Implementing the comprehensive quality evaluation of ordinary senior high school students is an important content of the new round of basic education curriculum reform. 20 14, 12, 16 The Ministry of Education issued the Opinions on Strengthening and Improving the Comprehensive Quality Evaluation of Senior High School Students, which clarified the details of the comprehensive quality evaluation. It can be seen that it is imperative to carry out comprehensive quality evaluation in senior high schools. This paper mainly talks about how to correctly understand comprehensive quality and its evaluation, and puts forward some suggestions on evaluation methods and safeguard measures.

First, comprehensive quality evaluation: what to evaluate?

"Comprehensive quality evaluation, what evaluation?" In order to solve this problem, we need to ask further: "What is comprehensive quality?"

For "comprehensive quality", the government has not given a clear and definite definition. The concept of "comprehensive quality evaluation" first appeared in "Guiding Opinions on Graduation Examination for Junior and Middle Schools in 2004 and Enrollment System Reform for Ordinary High Schools in the National Basic Education Curriculum Reform Experimental Zone". The document requires that the comprehensive quality of junior high school graduates should be evaluated, and the evaluation results should be used as an important basis to measure whether students meet the graduation standards and enroll students in senior high schools; At the same time, it is pointed out that the comprehensive quality evaluation should be based on the "basic development goal" put forward by the Ministry of Education in 2002, including moral quality, civic literacy, learning ability, communication and cooperation, sports and health, aesthetics and performance. In February, 2006, the Ministry of Education held a seminar on comprehensive quality evaluation of new curriculum experimental provinces (regions) in ordinary high schools in Beijing. Since then, "comprehensive quality evaluation" has frequently appeared in various documents and documents, and its evaluation content has been basically shaped into six aspects.

Later, the content of comprehensive quality evaluation changed. The "Implementation Opinions on Deepening the Reform of Examination Enrollment System" issued in September of 20 14 stipulates that the comprehensive quality evaluation "mainly includes students' ideological and moral character, academic level, physical and mental health, hobbies, social practice and so on. "Opinions on Strengthening and Improving the Comprehensive Quality Evaluation of Senior High School Students" issued at the end of 20 14 stipulates that the comprehensive quality evaluation includes five aspects: ideological and moral character, academic level, physical and mental health, artistic accomplishment and social practice.

To sum up, we can find that there are at least three different understandings of the basic content of "comprehensive quality evaluation".

First, understand "comprehensive quality" as "non-academic quality", including moral quality, civic quality, learning ability, communication and cooperation, sports health, aesthetics and performance. This is the practice in most provinces. Among them, a few provinces have made minor modifications to these six aspects: for example, Hubei has taken "innovation and discovery" as one of its contents, Qinghai has added "practice and innovation", and Zhejiang has transformed these six dimensions into five aspects: comprehensive review (including moral quality, civic literacy, emotional attitude and cooperative spirit), aesthetics and art, sports and health, labor and skills, and exploration and practice. In addition, the Implementation Opinions on Deepening the Reform of Examination Enrollment System and the Opinions on Strengthening and Improving the Comprehensive Quality Evaluation of Ordinary Senior High School Students issued on 20 14 respectively define the contents of comprehensive quality evaluation as five aspects: life morality, academic level, physical and mental health, hobbies, social practice and ideological morality, academic level, physical and mental health, artistic accomplishment and social practice.

The second is to understand "comprehensive quality" as the combination of "academic quality" and "non-academic quality". Beijing stipulates that the comprehensive quality evaluation of ordinary senior high schools consists of two parts: basic indicators (ideological and moral character, academic performance, communication and cooperation, sports and health, aesthetics and performance) and development indicators (personality development). For another example, the comprehensive quality evaluation of Hebei Province includes four parts: modular learning evaluation, academic level evaluation, comprehensive practice evaluation and basic quality development evaluation, among which the basic quality development evaluation includes moral quality, civic literacy, learning ability, communication and cooperation, innovation and discovery, sports and health, aesthetics and performance.

The third is to understand comprehensive quality as the integration of moral, intellectual, physical and aesthetic qualities. For example, the Comprehensive Quality Evaluation Scheme for Primary and Secondary School Students in Shanghai (Trial) stipulates that the primary indicators of comprehensive quality evaluation for primary and secondary school students include four aspects: morality, intelligence, physique and beauty. Among them, the secondary indicators of morality include ideological morality, social practice and moral education, the secondary indicators of intelligence include academic performance, practical ability, learning ability and academic performance, and the secondary indicators of physique. In addition, the "Implementation Opinions on Deepening the Reform of Examination Enrollment System" points out in another place that "comprehensive quality evaluation mainly reflects the all-round development of students' morality, intelligence, physique and aesthetics".

Logically speaking, "comprehensive quality" should be the integration of all aspects of students' quality, including academic quality (characterized by test scores) and non-academic quality. After investigating the comprehensive quality evaluation abroad, the researchers found that "it is basically not excluded that students' academic ability or academic performance is a part of comprehensive quality, but they all regard it as a very important content." Defining comprehensive quality as the quality beyond students' academic ability basically does not exist. " [1] If comprehensive quality is understood in this way, the college entrance examination is a part of comprehensive quality evaluation. Obviously, in reality, college entrance examination is not and will not be a part of comprehensive quality evaluation, and its role and importance are far greater than comprehensive quality evaluation. Based on the reality of China's college entrance examination and its great role in education, comprehensive quality should only be understood as those qualities that can't be detected by the college entrance examination, including "non-academic quality" and some "academic quality" that can't be detected by the college entrance examination.

Second, comprehensive quality evaluation: what is it?

The next question is, if the comprehensive quality refers to the unmeasurable quality in the college entrance examination, should these qualities be identified separately and then synthesized into a total score when evaluating the comprehensive quality? At present, the practice in most provinces is the same. However, this will not only fail to accurately measure the comprehensive quality, but also further lead to the alienation of education and increase the academic burden of students and the workload of teachers. In fact, this involves the concept of educational purpose.

The researchers believe that "the basic spirit of China's educational purpose lies in cultivating all-round development of morality, intelligence, physique and beauty, with innovative spirit, practical ability and independent personality." [2] However, for a long time, "independent personality" has been concealed in educational purposes. This may be one of the fundamental reasons why we can't cultivate world-class innovative talents for a long time. In today's democratic, open and pluralistic society, the cultivation of students' personality must be paid attention to and established in the examination and evaluation system. However, this can't be completed by the unified college entrance examination system, and comprehensive quality evaluation must shoulder the heavy responsibility of discovering and developing students' personality. For a long time, we have made a vulgar understanding of "all-round development" education, and think that all-round development means that students can get high-level development in all aspects. In fact, holistic education mainly refers to the comprehensive education of students, so that students can get in touch with the basic knowledge of various disciplines and find their own fields of interest. This is their lifelong ambition of in-depth study. In other words, although holistic education requires holistic education, it does not require (and certainly does not oppose) students to reach a high level of development in all aspects, but hopes that students can get in touch with holistic education and then discover and develop their own personality. All-round development is the premise and foundation of personality development, but education must not stop at "all-round development", but should help students realize personality development on the basis of all-round development. Therefore, some researchers believe that quality education is an education that pursues the uniqueness and integrity of human personality development. Based on this understanding, researchers believe that, in essence, "comprehensive quality evaluation is an evaluation of personality development". [3]

Comprehensive quality evaluation To sum up, comprehensive quality evaluation is to evaluate the unmeasurable quality in the college entrance examination, and its purpose is to find out students' personality strengths except test scores. Six aspects, such as moral quality, civic literacy, learning ability, communication and cooperation, sports and health, aesthetics and performance, or five aspects, such as ideological and moral character, academic level, physical and mental health, artistic literacy and social practice, are only examples of evaluation content, not a complete evaluation system, or an important content of comprehensive quality evaluation, which does not cover all the contents. On this basis, the evaluation content can be repaired. As long as students have excellent qualities that can't be measured by the college entrance examination, they are all the objects of comprehensive quality evaluation, which can be academic quality or non-academic quality. For example, if a student's knowledge of ancient Chinese is profound, because a limited number of college entrance examination questions can't reflect his knowledge of ancient Chinese, then the academic quality of this student's knowledge of ancient Chinese is the content of comprehensive quality evaluation. Similarly, suppose another student likes biology very much. He taught himself many college biology courses in high school and decided to be a biologist in the future. However, the biology college entrance examination based on the curriculum standard of high school can not evaluate the academic quality of this student in biology, so it should also be the object of comprehensive quality evaluation.

Third, comprehensive quality evaluation: how to evaluate?

How to evaluate the comprehensive quality of senior high school students is the most critical issue. At present, the comprehensive quality evaluation basically adopts the method of "gradually refining and then synthesizing". According to this way of thinking, no matter how many changes we make in details, the problems in the evaluation are still unresolved. The relationship of the problem lies not in mending the details, but in changing the thinking mode of comprehensive quality evaluation.

First of all, the comprehensive quality evaluation results can only be presented in the form of "identification of advantageous regions". As mentioned above, almost all provinces and cities adopt the method of "gradual refinement and re-synthesis". This practice is comprehensive and reasonable, with strong operability and clear logic, but it is only for the convenience of leadership and management, not from the reality of students' quality development.

The reason why comprehensive quality can't be evaluated by college entrance examination is that it is difficult to quantify itself, so it is unreasonable to give a score or grade. It is even more absurd to score or grade each indicator and then synthesize it. The premise of the merger is that the quality after the merger is homogeneous and replaceable, while the quality of the six aspects (or other different dimensions) mentioned above is not homogeneous, let alone mutually replaceable. For example, a student's "ideological and moral" has a problem, and we can't make up for it with "strong learning ability".

In addition, the result of a reluctant merger is to cover up some good (or bad) qualities. If a student is awarded the title of "moral model" for saving lives, he can get 100 (or "excellent") in the dimension of "moral quality", but because the other five dimensions are not outstanding, he can only get 60 points (or "qualified"). In the end, its comprehensive quality is only 66.7 points ("qualified" level). It is obviously unreasonable that a student who is rated as a "moral model" is qualified only in comprehensive quality. This is not because of its low comprehensive quality, but because our comprehensive quality evaluation adopts a perfect thinking mode.

So how to evaluate the comprehensive quality? According to the idea that "comprehensive quality evaluation is the evaluation of personality development", we think that comprehensive quality evaluation should be carried out from many aspects, so as to find students' superior quality (or personality specialty) in any possible aspect, because if we only evaluate students from a limited number of aspects, assuming that a certain development advantage of students is not within the evaluation scope, then this advantage will not be found, and then it will be ignored or suppressed. Therefore, when presenting the comprehensive quality evaluation results, the evaluation results of multiple dimensions should not be integrated into a total result; On the contrary, it should only present the best one or two aspects of students' development and explain their development degree. Other aspects, if there is no problem, can not mention; If there is a problem, you should point it out realistically. This is the so-called "dominant region identification". The same should be true when evaluating the subordinate indicators of various dimensions of comprehensive quality. If there are three indicators in a certain dimension, and a student performs particularly well in one indicator and gets "excellent", but has no bad performance in other indicators, then the student should get "excellent" in that dimension. In other words, if everyone has a certain quality, and the difference is not big, then it can be ignored in the comprehensive quality evaluation, because it is not only meaningless, but also increases the workload and difficulty of evaluation.

Secondly, the method of daily observation is suitable for comprehensive quality evaluation. Comprehensive quality can't be detected by examination or on-site performance, but is formed through long-term accumulation, mostly in daily life, so it can only be judged by daily observation. When evaluating students' comprehensive quality, we should pay attention to two behaviors: consistent behavior and key behavior. Both of these behaviors can fully prove the existence of a certain quality. "Consistent behavior" refers to a person's consistent behavior in daily life. If a student takes care of his sick grandmother all the year round, then we have every reason to show that this student has the quality of "filial piety". "Key behavior" is "the behavior that students take the initiative to make in a specific situation and can best represent a certain quality". [4] If a student sees a child fall into the cold river on his way to school, he jumps into the river to save him, which fully shows that the student has the quality of "sacrificing himself to save others". For this special behavior, we can't expect it to be consistent, because he won't often encounter such a situation as "children falling into the water".

Third, for each evaluation content, only qualitative evaluation can be used. Because the comprehensive quality is difficult to measure, it is not feasible to use the scoring system when measuring the quality corresponding to each dimension or index, because we can't accurately judge how much a student with 85 points in "moral quality" is better than another student with only 80 points. In addition, due to the fuzziness of comprehensive quality, its evaluation has more room for manoeuvre. If the scoring system is adopted in the comprehensive quality evaluation, stakeholders (such as students, parents, even class teachers and teachers) will "divide and rule", which will lead to more corruption and fairness problems. Although the grading method can avoid this problem, it usually masks some qualities of students. For example, a student got an "A" in the dimension of "moral quality". We don't know whether he got an "A" because he gave up himself for others, because he didn't know how to collect money, because he was filial to his parents, or because of other behaviors. As a result, it is impossible for colleges and universities to judge whether students have certain qualities according to the results of comprehensive quality evaluation when enrolling students or employing units. Therefore, comprehensive quality evaluation can only adopt the way of "comment evaluation" to describe students' quality and performance realistically. Fourth, comprehensive quality evaluation: how to ensure?

Whether the comprehensive quality evaluation of ordinary senior high schools can be really implemented depends not only on how well the evaluation itself is done, but also on a good external guarantee mechanism.

First, comprehensive quality evaluation must be included in the college entrance examination system. Scholars have different opinions on whether comprehensive quality evaluation should be included in the college entrance examination system and play a substantive role in the process of college enrollment. Some researchers believe that if it is included in the college entrance examination, it will increase the burden on students, lead to more unfair education and increase educational corruption. However, the college entrance examination occupies an important position in China's education system, which "leads" the development of the whole basic education. The logic of reality is that the whole basic education is centered on the college entrance examination: the subjects to be tested in the college entrance examination should be carefully taught; Subjects that are not tested in the college entrance examination are not taught or processed; Subjects that account for a large proportion in the college entrance examination will be mainly taught; A small percentage of subjects are generally taught. Based on this, if the comprehensive quality evaluation is not included in the college entrance examination system, it will not get real attention and will be blurred. However, judging from the comprehensive quality evaluation scheme and college entrance examination scheme issued by various provinces, the comprehensive quality evaluation has not achieved a "hard link" with the college entrance examination. Incorporating comprehensive quality evaluation into the college entrance examination system may indeed lead to more corruption under the existing conditions, but it should be understood that this is not a problem of comprehensive quality evaluation itself, but a problem of management system. Therefore, to truly implement comprehensive quality evaluation, we must reform the management system.

Second, we should establish a credit system for the whole society. The fundamental reason why people have all kinds of worries and concerns about comprehensive quality evaluation lies in the reliability of comprehensive quality evaluation, which in turn stems from the integrity system of the whole society. If the comprehensive quality evaluation loses its reliability, it will naturally be difficult for the evaluation results to play a substantial role in the college entrance examination or be used by employers, and the evaluation itself will also play an "anti-education" role for students. Therefore, in the process of comprehensive quality evaluation, a complete social credit system must be established. First of all, if students and their parents (or other guardians) are found to have cheated in the process of comprehensive quality evaluation, they should be prohibited from taking the college entrance examination again within three years (or other suitable years). Secondly, if teachers, educational administrators or other public officials are found to be fraudulent, they should be suspended from public office. Third, if the corresponding leaders commit fraud or participate in fraud, they should be dismissed from all public offices. Only when the consequences of fraud are clearly defined and strictly implemented can the integrity system needed for comprehensive quality evaluation be formed.

The key problem here is that students who cheat in comprehensive quality evaluation, whether they are themselves or their guardians, must be punished (such as prohibiting them from taking the college entrance examination within three years); If this kind of behavior is tolerated, it will not be conducive to the development of students and the implementation of comprehensive quality evaluation. The reasons are as follows: First, if students cheat in the process of comprehensive quality evaluation without being dealt with, comprehensive quality evaluation will not only fail to educate the student and other students, but also play an anti-education role. Second, if a student is not severely punished for cheating in the comprehensive quality evaluation, more people will cheat in the comprehensive quality evaluation, which will eventually make the comprehensive quality evaluation full of loopholes and useless. Third, honesty itself is a part of students' comprehensive quality. If students violate the principle of good faith in the process of comprehensive quality evaluation and do not give punishment, it means that the comprehensive quality evaluation violates the principles formulated by themselves. Fourth, accepting punishment for violating the rules of good faith is the predecessor of legal consciousness, which is conducive to the construction of a legal society and the establishment of a credit system in the whole society. Punishing students who are dishonest in the process of comprehensive quality evaluation may be a good breakthrough in establishing the whole social credit system.

Third, give full play to the role of "acquaintances" in comprehensive quality evaluation. The so-called "acquaintance" refers to people who are very familiar with the evaluated object. Because they are "acquaintances", they are most familiar with the students being evaluated, and their evaluation is also the most true. It is for this reason that "peer review" is very popular abroad. If the credit system and punishment mechanism are perfect, acquaintances dare not cheat for some people easily in the evaluation process. At the same time, in order to prevent the "acquaintance effect" to the greatest extent (that is, the evaluator seeks illegitimate interests for his acquaintances in the evaluation process), the evaluation process must be a process of public debate and filed in a corresponding way (such as audio or video recording). In the process of comprehensive quality evaluation of ordinary senior high schools, "acquaintances" should include students themselves, classmates, parents, class teachers and classroom teachers. Therefore, the comprehensive quality evaluation must establish an evaluation committee composed of students, class teachers, teachers and parents. In the specific evaluation, students should first state their advantages in one or two aspects and provide evidence; Then the evaluation Committee will make an evaluation; After publicity and appeal; Finally, the evaluation results are released. This evaluation not only has strong operability, but also avoids the problem that the evaluation results of different evaluation subjects are difficult to synthesize.

All the guarantee mechanisms need the top-level design of the competent authorities and the guarantee of political power, rather than relying only on certain schools and certain regions to carry out pilot projects, because these guarantee mechanisms involve the problems of the whole society, not just the problems existing in some schools and certain regions.