In Chile, a law that seeks the application of a qualitative evaluation scale for the first primary cycle is being discussed. It is argued that the grade scale (1.0-7.0) produces "tiredness" and "stress" in students (6-10 years of age). I think that this discussion is secondary or not very relevant, since the important thing is to focus on the evaluation processes that should be carried out during the teaching and learning process, from a formative perspective and oriented to the feedback of the students with the purpose of ensuring the learning engaged in study programs. In this way, this approach seeks to promote evaluation as a transformational process and that provides students with varied possibilities to demonstrate their learning. In addition, this perspective should consider the student more "subject" than "object" of the evaluation, thereby being a central actor, through self-assessment, co-evaluation and peer evaluation, with a view to self-regulation of their own learning and greater autonomy. Putting this perspective into practice, the scale, qualitative or quantitative, that is used to inform students' learning becomes a formal topic. Finally, I would be grateful if you can help me with studies, theoretical or empirical, that account for the "fatigue" and "stress" that would result in the use of quantitative scales to communicate the results of the learning assessment.

More Daniel Ríos Muñoz's questions See All
Similar questions and discussions