媒体公信力研究者_教育评估公信力研究

  本文关键词：教育评估公信力研究，，由笔耕文化传播整理发布。

        转型期中国教育评估的信任困境和基于公信力提升的评估秩序建构,是现阶段教育评估及教育管理必须面对的颇具挑战的基础性问题,开展教育评估公信力研究十分必要也非常紧要。本论文综合运用多学科的相关理论和知识,基于文献研究、思辨分析、采用开放式和半结构访谈等方法,对教育评估实践中的“信任难题”进行初步的理论分析与学理回应。本文首先描述并呈现了当前社会诸领域出现的“信任危机”以及教育评估实践中的“信任难题”,指出当前我国教育评估存在公信力低下这一现实困境；在详细回顾信任研究理论发展的基础上,确立了教育评估公信力研究的问题关注。因“公信力”是汉语世界的新词汇,本研究对“公信力”的概念界定,相近概念的辨析及公信力在教育评估概念地图中的位置坐标等予以较多着墨。研究细致分析了教育评估实践的公信力诉求及其特性,揭示公信力这一概念的公共性、关系性、整合性以及教育评估公信力提升的艰巨性。其次,对教育评估公信力的影响要素进行解释性建构。本研究以评估相对人、利益相关者及社会公众对教育评估的期望为出发点,对评估参与者的诚信与诚实、评估活动的公正与准确、权威与利害,评估过程中的参与协商及舆情引导等进行详细论证,对社会系统性因素,如传统的信任文化及特点、教育规模与价值观多元等进行了探讨。研究发现,我国教育评估在“去行政化”的转型过程中,人们对评估的期望正在发生变化,这直接促成教育评估公信力的信任结构变迁。影响要素的分析为教育评估公信力提升途径的探讨奠定基础。再次,研究结合评估发展四阶段的划分,指出教育评估公信力的信任指向分别对应于测量、描述、判断、价值协商等层级,人们的普遍信任在教育评估“硬核”与“保护带”上存在着结构性的差异,研究还概括了威慑型公信力、批判型公信力,以及自致型公信力的关键特征及其效应。强调区分公信力层级结构及品质类型的必要性和重要性在于揭示公众普遍信任指向及信任标准的差异。在此基础上,研究对评估公信力现象进行了历史及中外比较,还对评估公信力的双重面相,即普遍信任与广泛质疑共存之悖论状态进行了分析解释。伴随社会转型的持续推进,公众的质疑能力和舆论环境对评估公信力亦将产生影响。教育评估与信任问题关联密切,本文论证了教育评估中的有限信任及其特征。基于人类才德的非完善性,教育评估中的有限信任是合理的,相比于充分信任与不信任具有比较优势。研究分析并揭示出评估实践中不信任与信任胶合共生这一实然状态,并对评估中信任关系的非对称性进行了概括,基于“办”之责任与自由,对教育的“管、评”机制进行了理论探讨。研究指出,教育及学术的公共属性要求管理主体履行底线意义上的监管职责,以保证教育教学及学术供给的基本水准。在“办”之资质得以确认的基础上,“管、评”分离,管理主体应致力于对教育评估公正秩序的维护上,严格限制行政权力对具体教育教学及学术活动的干预及控制。现阶段国内教育评估中“管、评”失衡,选拔评优评估供给过剩而认可保障性评估供给严重不足,以致于形成“善意”的摧残。评估公信力由信任与不信任共同驱动,不信任作为外部压力促压却并不必然促进教育评估理论与实践的改善,教育评估发展及其公信力的提升需要优化信任纾解不信任。这一思路有助于澄清公信力问题争论上的误区,同时认识和发现不信任之于公共治理的潜在价值,该部分的分析论证是本研究重要的观念及理论创新,也是对当前信任研究的重要补充。最后,从范式转型与制度保障层面提出教育评估公信力提升的策略及途径。基于信任的优化与不信任的纾解及超越,研究从明确权责,规范评估公共权力,完善教育评估立法,形成评估法治体系；转变管理职能,强化监管维护良序；发展智库,提升评估专业能力,设定评估标准,改善评估信用水平；加强监督制衡,防范道德风险,创设诚信评估环境,增进伦理自觉；制定执行细则,公开评估信息,促进互动协商,引导舆情民意；建立健全释疑机制,如开放思想市场,善待批评质疑,增设风险论证,建立健全元评估机制等六大方面提出了我国教育评估公信力提升的策略建议。这些建议寄期望于为现实问题的探讨提供参考。

    The Dissertation researches on the trust dilemma of education evaluation and the order construction based on the credibility improvement in the social transition, which is the challenging basic problem of the current evaluation and even education management. More researches on the evaluation credibility are very necessary and urgent. Based on the literature reviewing and analytical theorizing, along with open and semi-structured interviews, the integration of the multidisciplinary theory and knowledge, the author made a theoretical analysis of the "trust paradox "in the current practice of educational evaluation as well as relevant responses.The study firstly described the present "crisis of trust" and the "trust paradox" in educational evaluation practice, and pointed out the credibility absence dilemma of China’s education evaluation. Based on a detailed review of researches into trust development, the present study pinpointed the major issues in education credibility researches. As "credibility" is new in Chinese vocabulary, this study put more emphasis on defining "credibility" and the discrepancies between the term and related concepts, as well as its position in education evaluation concept map. The study also made a thorough analysis of the general appeal of credibility in education evaluation practice and its characteristics such as communality, relativity, comprehensiveness and arduousness in its improvement.Secondly, the study made an interpretative construction of the elements in the education evaluation credibility. Starting from the expectations by the counterparts, stakeholders, and the general public, the paper dwelled on such necessary qualities as honesty and credibility of the evaluation participants, fairness and accuracy, authority and stakes of the evaluation process, and involvement and negotiation as well as the general opinion guidance. The study also probed into the systematic social elements like traditional trust culture and its features, educational scale and value pluralism. The study found that the expectations of evaluation are being changed in the ongoing "de-administrationalization" transformation process, which led directly to the public trust structure changes in the education evaluation credibility. Analysis of the credibility elements paved the way for further discussion on the approaches to the betterment of education evaluation.Thirdly, supported by the Guba and Lincoln’s division about the four stages in the evaluation development, the study proposed that the trust point of education evaluation credibility corresponds to the measurement, description, judgment, and the value negotiation, and the public trust in the education evaluation allows for structural difference in "core" and "protection zone". Besides, the study outlined three type of credibility like deterrence credibility, criticism credibility, as well as self-induced credibility and respective characteristics and its role. This interpretation model emphasizes the necessity and importance of the distinction of the level and quality of structure. On this basis, the dissertation made a chronological analysis and cross-cultural comparison. The duality nature of credibility (the paradox of simultaneity of universal trust and general questioning) is also explained. With the progress of social transformation, the ability to question by the public and the general opinion environment will have an impact on the evaluation credibility.As trust issue is closely associated with education evaluation, the paper elaborated on the limited trust and its features. In light of the imperfection of human intelligence and virtue, the limited trust is reasonable in education evaluation, and enjoys a comparative advantage compared to the full trust and distrust. This research revealed the actual agglutination state of the distrust and trust in the evaluation practice, and sketched the asymmetry of the trust relationship. A theoretical analysis was given as to the education administration-evaluation mechanism based on the responsibility of schools, teachers&students and corresponding freedom. The study pointed out that the public property of education and academic requirements of the management body expects administrative bodies to perform bottom line supervisory duties in order to ensure a basic level of teaching and academic supply. On the basis of the qualification recognization, administrative-evaluation must be separated. The administrative bodies should be committed to the maintenance of education evaluation justice and order, and strictly refrained from interfering and controlling specific teaching and academic activities. The prevailing imbalance between administration and evaluation in present domestic education evaluation, the oversupply of performance evaluation contrasted with a severe shortage of accountability led to well-meant ruins. Education credibility is driven by trust and distrust. Distrust, as an external force, may not necessarily lead to the improvement of education evaluation theories and practice. The progress of education evaluation and improvement of credibility depends on the optimization of trust and dissolution of distrust. The new ideas help to clarify the misunderstandings on the credibility controversy, to recognize the potential value of distrust in public governance. The analysis and argument of the part is the important concepts and theoretical contribution, as well as an important supplement of the current trust research.Finally, the study proposed some strategies and approaches to the improvement of the education evaluation credibility from the paradigm shift and the system protection. Based on the trust enhancement, distrust dissolution and transcension, the study put forward the following six suggestions to improve the credibility in our educational evaluation. They are1) clarifying power and responsibility, standardizing evaluation power, perfecting education evaluation legislation and building law system;2) transforming administrative roles and strengthening supervision to safeguard order;3) developing an Education Evaluation Think Tanks to enhance the evaluation professional competence, and establishing the criteria to improve the fiduciary responsibility;4) reinforcing supervision to prevent moral hazards, shaping honest evaluation environment, enhancing ethical consciousness;5) stipulating implementation details, publicizing evaluation information, promoting faculty involvement, interactive consultation and properly guiding public opinions;6) establishing and improving the doubts-resolution mechanisms, such as an open marketplace of ideas, a favorable treatment of criticisms and questions, an addition of risk analysis, and proper establishment and improvement of meta-evaluation mechanism. Hopefully, these suggestions will serve as a good reference to relevant problems in our real life.

教育评估公信力研究

论文摘要6-8ABSTRACT8-10第一章 绪论14-52    第一节 研究背景与问题的提出14-22        一 转型社会各领域的“信任危机”14-15        二 教育及评估实践的“信任难题”15-20        三 教育评估困境之“公信力密钥”20-22    第二节 研究论域的论述与评析22-44        一 信任及公信力研究的述与评22-34        二 教育评估公信力研究的述与评34-44    第三节 分析框架及研究问题44-47        一 研究的分析框架45        二 研究的主要问题45-47    第四节 立论方法与研究意义47-52        一 研究思路与方法47-50        二 论文的研究意义50-52第二章 核心概念的界定及其属性52-70    第一节 教育评估公信力的概念界定52-61        一 “教育评估”及双重属性52-55        二 “公信力”的词义解析55-58        三 教育评估公信力的界定58-61    第二节 教育评估实践中的信任诉求61-64        一 评估类型及其信任诉求61-63        二 作为信任品的教育评估63-64    第三节 概念辨析及评估公信力的特性64-70        一 相近概念及其辨析65-66        二 公信力的位置坐标66-68        三 评估公信力的特性68-70第三章 教育评估信任状态的影响要素70-110    第一节 施信者的评估期望及信任特征70-78        一 施信者的评估期望70-74        二 施信者的信任特征74-78    第二节 评估主体的诚信、公正与权威78-92        一 诚实与诚信：公信力的伦理认同78-81        二 公正与准确：公信力的专业信服81-86        三 权威与利害：公信力的利益依赖86-92    第三节 评估中的参与协商及舆情引导92-100        一 评估的公共参与及价值协商92-95        二 评估舆论的形成及舆情引导95-100    第四节 社会系统性因素对评估的影响100-110        一 传统的信任与评估文化100-107        二 教育规模与价值观多元107-110第四章 教育评估的信任结构及比较评析110-148    第一节 教育评估的信任结构及其指向110-126        一 基于四阶段的教育评估之信任层级111-119        二 评估的“硬核”“保护带”与信任指向119-126    第二节 信任标准及评估公信力的类型126-132        一 威慑型公信力及其特征127-128        二 批判型公信力及其特征128-130        三 自致型公信力及其特征130-132    第三节 教育评估公信力的比较及评析132-148        一 评估被信任状态的变迁及思考133-139        二 评估公信力的中外比较及借鉴139-143        三 评估公信力的双重面相及改进143-148第五章 教育评估中的有限信任及其机制148-187    第一节 基于非完善之人类才德的有限信任及特征148-159        一 评估中有限信任的合理性148-153        二 不信任与信任常胶合共生153-155        三 评估信任关系的非对称性155-159    第二节 基于“办”之责任与自由的“管评”机制159-176        一 督促责任的履行：“管”对“办”之资质的监管160-166        二 确保自由的竞争：“管”对“评”之秩序的维护166-172        三 “管、评”失衡：选拔评优过剩及善意的摧残172-176    第三节 信任与不信任的效应及评估公信力的提升176-187        一 评估公信力的双轮驱动及信任效应176-178        二 不信任促压着评估理论与实践变革178-181        三 提升公信力需纾解不信任优化信任181-187第六章 提升公信力：范式转型及制度保障187-233    第一节 形成评估法治体系,奠基法理信任187-196        一 明确权责,规范评估公共权力188-190        二 形成法治体系,奠基法理信任190-196    第二节 强化监管维护良序,转变管理职能196-202        一 强化监管,确保办学资质合格196-199        二 “管办评”分离,维护评估良序199-202    第三节 提升评估专业能力,改善信用水平202-210        一 发展智库,提升评估专业能力202-206        二 设立评估标准,改善信用水平206-210    第四节 创设诚信评估环境,增进伦理自觉210-217        一 创设诚信环境,增进伦理自觉211-213        二 加强监督制衡,防范道德风险213-217    第五节 公开信息促进协商,引导舆情民意217-225        一 制定执行细则,公开评估信息217-219        二 促进互动协商,引导舆情民意219-225    第六节 建立健全释疑机制,提升信任品质225-233        一 开放思想市场,善待批评质疑225-228        二 增设风险论证,健全元评估机制228-233第七章 结语233-239    一 研究结论及可能的创新之处233-236    二 研究局限及未来的研究方向236-239主要参考文献239-258附录1 部分访谈记录258-270附录2 攻读学位期间发表的论文270-271致谢271-272

  本文关键词：教育评估公信力研究，由笔耕文化传播整理发布。