When Values Collide: Field Instructors' Experiences of Providing Feedback and Evaluating Competence
When Values Collide: Field Instructors' Experiences of Providing Feedback and Evaluating Competence
复制标题
DOI：
10.1300/j001v26n01_08
复制
发表时间：
2007-01-01
影响因子：
1.2
通讯作者：
Regehr, Glenn
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bogo, Marion;Regehr, Cheryl;Regehr, Glenn
本文报告了对四项研究中积累的定性数据的分析，这些研究涉及现场讲师评估学生并在必要时提供纠正反馈的经验。研究结果表明，虽然现场评估工具越来越多地试图提供标准化、客观和“公正”的绩效衡量标准，但这些评估仍然是在专业和关系背景下进行的，这可能会损害其价值。作为社会工作者，现场指导员遵循尊重多样性、关注优势和赋权、倡导弱势群体以及重视人际关系作为成长和变革途径的专业价值观。通过将现场讲师置于看门人的角色，大学要求他们倡导特定的专业行为规范标准，并对未能达到或遵守这些规范标准的学生记录负面评价。此类活动可能与社会工作者的个人和专业价值观直接冲突，从而给现场指导员带来令人不安的悖论。学生评估模型必须考虑这种冲突对现场讲师履行专业看门人角色的能力的影响，并且必须找到解决有问题的学生的新方法。 (C) 2007 年，The Haworth Press, Inc. 保留所有权利。
This paper reports on an analysis of qualitative data accrued across four research studies that addressed the experiences of field instructors in evaluating students and providing corrective feedback when necessary. Findings suggest that while tools for field evaluation are increasingly attempting to provide standardized, objective, and "impartial" measures of performance, these evaluations nevertheless occur within a professional and relational context that may undermine their value. As social workers, field instructors are guided by the professional values of respecting diversity, focusing on strengths and empowerment, advocating for vulnerable individuals, and valuing relationships as avenues for growth and change. By placing field instructors in a gatekeeping role, the university requires them to advocate for particular normative standards of professional behavior and to record a negative evaluation for a student who fails to achieve or adhere to these normative standards. Such activities can be in direct conflict with social workers' personal and professional values, thereby creating a disquieting paradox for the field instructor. Models of student evaluation must consider the influence of this conflict on the field instructor's ability to fulfill the role of professional gatekeeper and must find new ways of addressing the problematic student. (C) 2007 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.