Transcript ECER 2007 Session 3a - uni

ECER 2007
19-22 September
Contested Qualities of
Educational Research
Session 3a
Reflection and Self Evaluation
for Teachers and Trainers
Gerald Heidegger and Irina Michel
How should Self Evaluation
be approached?
National and international discussions
concentrate too much on quality assurance
Development of quality is strongly
connected to self evaluation and reflection
of teachers and trainers
Reflection gives a systematic possibility
to dectect actions to improve quality
Aspects of the history of quality management and
its tranfer to the educational sector
- The idea of quality management stems from production industry (ISO
9000)
-
During the last decade the idea of quality management has been broadly
transfered to non-profit organisations (EFQM – European Foundation for
Quality Management)
-
The first non-profit sector that has taken over quality management was
the care sector – soon stressing self-evaluation (because a lack of „hard“
outcomes)
-
Today a lot of public schools go through evaluation processes.
-
For disadvantaged young people: Our method QSED
(Quality through Self-Evaluation and Development)
Output
indicators or
personal
development
common
understanding of the
phenomenon that
should be evaluated
Contexts of
Evaluation
historical and cultural
embeddedness of the
phenomenon of
evaluation
From ISO 9000
via EFQM to
Q2E, QSED
national annd
international
evaluation
discussions
different evaluation
interests, fears and,
targets
Carried out by
OECD, CEDEFOP
Indicator centered
evaluation
strict, highly
structured
procedures
Carried out by
IDEA, IOCE
Evaluation trends
Measuring soft
outcomes
innovative
evaluation
approaches
targeting
empowerment or
participation
External Evaluation
Advantages
•
•
•
•
Seemingly „objective „
Reliable Outcomes
Easily transferable
results
No self-deception
No cheating (???)
Disadvantages
•
•
•
•
•
•
Should be combined
with (internal) selfevaluation
In order to….
•
•
To measure „soft“
outcomes is very
difficult/impossible
Processes are aiming
at the targets of the
external evaluation
In this way processes
are severely
narrowed down
Teachers/Trainers
are objects of
external powers
They become
disempowered
They become
passive
• avoid these
Existing European evaluation approaches:
example EFQM
leadership
(1)
politic and
strategy
(2)
company results
(9)
criteria of EFQM
staff orientation
(3)
societal
responsibility
and image (8)
staff
contentedness
(7)
customer
contentedness
/satisfaction (6)
resources
(4)
processes
(5)
Figure 6.1: Criteria of EFQM
basic instrument for
the development of a
quality model
…
...basic instrument for
the development of a
school specific
evaluation instrument
as basis for a quality
comparison between
schools
…
Q2E can be
used as ...
…
…as basis for the
development of a
quality handbook
help for the development
of a school specific profile
of strengths and
weaknesses
…
Figure 6.4: Options for using Q2E
basic instrument for
focus evaluation
How should Self Evaluation be
approached?
Quality Development through
Self Evaluation with a Web Based
Tool?
 CVET actors from six European countries were involved in the
construction process from the beginning of the project
„REFLECTIVE EVALUATION“
The main product: a web based tool is centred on self evaluation of
teachers/trainers & adaptable to specific cultural/ institutional needs
FOR
People at risk in the labour market
(at threat of being fired; unemployed; women returners)
AND
Participants in conventional CVT courses !
Quality Development
through Self Evaluation
with a Web Based Tool?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Interactive web based tool
Six dimensions (reflection areas)
Four Levels
Adaption through the users themselves
Pictures, audio, video
Multiple methods for reflection
Material pool
Assessment &
Recognition
Self-Evaluation
&
Quality Development
Six dimensions
Teaching &
Learning
Collaboration
&
Networking
Reflective
Evaluation
Work
Conditions
Values &
Roles
next
Four Levels
• System
• Institution
• Team/Interpersonal
• Individual
Challenges
System Level
- Criteria for QM dictated from outside
- Stiff quality assurance instead of dynamic quality
development
Institutional Level
- Adaption to market oriented results instead of
own aims
Team-/Individual Level
- Resentment to participate actively
- Feeling forced by QM
Solutions
System
Acknowledgement of „soft“ outcomes
Institutions
External evaluation combined with internal self
evaluation
Team/Individual
For an easier and continuing adjustment to self
evaluation for example our self reliant quality
development tool for higher motivation through
interactivity and multimedia