al. (2017). Assessing Information
5. and Communication Technology Competence of Students: Approaches,
6. Tools, Validity and Reliability of Results. Educational Studies Moscow, 4,
7. –132. Retrieved from https://vo.hse.ru/data/2017/12/20/1159979685/
8. Avdeeva.pdf. (In Russian).
9. Behrens, J. T., Mislevy, R. J., Di Cerbo, K. E., et al. (2010). An evidence centered
10. design for learning and assessment in the digital world. (CRESST Report
11. . Los Angeles, CA: University of California, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST). Retrieved
12. from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED520431.pdf.
13. Conrad, Sh., Clarke-Midura, J., & Klopfer, E. (2014). A Framework for Structuring
14. Learning Assessment in a Massively Multiplayer Online Educational Game:
15. Experiment Centered Design. International Journal of Game-Based Learning. DOI: 10.4018/IJGBL.2014010103. Retrieved from
16. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261960598_A_Framework_for_
17. Structuring_Learning_Assessment_in_a_Massively_Multiplayer_Online_Educational_Game_Experiment_Centered_Design.
18. Dichev, C., & Dicheva, D. (2017). Gamifying education: what is known, what is
19. believed and what remains uncertain: a critical review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, (14)9. DOI: 10.1186/
20. s41239-017-0042-5.
21. Efremova, N. F. (2018). Design of evaluation tools based on the model of
22. evidence-based argumentation. Pedagogicheskie izmereniya, 3. Retrieved
23. from https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/proektirovanie-otsenochnyh-sredstv-po-modeli-dokazatelnoy-argumentatsii/viewer. (In Russian).
24. Efremova, N. F. (2019). Conceptual Model of Evaluation of Competence of
25. Students. Modern high-tech Technologies, 7, 169–174. Retrieved from
26. www.top-technologies.ru/ru/article/view?id=37607. (In Russian).
27. Efremova, N. F. (2019). Modeling of an objective assessment of students‘
28. achievements. Obrazovatelnye tekhnologii, 3. Retrieved from
29. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/modelirovanie-obektivnoy-otsenki-dostizheniy-studentov/viewer. (In Russian).
30. Groff, J., Clarke-Midura, J., Owen, V. E., et al. (2015). Better Learning in
31. Games. A Balanced Design Lens for a New Generation of Learning Games.
32. Learning Games Network, MIT Education Arcade. Retrieved from
33. https://education.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/BalancedDesignGuide2015.pdf.
34. Khlopotov, M. V. (2014). Bayesian network in student model engineering for
35. competence level evaluation. Naukovedenie, 5(24). Retrieved from
36. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/primenenie-bayesovskoy-seti-pri-postroenii-modeley-dlya-otsenki-urovnya-sformirovannosti-kompetentsiy/viewer.
37. (In Russian).
38. Khudenko, L. A., & Avdeeva, S. M. (2014). Research of information and communication competence of 9th grade students of the Republic of Belarus:
39. purpose and main results. Bulletin of Education, 1, 3–10. Retrieved from
40. https://www.ntf.ru/sites/default/files/%D0%A0%D0%91_%D1%81%D1%82%
41. D0%B0%D1%82%D1%8C%D1%8F_%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%BA.pdf.
42. (In Russian).
43. Mislevy, R. J., Almond R. G., & Lukas, J. F. (2003). A brief introduction to
44. evidence-centered design: Research Report. Princeton, N.J.: Educational
45. Testing Service. Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/
46. epdf/10.1002/j.2333-8504.2003.tb01908.x.
47. Shute, V. J., Masduki, I., & Donmez, O. (2010). Conceptual Framework for Modeling, Assessing and Supporting Competencies within Game Environments.
48. Tech., Inst., Cognition and Learning, 8, 137–161.
49. Uglanova, I. L., Brun, I. V., & Vasin, G. M. (2018). Evidence-Centered Design
50. method for measuring complex psychological constructs. Journal of
51. Modern Foreign Psychology, 7(3), 18–27. DOI: 10.17759/jmfp.2018070302.
52. (In Russian).
53. Uglanova, I. L., Оrel, Е. А., & Brun, I. V. (2020). Measuring creativity and critical
54. thinking in Primary School. Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal, 41(6), 96–107.
55. DOI:10.31857/S020595920011124-2. (In Russian).
56. University of the State of New York, State Education Department. (2019).
57. Educator Guide to the Regents Examination Global History and Geography
58. II Grade 10. Retrieved from www.p12.nysed.gov/assessment/ss/hs/
59. framework/ghg2/educator-guide-ghg2-19.pdf.
60. Zieky, M. J. (2014). An introduction to the use of evidence-centered design in
61. test development. Psicología Educativa, 20, 79–87. Retrieved from https://
62. journals.copmadrid.org/psed/art/j.pse.2014.11.003.
Review
For citations:
, , . Educational Policy. 2021;(3):52-59. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22394/2078-838x-2020-3-52-59
Views:
55
JATS XML
Email this article 