SPECIFICITY OF THE EVALUATING INSTRUMENT OF DANIELSON FRAMEWORK FOR TEACHING (The U.S. Experience)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31110/2413-1571-2021-030-4-007Keywords:
Danielson framework for teaching, pedagogical constructivism, student engagement, expert evaluation, rubric, set of criteriaAbstract
Formulation of problem. According to our observations, the sets of criteria for evaluating teaching, developed in 2019‑2020 by specialists of the State service of education quality, do not have the property of measurability. But the measurable criteria make it possible to identify levels of professionalism. Scales of criteria serve to do this. If there are no evaluation scales, the procedure for expert evaluation is replaced by the procedure for monitoring compliance with the requirements. And this discredits the idea of evaluation for professional development. Thus, reviews of the best foreign technologies for evaluating effective teaching are relevant. Our study was guided by the following research question: what are the distinctive features inherent in the criteria used in the U.S. to evaluate the teaching work?
Materials and Methods. We made a review of popular in the U.S. the evaluating instrument “Framework for Teaching” by Ch. Danielson to find out its distinctive features. We did it from the standpoint of a systems approach.
Results. Danielson's Framework for Teaching represents the criterion complex necessary for expert evaluation of the teaching work’s effectiveness. A set of 22 criteria is the core of it. Criteria characterize professional teacher qualities that affect student performance. Each criterion has characteristics, indicators, and scale. Characteristics specify the most important facets of the criterion. Indicators are used to construct a scale of a criterion. The scale includes descriptions of evaluative judgments.
Conclusions. Based on the results of our study, we established four distinctive features of the criteria under consideration. First, their theoretical basis is the ideas of pedagogical constructivism. Secondly, the criteria are universal for all teaching specializations. Third, the set of criteria is complete, actionable and measurable. Fourth, the criterion complex provides two evaluation functions: development and accountability.
Downloads
References
Богданова В. Конструктивистские идеи в педагогике: от адаптации к свободе. Педагогический журнал. 2012. № 2–3. C. 23-38. HTTPS://www.publishing-vak.ru/file/archive-pedagogy-2012-2/2-bogdanova.pdf.
Гафт М. Принятие решений при многих критериях. М. : Знание, 1979. 64 с.
Загвоздкин В. Проблема оценки качества работы учителя. Народное образование. 2018. № 10. С. 89–98. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/problema-otsenki-kachestva-raboty-uchitelya
Зварич І. Оцінювання професійної діяльності викладачів у вищих навчальних закладах США (друга половина ХХ – початок ХХІ століття). Київ : Фенікс, 2014. 344 с.
Макаров И. Теория выбора и принятия решений. М. : Наука, 1982. 328 с.
Малошонок Н. «Студенческая вовлеченность» как социальное явление: теория и методология исследования: автореф. дис. ... к-та социол. наук: 22.00.01/Высшая школа экономики. Москва, 2014. 36 с. https://www.hse.ru/sci/diss/124050733
Маркова А. Психология труда учителя. М. : Просвещение, 1993. 192 с.
Строкова Т. О выборе критериев оценки в педагогических исследованиях. Педагогика, 2015. № 3. С. 9–15.
Barr R., & Tagg J. (1995) From Teaching to Learning: A New Paradigm for Undergraduate Education. Change, 6, 13 26. HTTPS://elib.bsu.by/handle/123456789/48389.
Cantrell, St. (2012). The Measures of Effective Teaching Project: An Experiment to Build Evidence and Trust. Education Finance and Policy, 7(2), 1–16. htpps://www.researchgate.net.
Danielson Ch. (2013). Framework for Teaching. Evaluation Instrument. htpps://www.danielsongroup.org.
Moss, J. (2015). The Danielson Model of Teacher Evaluation: Exploring Teacher Perceptions Concerning Its Value in Shaping and Improving Instructional Practice. [Doctoral dissertation, Seton Hall University]. Seton Hall University Dissertations and Theses (ETDs). scholarship.shu.edu/dissertations/2090 [in English].
Muchinsky P. (2003) Psychology Applied to Work: An Introduction to Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Wadsworth Publishing.
Putman, H., Ross, E., & Walsh K. (2018). Making a Difference: Six Places Where Teacher Evaluation Systems are Getting Results. National council on teacher quality_report. HTTPS://www.nctq.org/publications/Making-a-Difference.
Santiago, P. (2013). The evaluation and assessment framework. In OECD Reviews of Evaluation and Assessment in Education “Synergies for Better Learning. An International Perspective on Evaluation and Assessment”. OECD, (pp. 57 138). HTTPS://www.oecd-ilibrary.org.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Categories
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Таяна Дєордіца, Марина Вороніна, Наталія Литвинова
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
- Authors grant the journal a right of the first publication of the work under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)that allows others freely to use (read, copy and print) submissions, search content and link to published articles, disseminate their full text and use them for any legitimate non-commercial purposes (i.e. educational or scientific) with the mandatory reference to the article’s authors and initial publication in this journal.
- Original published articles cannot be used by users (exept authors) for commercial purposes or distributed by third-party intermediary organizations for a fee.
