| Nama Pengarang | : | Gerald E. Sroufe, Shepard, Lorrie A., Cynthia l. Patrick, Husen, Torsten, Albert Tuijnman, Michael W. Kirst |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 26-27 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | - |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 10-18 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | There is a distinction to be made that transcends the one between the quantitative and qualitative researh paradigs. It is a distinction between that kind of research that suits best the study of causal relations among selected variables and the study of complex learning environments undergoing change. Two studies illustrating the differences lead to the formulation of two approaches-the analytic and the systemic-which differ from each other in terms of the epistemological assumptions that underlie them. These differences are not accounted for by other contrasts such as ``basic-applied`` or ``quantitative-qualitative.`` The analytic approach mainly assumes that discrete elements of complex educational phenomena can be isolated for study, leaving all else unchanged. The systemic approach mainly assumes that elements are interdependent, inseparable, and even define each other in a transactional manner so that a change in one changes everything else and thus requires the study of patterns, not of single variables. It is, however, further argued that the validity of each approach is limited by the combination of assumptions made, phenomena chosen for study, questions asked, and research methodologies employed. Thus, the two approaches, by epistemological necessity, have to be employed complementarily. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 19-22 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | - |
| Nama Pengarang | : | House, Ernest R., National Academy of Education, Gavriel Salomon |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 2-9 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | Disputes in educational research over the past few decades have resulted in part from an inadequate conception of the nature of science itself. Developments in the philosophy of science have led toa new understanding-scientific realism-that has promise of resolving many longstanding dilemmas. At the core of the ``standdard view`` of science is the incorrect Humean notion of causation, which has had devastating effects on research in the social sciences. An adequate notion of causation may provide a framework for research that is at once scientific, that incorporates the perceptions and intentions of participants, and that advances critical vakues such as social justice. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 2-7 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | In the current climate of dissatisfaction with public education, the standardized achievement test score has been operational definition for educational achievement, and raising test scores has been equated with educational improvement. The pressure to raise test scores has resulted in practices which pollute the inferences we make from these scores. We examine two major sources of test score pollution: (a) how public school personnel prepare students to take the standardized test and (b) nonstandard practices and conditions under which tests are administered. We also examine the apparent causes of this pollution and its effects on testing practices in American Education. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 8-11 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | Evidence from an extensive qualitative study of the role of external testing in elementary schools led to propositions about the effects of such tests on teachers. Data from interviews revealed that teachers experience negative emotions as a result of the publication of test scores and determine to do what is necesary to avoid low scores. Teachers believe that scores are used againts them, despite the perceived ivalidity of the tests themselves. From classroom observations it was concluded that testing programs substantially reduce the time available for instruction, narrow curricular offerings and modes of instruction, and potentially reduce the capacities of teachers to teach content and to use methods and materials that are incompatible with standardized testing formats. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 27-29 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | - |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 21-26 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | - |
| Nama Pengarang | : | Scott G. Paris et al, House, Ernest R., Ellen Condliffe Lagemann, Patricia Albjerg Graham, Mary Lee Smith, Thomas M. Haladyna, Susan Bobbit Nolen, Nancy S. Haas |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 12-20 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | Throughout the 1980s there was a proliferation of achievement testing in America to promote and assure the effectiveness of educational reforms. However, both traditional innovative forms of assessment failed to consider the cumulative impact of repeated testing on students` attitudes and motivation. Our surveys of students in Grades 2-11 revealed that by adolescence many students become suspicious and cynical about tests. A large number of students, especially low achievers, become anxious about tests, cheat, try half-heartedly, or use poor test-taking strategies. These reactions may preserve students` feeling of competence when they receive low test scores, but they undermine the validity of the test scores and discourage genuine learning. A development perspective on testing may prevent students` counterproductive reactions and may help to guide reforms in educational assessment. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 2-8 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | This analysis attempts to look again at the major concepts of the ``new philosophy of science`` in terms of their relevance for educational research. The argument is made that such concepts as underdetermination and incommensurability have limited aplicability to many areas of educational research. This is due to the fact that such terms are based on the existence of genuine theories as found in the natural sciences, and the requirements for such theories cannot be (presently) met in the human sciences. There is also the related problem ambiguity on how these terms are to be applied exactly to the field of educational research. The analysis further contends that writers in this area have not dealth with the critical concept of indeterminacy. It is argued that of all the concepts of the new philosophy of science, this term has most promise for defining the direction of educational research. From one view, indeterminacy may suggest even a greater degree of relativism; looked at from another angle, it is seen that indeterminacy is a means of structuring and fruitfully debating the purpose of educational research. |
Unduh Dokumen Berkas PDF Utama