اتجاهات طالبات کلية التربية بجامعة الملک سعود نحو أساليب التقويم المستخدمة في برنامج الاعتماد الأکاديمي لتقويم أدائهن في ضوء التخصص والمستوى والمعدل الدراسي

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Assistant Professor of Educational Psychology - College of Education - King Saud University - Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

2 Associate Professor of Educational Psychology - College of Education - King Saud University - Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Human Studies - Al-Azhar University

3 Assistant Professor of Special Education - College of Education - King Saud University - Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Abstract

 
This study aims to reveal the methods of evaluation used in evaluating the performance of girl students at college of Education at King Saud University. The study also aims to identify students' attitudes towards the evaluation methods used to evaluate their performance, as well as to detect whether there are differences between the attitudes of students towards evaluation methods used in accreditation systems depending on different specialization, academic level, and average of Academy rate. The study sample consisted of (522 girls students) from college of Education selected from all departments. The instrument of data collection was a questionnaire, which prepared by the authors. Results showed differences between the students of different departments at the college of Education on their attitudes toward the types and methods, procedures and stages of evaluation. In addition, the results showed positive attitude appered spcilicty at higher average cumlutive grade students. Furthemore, the results showed positive attitudes toward the various evalution methods that include use different types of tests, means and stages evaluation that cover all aspects of the learning process.
 
 
 
 

References

  1.  
    1. Amy,D.;Donna L. ;Sundre, S.; & Sara J.(2010).Exam  Matters: Using the Student Opinion Scale for About Student Performance, the journal of general education, Vol. 58(3), 212-230.
    2. Andrew ,T. ; Roach , A. & Beddow, A.(2010). Incorporating Student Input in Developing Alternate Assessments Based on Modified Academic Achievement Standards. Council for Exceptional Children, Vol. 77(1), 61-80.
    3. Aaron U.; Irina K. & David S. (2005). Authentic Learning: Balancing Bloom’s Cognitive and Affective Domains, Teaching of Psychology, Vol. 32(3), 154-160.
    4. Baeten, M., Struyven, K., &Dochy, F. (2008). Students’ assessment preferences and approaches to learning in new learning environments: A replica study. Paper to be presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, March 2008, New York.

 

  1. Beller, M.; &Gafni, N. (2000). Can item format (multiple choice vs. open-ended) account for gender differences in mathematics achievement? Sex Roles. A Journal of Research, 42, 1–21.
  2. Ben-Chaim, D.; & Zoller, U. (1997). Examination-type preferences of secondary school students and their teachers in the science disciplines. Instructional Science, 25(5), 347–367.
  3. Bennti, G.; & Sinai, Y. (2007). Gender differences in multiple-choice tests: The role of differential guessing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 26, 23–35.
  4. Birenbaum, M. (1997). Assessment preferences and their relationship to learning strategies and orientations.Higher Education, 33, 71–84.
  5. Birenbaum, M. (2000). New insights into learning, teaching and the implications for assessment. Keynote address at the 2000 conference of the EARLI SIG on assessment and evaluation, September 13, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
  6. Birenbaum, M.; & Feldman, R. A. (1998). Relationships between learning patterns and attitudes towards twoassessment formats. Educational Research, 40(1), 90–97.
  7. Bolt, S. E.; & Roach, A. T. (2008). Including diverse learners in standards-based accountability: Promoting access to assessment and instruction. New York, NY: Guilfotd.
  8. Boud, D. (2009). Assessment and the promotion of academic values. Studies in Higher Education, 15(1), 101–111.
  9. Braxton, J. M.; & M. R. Mann.( 2004). Incidence of student response to faculty teaching norm violations. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, vol 99, pp: 35–40.
  10. Broekkamp, H., van Hout-Wolters, B., van den Bergh, H., &Rijlaarsdam, G. (2004). ‘Teachers’task demands, students’ test expectation, and actual test content. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 205–220.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics