Docimology

The docimology is the science of the evaluation in Pédagogie.

History

The first to have worked on the evaluation is Henri Piéron. It in particular was interested in the variation of the note of the same copy according to the corrector.

Influence of the appraiser

The appraiser has his prejudices, his frame of mind… The result of the evaluation thus depends on the appraiser. In particular:

if a pupil is introduced like brilliance, its copy will be better noted than if it is presented like poor;
there is a contrasting effect: an average copy will appear better after bad copies than after brilliant copies.

One can explain this phenomenon by the selectivity of the appraiser: according to what it knows of the pupil, it will rather take into account the good sides of the copy or on the contrary its defects. That poses in particular the problem of the evaluation continues, and in a general way of the evaluation by the trainer himself:

on a side, the trainer knows the pupil and thus is able to make the share, for example, between a acccidentelle against-performance and a real gap, or to take into account certain competences of the pupil to mitigate his opinion;
on another side, the evaluation has a skew due to the a priori of the appraiser.

On behalf of the evaluated person, the fact of knowing the appraiser can be positive (less trac) or negative (if he thinks that the trainer goes the “sacquer”).

Influence statement

The manner of putting the question - in the broad sense, to present the problem being used for the evaluation - will influence the answer. This was studied in cognitive Psychologie. Elizabeth Loftus undertook the following experiment: it shows film of an accident to several people, and asks the speed to which the shock occurred and if there were breakings of pane. If it uses the word “crashed to pieces” (smashed) , speed is considered faster than if it uses the word “struck” (hit) in states question. And whereas the film does not show broken glass, of many people affirm that they saw of it whether it uses the “crashed to pieces” word.

It will be also noted that the statement can induce in error:

it can comprise errors (what must be of course avoided): how then to evaluate the answer to an erroneous question? Let us note that this situation can also be desired, for example to test the reactivity of the candidate, his capacity to take retreat, to doubt the authority;
the statement can be unsuited to the formation: of a too simple level or on the contrary too high, or presenting a situation that learning it cannot manage because knowledge, know-how or knowledge-being necessary do not form part of the prérequis to the examination.

Basic questions about the evaluation

When an evaluation is conceived, it is advisable to raise six questions:

why evaluate? See Ci afterwards;
for which to evaluate? For learning, the silent partner of the formation, the future employer,…
how to evaluate?
Which to evaluate? Learning, the trainer, formation,…
what to evaluate?
When to evaluate?

Goals of the evaluation

It is initially advisable to raise the question of the why of the evaluation.

The evaluation is initially a means of following progress: a Formation has objectives to reach, in term of transmission of knowledge (knowledge), know-how (practical), knowledge-being (attitudes), the evaluation thus makes it possible to locate learning them with respect to these objectives. That makes it possible to justify learning them, to make them become aware that they need to provide an effort, to show them that they improved, but that also makes it possible to the trainer to be called in question, to adapt the formation (form and contents).

The evaluation is then a means of certifying that the objectives were indeed achieved. That in general takes the shape of a diploma, which can be recognized by other organizations and thus give the access to an employment, a function, with a higher education level.

The evaluation is thus educational tools (formative evaluation), which contributes to the progress of learning, and a tool for selection (attesting evaluation).

What does one evaluate?

The complexity of the evaluation is of knowing what one evaluates exactly . Thus, in an examination, one does not evaluate only knowledge, but also the management of the nervous tension (Stress) , the strategy (dead ends, race at the points), ingeniousness (to cheat without being made take), the chance… Contrary, the evaluation continues makes it possible to follow the progress of knowledge from day to day, but is not very favourable with the long-term synthesis and memory (the evaluated part is restricted and recent).

In a Multiple-choice questionnaire, one will evaluate a capacity with sorting, remembering with a support. With a composition (drafting, essay), one will evaluate knowledge but also the capacity of analysis, of synthesis, the written expression. In an oral examination, one will evaluate moreover the oral expression. In a roleplay, one will be able to evaluate the management of the nervous tension, the reactivity, the capacity of adaptation.

In a collective evaluation (collective Maintenance, evaluation by project), one will evaluate in particular the knowledge-being, the capacity to be worked in team.

The difficulty of the problem arising is also not alleviating; she simply will not lower or to make assemble the notes overall, she also will change what is evaluated. Let us take two opposite cases:

one poses only problems already dealt with during the formation: one evaluates the capacity of work (“cramming”), of memorizing, of restitution, but one does not determine if the person is able to use what she learned in a new context;
one poses a problem which seen forever: one the management of the surprise, of the stress, the capacity to take is retreat evaluates… but what one wants to evaluate, and learning it was prepared on this point?

When an evaluation is conceived, it is thus paramount to know which are the objectives of the formation, in order to be able to determine which will be evaluated; and it is necessary to raise the question of the adequacy between the mode of evaluation and the objectives of the formation.

Risks of an unsuited evaluation

An unsuited evaluation is an evaluation which does not answer the put question, i.e. which does not evaluate, or badly, the pupils with respect to the objectives of the formation.

That can initially lead to a problem of selection: one risks to select a candidate not corresponding to the profile (bad selectivity) and to eliminate on the contrary an interesting candidate (bad sensitivity).

That can also be a factor of demotivation for learning.

An evaluation can also be unsuited because it is inequitable, for example because various correctors allot the notes in a different way. In addition to the fact of establishing a more precise scale, one can set up a system of Péréquation of the notes.

Evaluation of knowledge and professional capacity

The same principles regulate usually the evaluation of knowledge to both ends of the formation, in higher education and the basic trainings, being satisfied to check the possession of a luggage , at best, of a Savoir-faire. However, the exercise of a Profession is very far from being limited to the possession of a whole of knowledge, or even of authentic a To know. If this shift does not carry to major consequence in the technical dies, it is not the same in all the branches where the human factor is if not in the foreground, at least remains a dimension impossible to circumvent; can one be Médecin, without some psychological fiber or Social worker without Empathie?

Admittedly, one can suppose that in the beginning the choice of orientation was made by integrating this dimension and that the raises has the potential necessary (that no formation besides will be able to replace). One can also hope that the formation will incluera approaches other than the acquisition of a technical knowledge, and than finally, an evaluation will make it possible to check the real capacities of the future professional in situation.

In all the cases where these calculations are not checked, the validation of a formation according to a representation of the trade amputated by its human dimension takes the risk to recognize like suited professionally people missing of qualities necessary for a harmonious exercise of their trade. Individually, there is in these cases, a progressive loss of Motivation and finally a human waste; socially, the Division of the labor loses a good part of its interest. So-and-so who would have being Architecte will have to be satisfied to dream some while being Juge as it can; So-and-so who would have being Chimiste will have to make her career in the Obstétrique whereas the heart is not there.

Though the evaluation would not have therefore being used to check the affinity of the pupil with his future trade, since this is spring of quite former checks, it should allow the taking into account of human capacities to the full extent and in any case quite different from the pure acquisition of knowledge and their fictitious application. In the ideal, it would make it possible to recognize Aptitude S more than of the To know S and would thus make it possible to really locate the individuals compared to the social mission which they will have to assume of the years during; the recognition of more or less crippling insufficiencies allows then, for the most justified, of the additional training or the choices more appropriate to their effective profile and especially a reorientation for most intrinsically unsuited to the trade.

Conversely, the absence of taking into account of talents not immediately related to the Connaissance S underestimates the professional value if these talents are in fact determining in the daily newspaper of the trade. Of course, thereafter, the activity gives to the individual the opportunity to express his potential and does not lead to demoralization or the inadequacy tested by that which is condemned to work cantilever of its vocation, but the risks of individual and collective waste remain: “But which will say frustrations, bitternesses sterilizing at all those which, provided with qualities necessary, will never have the possibility of making them be used for the community property, since they could not prove, in a test of mathematics, that they had the direction of the human relations, in a test of checking of knowledge, that they had the spirit of invention! ”

Types of evaluation

evaluation authenticates
evaluation continues
formative evaluation
evaluation by project
sommative evaluation

attesting evaluation
Examen

See too

docimology|docimology

Metrology
Statute of the error
Maintenance of recruiting

Random links: