基础教育质量指数构建的模式与途径

doi:10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2021.04.003

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

基础教育质量指数的构建可以为教育质量提供科学、有效的评价方法。本文首先回顾了对教育指标体系和教育指数的相关探索，总结了基础教育质量指数构建的模式，为构建我国基础教育质量指数提供参考。结合我国提升基础教育质量的目标和新时代教育评价机制改革的趋势对基础教育质量指数的构建提出的具体要求，本文提出了基础教育质量指数构建的可能途径：以CIPP框架为出发点初步构建并不断完善指标体系；基于效度证据选择投入、过程和结果指标；建立多方参与的综合评价系统；基于质量标准科学地使用和解释指数；在评价质量水平时兼顾公平。同时，为落实我国基础教育质量指数的构建，我们认为，还需要一系列教育实证研究的支撑，未来研究应关注数据链接和填补、质量指标的本土化效度验证、不同水平指数的效度验证、“互联网+”时代的指数构建、综合指数合成方法的比较、结合质量标准的指数使用案例，以及融合质量水平与公平的指数构建等研究主题。

关键词: 基础教育质量, 指数, 指标体系, 质量标准

Abstract:

The development of basic education quality index can provide scientific and effective evaluation for education quality. This paper first reviewed the related explorations on educational indicator systems and educational indices to provide insight into the construction of the basic education quality index of China. Based on the goal of improving education quality and the specific requirements for the construction of the basic education quality index proposed by the trend of educational evaluation system reform in this new age, this paper proposed a possible approach to constructing the educational indicator system based on the CIPP framework, selecting input, process and product indicators according to validity evidence, building a comprehensive evaluation system allowing the participation of multiple sides, using and interpreting the index based on the quality standards, and considering equity and quality simultaneously. Meanwhile, to facilitate the construction of the basic education quality index, there is a need for a series of educational empirical studies in the areas such as data linking and imputation, the local validation of quality indicators, validation of indices of different levels, the index construction at the age of “Internet +”, comparison of different aggregation methods, case study of index application with quality standards, and the construction of index merging quality level and equality.

Key words: quality of basic education, index, indicator system, quality standard

张佳慧, 李峰, 辛涛. 基础教育质量指数构建的模式与途径[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2021, 39(4): 30-41.

Jiahui Zhang, Feng Li, Tao Xin. Method and Proposed Approach to Constructing the Index of Basic Education Quality[J]. Journal of East China Normal University(Educational Sciences), 2021, 39(4): 30-41.

图/表 1

参考文献 0

	程凤春, 卫喆. (2012). 再论教育质量及其衡量标准——基于ISO9000族标准的分析. 教育研究, 6, 56- 60.
	俄罗斯联邦教育部. (2017). 2016年普通教育机构质量评估体系指标. 取自: http://demo.kopeysk-uo.ru/upravlenie-obrazovaniya/napravleniya/107-kontrol-i-nadzor/sistema-otsenki-kachestva-obrazovaniya/munitsipalnaya-model-otsenki-kachestva-obrazovaniya/224-pokazateli-sistemy-otsenki-kachestva-obshcheobrazovatelnykh-uchrezhdenij-2016.html
	郭金玉, 张忠彬, 孙庆云. (2008). 层次分析法的研究与应用. 中国安全科学学报, 5, 148- 153. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-3033.2008.03.027
	黄芳. (2018). 普及化高等教育阶段的质量观——基于美国、英国和日本的经验及启示. 现代教育论丛, 224 (6), 37- 42.
	李晓西, 刘一萌, 宋涛. (2014). 人类绿色发展指数的测算. 中国社会科学,222(6),69—95, 207−208.
	刘志军, 徐彬. (2019). 教育评价: 应然性与实然性的博弈及超越. 教育研究, 40 (5), 10- 17.
	吕晶. (2020). 中国教育实证研究中的定量方法: 五年应用述评. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 38 (9), 36- 55.
	戚兴华. (2019). 绩效与公平:美国博士生教育质量评价的价值取向探析. 上海教育评估研究, 8 (4), 29- 34.
	苏为华. (2000). 多指标综合评价理论与方法问题研究. 厦门: 厦门大学博士论文.
	王健健等. (2005). 统计学基础. 武汉: 武汉理工大学出版社.
	王志平. (2007). “人类发展指数” (HDI): 含义、方法及改进. 上海行政学院学报, 37 (3), 47- 57. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-3176.2007.03.005
	辛涛, 姜宇. (2012). 在国际视域下定义教育质量标准. 人民教育, 12, 2- 6.
	徐蔼婷. (2006). 德尔菲法的应用及其难点. 中国统计, 9, 57- 59. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-4557.2006.01.035
	徐国祥. (2004). 统计指数理论及应用. 北京: 中国统计出版社.
	杨永恒, 胡鞍钢, 张宁. (2005). 基于主成分分析法的人类发展指数替代技术. 经济研究, 7, 4- 17.
	张民选, 陆璟, 占胜利, 朱小虎, 王婷婷. (2011). 专业视野中的PISA. 教育研究, 6, 5- 12.
	张炜, 周洪宇. (2019). 中国教育指数(2019年版). 宁波大学学报(教育科学版), 41 (3), 1- 8.
	张小波. (2013). 基于综合评价的研究生教育质量效率指数研究——对“985工程”一期34所高校的实证分析. 中国高教研究, 9, 68- 75.
	周光礼, 袁晓萍. (2020). 聚焦“四个评价” 深化教育评价机制改革. 中国考试, 340 (8), 1- 5.
	庄艳. (2009). 统计指数相关问题的思考. 技术与市场, 16 (5), 38- 38. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8554.2009.05.026
	Altinok, N., Angrist, N., & Patrinos, H. A. (2018). Global Data Set on Education Quality (1965—2015) Policy Research Working Paper Series 8314. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10986/29281.
	Altinok, N., Diebolt, C., & Meulemeester, J.-L. D. (2014). A new international database on education quality: 1965—2010. Applied Economics, 46 (11), 1212- 1247. doi: 10.1080/00036846.2013.868592
	Angrist, N., Patrinos, H.A., & Schlotter, M. (2013). An Expansion of a Global Data Set on Educational Quality (No. WPS6536). The World Bank Policy Research Working Paper.
	Atkinson, A.B. (1970). On the measurement of inequality. Journal of Economic Theory, 2, 244- 263. doi: 10.1016/0022-0531(70)90039-6
	Buchmann, G., & Neri, M. C. The Brazilian Education Quality Index (Ideb): Measurement and Incentives Up-grades. Rio de Janeiro : FGV, EPGE, 2010 (Ensaios Econômicos; 686).
	Creemers, B. P. M., & Kyriakides, L. (2010). Validity of Educational Indicators. International Encyclopedia of Education (Third Edition), 193- 199.
	Council of Ministers of Education. (2007). Council Conclusions of 25 May 2007 on a Coherent Framework of Indicators and Benchmarks for Monitoring Progress towards the Lisbon Objectives in Education and Training. Retrieved from https://www.cedefop.europa.eu/en/news-and-press/news/council-conclusions-coherent-framework-indicators-and-benchmarks-monitoring.
	European Commission. (2019). Education and Training Monitor 2019. Retrieved from https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/15d70dc3-e00e-11e9-9c4e-01aa75ed71a1/language-en/format-PDF/source-171178208.
	Hanushek, E. A., & Wößmann, L. (2007). The role of education quality for economic growth. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 4122. Retrieved from https://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/pdf/10.1596/1813-9450-4122.
	Haven, H. (1999). Education in Finland. Statistics and Indicators. Helsinki: Statistics Finland.
	Jiang, Y., Zhang, J., & Xin, T. (2019). Toward education quality improvement in china: a brief overview of the national assessment of education quality. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 44 (6), 733- 751. doi: 10.3102/1076998618809677
	Kane, M. (2006). Validation. In Brennan R. L. (eds.). Educational measurement (4th edition). Washington, DC: American Council on Education/Praeger.
	National Education Association. (2010). Teacher assessment and evaluation: The National Education Association’s framework for transforming education systems to support effective teaching and improve student learning. Retrieved from http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/HE/TeachrAssmntWhtPaperTransform10_2.pdf.
	National Research Council (NRC). (2011). Successful K-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Committee on Highly Successful Science Programs for K-12 Science Education. Board on Science Education and Board on Testing and Assessment. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
	NRC. (2013). Monitoring progress toward successful K-12 STEM education: A nation advancing? Committee on the Evaluation Framework for Successful K-12 STEM Education. Board on Science Education and Board on Testing and Assessment, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
	Nuttall, D. L. (1994). Choosing indicators. In Riley, K. A. & Nuttall, D. L. (ed.). Measuring Quality: Education Indicators – United Kingdom and International Perspectives. Bristol, PA: Falmer.
	Oakes, J. (1989). What educational indicators? The case for assessing the school context. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11 (2), 181- 199. doi: 10.3102/01623737011002181
	OECD (2020). How’s Life? 2020: Measuring Well-being. Paris, OECD Publishing.
	Poliandri, D., Cardone, M., Muzzioli, P., & Romiti, S, (2010). Dynamic Database for Quality Indicators Comparison in Education. Istituto Nazionale per la Valutazione del Sistema Educativo di Istruzione e di Formazione Working Paper No. 04/2010. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=1639398 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1639398
	Shavelson, R. J., McDonnell, L. M., & Oakes, J. (1989). Indicators for Monitoring Mathematics and Science Education: A Sourcebook. (Report No. R-3742-NSF/RC). Santa Monica: RAND Corporation.
	Stensaker, B. (2007). Quality as a fashion: Exploring the translation of a management idea into higher education. In Westerheijden, D. F., Stensaker, B. & Rosa, M. J. (eds.). Quality assurance in higher education: Trends in regulation, translation and transformation. Dordrecht: Springer.
	Tovey, P. (1994). Quality assurance in continuing professional education. New York: Routledge Illustration.
	United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (1990). Human Development Report 1990. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
	United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (1994). Human Development Report 1994. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
	United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (1995). Human Development Report 1995. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
	United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (2019). Human Development Report 2019. New York: United Nations Development Programme.

CIPP	维度	指标
背景	人口统计学和经济学特征	失业率；人均GDP
	学校教育	平均受教育水平；各阶段入学率
	学校系统规模	机构数量；各类学校数量
	家庭社会经济文化背景	家长职业；低收入家庭的儿童
	学校社区参与	家长参与；政府支持
投入	学校	学校规模；班额
	经济资源	教育经费；生均经费
	物质资源	生均计算机数量
	人力资源	教师数量；教师年龄
	学生	学生早退
过程	区域水平	本地社区和家庭参与学校活动
	学校水平	教学时间；教师教研活动
	班级水平	课堂学习机会；探究式教学；特殊学生支持
结果	知识和能力	标准测验成绩；标准测验合格率
	受教育水平	毕业率；辍学率
	社会结果	年轻人失业率
	感知到的服务质量	用户满意度

[1]	李刚, 辛涛. 基础教育质量的内涵与监测评价理论模型[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2021, 39(4): 15-29.
[2]	马红梅, 雷万鹏, 钱佳. 教师工作环境的经济价值:基于地区经济地理特征的工资成本补偿[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2018, 36(5): 129-137+170.
[3]	范涌峰, 宋乃庆. 学校特色发展测评模型构建研究[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2018, 36(2): 68-78+155+156.
[4]	汪栋, 张琼文, 黄斌. 我国教育财政投入充足指数设计与标准化测算[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2017, 35(3): 116-125+172.
[5]	王红, 佘元冠. 我国院校评估指标体系研究 ——从影响本科教学质量因素的视角[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2014, 32(4): 55-62.
[6]	董业军. 我国地方高校招生计划地区分配模型指标体系研究[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2012, 30(4): 31-36.
[7]	姚继军张新平. 新中国教育均衡发展的测度[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2010, 28(2): 33-42.
[8]	邵志芳　李二霞. 中高考数学试题难度的认知任务分析[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2010, 28(1): 48-52.