- Author:
Zuzanna Sury
- E-mail:
zuzanna.sury@uj.edu.pl
- Institution:
Jagiellonian University, Krakow
- ORCID:
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0986-9370
- Author:
Barbara Ostafińska-Molik
- E-mail:
b.ostafinska-molik@uj.edu.pl
- Institution:
Jagiellonian University, Krakow
- ORCID:
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5093-3069
- Author:
Małgorzata Steć
- E-mail:
malgorzata1.stec@uj.edu.pl
- Institution:
Jagiellonian University, Krakow
- ORCID:
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1841-9542
- Year of publication:
2023
- Source:
Show
- Pages:
169-181
- DOI Address:
https://doi.org/10.15804/tner.23.74.4.12
- PDF:
tner/202304/tner7412.pdf
The main purpose of this paper is to present the preliminary findings of the research focused on the relationship between teachers’ identity processing styles and their attitudes towards external and internal evaluation, as well as teachers’ self-evaluation. This goal allowed for formulating the following research questions: (1) What are teachers’ attitudes toward the three types of evaluation? (2) What are their identity processing styles? and (3) What relationships between the above variables exist? The average was highest on the informational style scale and lowest on the diffuse-avoidant style scale. The study demonstrated a clear differentiation of teachers’ attitudes: from a negative attitude towards external evaluation to a positive one towards self-evaluation. Although the study did not find statistically significant relationships, it contributed to some conclusions on how to study teachers’ attitudes towards evaluation in the future. The research is a step towards finding the factors that positively and negatively influence teachers’ perceptions of evaluation research in their work.
- Author:
Alena Seberová
- E-mail:
alena.seberova@osu.cz
- Institution:
University of Ostrava, Czech Republic,
- Year of publication:
2005
- Source:
Show
- Pages:
51-67
- DOI Address:
https://doi.org/10.15804/tner.05.5.1.05
- PDF:
tner/200501/tner505.pdf
The article is focused on the analysis of the essence, purpose and meaning (sense) of evaluation and self-evaluation processes in the school environment. It is an attempt to analyse the pedagogical evaluation as both a specific theoretical problem and a long-term, systematic process by means of which the school is able to reflect and evaluate its work quality in a critical way, to initiate changes and thus to improve and upgrade its quality. The above idea is based on an assumption that the development of the good quality school depends on its concept as an open, co-operative and learning institution focused on educational, cultural and public awareness objectives; and the systematic reflecting, checking and evaluating of its objectives, progress and results form an integral part of its (internal) culture.
- Author:
Bartłomiej Walczak
- E-mail:
b.walczak@uw.edu.pl
- Institution:
Uniwersytet Warszawski
- ORCID:
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0346-712X
- Year of publication:
2024
- Source:
Show
- Pages:
26-41
- DOI Address:
https://doi.org/10.15804/kie.2024.01.02
- PDF:
kie/143/kie14302.pdf
Cultural anthropology and educational evaluation
The paper describes the connections between cultural anthropology and educational evaluation. It starts from the history of anthropologically oriented educational evaluation, when a qualitative-oriented approach emerged from a dominant, post-Tyleran tradition. It analyses connections between anthropological evaluation and anthropological paradigms, in particular the phenomenological one. The next section explores the notion of culture, a central category for ethnographic research, making anthropological evaluation distinctive from other research using a qualitative methodology. It presents the discussion about the notion of culture and the meaning of an inclusive approach to the research on school cultures. The third part describes distinctive features of anthropological evaluation, contrasted to the “traditional” anthropology. In the fourth part, conclusions from a postmodern critique of the linguistic turn are described: involvement in the power/knowledge relationships, an ontoepistemological status of collected data, fluidity and ambiguity of the evaluator’s roles. The next section covers probably the most obvious aspects of anthropological evaluation – the methodological implications. The last, sixth part presents challenges for doing evaluations in anthropological settings: keeping the integrity of the roles, reflecting on the biases, limitation in influence on change, “competition” with the postpositivist approach, and logistic difficulties.