Assessment and realistic mathematics education
Assessment and realistic mathematics education
复制标题
评估和现实数学教育
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1996
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
M. Heuvel
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
M. Heuvel
本书描述了现实数学教育(RME)对
评估学生对小学数学的理解程度。RME是荷兰人
世界范围内需要改革数学教育的答案。
改变了对作为学校学科的数学的看法，它的目标，关于教学的观念和
学习数学，需要新的评估形式。在RME中，这意味着
更倾向于观察和个别访谈。然而，笔试并没有
在这种方法下被抛弃了。正如这本书所阐明的，即使是笔试也可以
向教师提供有关学生学习过程的有价值的信息，如果
人们对这些测试有了新的看法。
这本书有两个部分。第一部分构成了这项工作的核心。第一章回顾了
荷兰数学教育改革的早期阶段，并提供了一个
调查当时人们对评估的看法。
第二章集中讨论了更多的研究是如何为进一步的研究奠定基础的
RME中小学数学评价的发展。原来，这个
研究是对不同政策的实施和效果进行的比较研究
数学教育的方法。
第三章提供了RME内部事务现状的总体方向
并进一步阐述了用于评估的RME理论。在#年下半年
RME对评估的看法是国际上的一面镜子
考核改革。
在第四章中，作为对总体取向的补充，重点转移到了写作上
测试。特别是，纸和铅笔的短任务问题和潜在的丰富
通过RME理论的应用，对这类问题进行了讨论。
第二部分详细介绍了三项评估研究。第五章重点介绍了
为更多的研究而开发的测试，即首先开始的测试
年级。它提供了有关测试开发的背景信息，并描述了
其出人意料的结果，包括一些国际上关于测试的发现。
第六章对RME在中国的机遇进行了研究。
教育。这项研究的核心是关于比率的笔试，类似于更多的测试。
第七章介绍了一个关于评估的发展研究项目。
在“上下文中的数学”项目的框架内，一个美国中产阶级
学校项目。本章集中讨论了一个关于百分比的特殊评估问题。
这里的主要问题是一个人遇到的开放性和确定性之间的紧张关系
在评估中转向更开放的问题。
This book describes the consequences of Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) for
assessing students’ understanding of mathematics in primary school. RME is the Dutch
answer to the worldwide need to reform mathematics education.
Changed ideas about mathematics as a school subject, its goals, ideas about teaching and
learning mathematics, require new forms of assessment. Within RME this means a
preference for observation and individual interviews. However, written tests have not
been abandoned within this approach. As this book makes clear, even written tests can
give teachers valuable information concerning the learning processes of their students, if
these tests are looked at in a new light.
The book has two sections. Part I forms the core of the work. Chapter one retraces the
early years of the reform of mathematics education in the Netherlands, and provides a
survey of how assessment was regarded at that time.
Chapter two concentrates on how the MORE research laid the foundation for further
development of primary school mathematics assessment within RME. Originally, this
research was a comparative study of the implementation and effects of different
approaches to mathematics education.
Chapter three provides a general orientation of the present state of affairs within RME
and presents a further elaboration of the RME theory for assessment. In the second half of
the chapter the RME views on assessment are held up to the mirror of international
assessment reform.
In chapter four, as a supplement to the general orientation, the focus is shifted to written
tests. In particular, paper-and-pencil short-task problems and the potential enrichment of
such problems through the application of RME theory are discussed.
Part II describes three assessment studies in detail. Chapter five focuses on one of the
tests that was developed for the MORE research, namely the test for beginning first
grade. It provides background information on the development of the test and describes
its unexpected results, including some international findings on the test.
Chapter six gives an account of a study into the opportunities for RME in special
education. The heart of this study is a written test on ratio, similar to MORE tests.
Chapter seven covers a developmental research project on assessment that was conducted
within the framework of the “Mathematics in Context” project, an American middle
school project. The chapter focuses on one particular assessment problem on percentage.
The main issue here is the tension between openness and certainty that one meets if one
moves to more open-ended problems in assessment.