[School Education] Policy to Review 'Proactivity' in Learning Assessment in the Next Revision of the Curriculum Guidelines [School Reports / Entrance Exams]

The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology has indicated a policy to review the 'attitude of proactively engaging in learning' (i.e., proactivity), which is one of the grading criteria in elementary, junior high, and high schools.

I read this news.

--

When I read this news, honestly,

I felt that they finally realized it was a difficult evaluation method.

that was my feeling.

The current evaluation method is as follows:

1. Assign a 'learning assessment' on a 3-point scale (A-C) for each subject based on three perspectives: 'knowledge and skills,' 'thinking, judgment, and expression,' and 'attitude of proactively engaging in learning.'

2. Summarize the above to determine the 'grade' on report cards, etc.

It is a two-step process, but regarding 'proactivity' in step 1, it has long been pointed out thatit is difficult to judge objectively from test results and the like, and it places a heavy burden on teachers to collect evaluation materials.it has been pointed out for some time.

-

To have a 'living human being' (i.e., a teacher) be the 'subject' and 'objectively judge' the 'attitude' with which a student proactively engages.

If I were asked to do the above by a client, even if the fee were exceptional, I would say,

1. It is impossible, so please look for someone else.

2. I will try, but since it is difficult to 'judge objectively,' I don't think it will likely lead to the results you desire.

I consider it such a difficult problem that I would say that.

No matter how you think about it, it is difficult for a teacher who spends a long time with students to 'objectively' judge something as 'abstract' as an attitude.

Perhaps because the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) also recognizes that the aforementioned 'assessment content and methods' are expressed too abstractly,

is specifically stipulated as follows.

-

However, proceeding with the above assessment methods results injudging the abstract concept of 'an attitude of proactive engagement in learning' based on formal criteria such as 'written work like notebooks and reports or comments made during class'which is problematic.

If that happens, to put it bluntly, it may end up becoming a competition ofhow to appeal to the teacherin order to raise one's grades.

Studying should be something done to improve oneself, not something done to show off to others.

And, I am very concerned that with each revision of the Course of Study like this,the proportion of internal reports accounted for by scores on regular tests and the like is decreasing.

-

Of course, test scores are not everything,but there is no doubt that test scores are one indicator of how and how much a student has engaged with that subject.

Anyone who has worked at a cram school knows that the effort students put into getting good scores on regular tests has not changed, past or present.

There are students who work steadily and diligently after school and on holidays to prepare, and yet their scores still do not improve.

That is precisely whyshouldn't we be able to highly evaluate students who achieve good scores on regular tests and the like?

I personally believe that traditional assessment methods should also be re-evaluated.

As I always state on my other creator page (Human Resources Management / Labor and Social Security Attorney),

it is difficult (impossible) to uniformly decide matters related to people in Japan,so I think it would be better to promote assessment methods that allow each school (including classifications such as private and public) to bring out its own unique characteristics.

☆Other educational articles☆