The so-called "authenticity evaluation" is a qualitative evaluation used to correct the shortcomings of the standard test and to measure the "credibility", "transferability" and "sustainability" evaluation of "2 1 century academic ability".
To form "core literacy", it is necessary to change the evaluation method-from "measurement evaluation view" to "problem solving view". Recently, focusing on children's "performance" and fully capturing the authenticity evaluation of academic ability formation has attracted attention.
From 1970s to 1980s, the United States advocated strict educational accountability and used standard tests to measure students' basic knowledge and skills. As a reversal of this trend, since 1980s, American educational circles have begun to explore the way of "authenticity evaluation". Children's learning ability is only tested once when they leave the learning site, and it can only be a superficial diagnosis. According to the actual performance of works, such as composition, the authenticity evaluation of capturing learners' "original" academic ability has begun to attract attention. The disadvantages of mapping can be summarized as follows: first, mapping only captures the questions with predetermined answers, and cannot comprehensively measure academic ability including thinking, creativity and expression ability. Secondly, the standard test only seeks the memory and reproduction of fragmented knowledge, which is far from the modern learning concept and cannot learn the relationship between known things and unknown things through meaningful and purposeful situations. Thirdly, under the background of educational accountability system, the more standard tests there are, the easier it is for teaching to tilt towards testing. However, if the project and experimental learning, collaborative learning and experiential problem-solving activities are weakened, the course will be dwarfed. Fourthly, in the standard test measurement, taking the limited evaluation as the learning result to predict the achievements of other subjects and other conditions can only be reduced to a tool with low diagnostic accuracy, and it is difficult to capture why there are such achievements. In this way, the problem of diagnostic ability with the help of standard tests is highlighted. As an alternative, the authenticity evaluation of children's academic ability is captured according to their homework performance.
The so-called "authenticity evaluation" is completely different from the standard test that simply measures the amount of knowledge. It is a qualitative evaluation, which is used to correct the shortcomings of the standard test and measure the academic ability of "trustworthy", "transferable" and "sustainable" 2 1 century. According to G.P. Wiggins, this is an ideal evaluation state. Only by directly discussing students' performance when facing valuable topics can the evaluation be true. This kind of expressive topic is very different from the standard test of solving problems with standard answers set in advance. Expressive topic is a complex content that can best reflect the actual results of children's learning. It can be roughly divided into notes and achievements. The former, such as research notes, experimental reports, narratives, etc. And the latter, such as reading aloud, group discussion, performance, sports competition, etc. Adults are bound to produce high-quality works and performances when facing practical problems in the real world. "Performance" can only reflect the authenticity if it is closely related to the real society in specific behavior situations. For example, writing a letter to parents, or writing an article for readers, instead of spelling and composition, can make a more realistic evaluation. In other words, we don't test the knowledge about scientific experiments, but take the scientific experiments themselves as the evaluation objects. Give two interview questions of Oxford University: 1. Why does a person have two holes in his nose and only one hole in his mouth? 2. In Britain, 1 person died of cancer, but in the Philippines, it was 1 person. What is the reason for the difference? Here, the professor is not asking the standard answer, but judging how students think, how to express themselves, whether they are creative and curious, etc.
Among the "authenticity evaluation", the most common one is "portfolio evaluation". The so-called "portfolio evaluation" refers to the collection of materials and information that can enter the portfolio in order to promote the formation of children's academic ability. Therefore, the "portfolio" is the information and data of each child's learning process and its achievements, which has been accumulated purposefully for a long time. It is not a simple folder of children's works, but can be used as the information of children's learning footprints, which can be collected in time series with a certain purpose and plan. This kind of "combination evaluation" is not a "collective basic evaluation" that examines the relative position within the collective, but a "target basic evaluation" that captures the reality of achieving the goal. In other words, according to the reality of various fields in the real society, set goals to judge the realization of children's learning.
In portfolio evaluation, improving performance is very important. It is generally open to achieve the goal, and the stakeholders involved in the formation of children's academic ability should provide corresponding help and support for children. In this way, a major feature of "portfolio evaluation" is to use goal-based evaluation to clarify the realization of goals, which can enable children to achieve goals with high quality and independently, thus cultivating their learning ability and self-evaluation ability. In the production of "portfolio evaluation", all kinds of evaluation learning and materials produced in the learning process and results are accumulated consciously and planned, and the overall appearance of children's real academic ability is grasped according to multi-angle learning.