【作者】 李欣；

【导师】 王斌华；

【作者基本信息】 华东师范大学 ， 比较教育学， 2011， 博士

【摘要】 随着知识经济时代的到来,世界各国的竞争更多地表现为人才的竞争,教育肩负着为各国培养优质劳动力资源的重任,它对国家发展与繁荣的作用受到前所未有的重视。为了在新的经济格局中获得或保持优势地位,世界范围内各国都进行了旨在提高国家竞争力的教育改革。因高中教育的特殊性,普通高中的教育改革尤其受到各国关注。普通高中教育对各国人才和国家的可持续发展,具有“固本强基”的作用。高中学生面临分流,普通高中教育首先肩负着为社会输送合格劳动力的重责,要向社会负责,保证所培养的学生符合社会发展对劳动力知识和技能的基本需求；普通高中教育还肩负着向高等学校输送合格生源的重责,要向高等学校负责,保证所输送的学生已经具备了进一步接受高等教育的基础；普通高中教育还要向学生本人负责,特别是在中国这样高中教育尚未实现义务化的国家,学生需要经过筛选和付费才能接受高中教育,因此各普通高中有责任和义务向学生提供高质量的教育,帮助他们为日后的就业和升学打好基础。一言以蔽之,高中教育能够“固国之本”、“强国之基”,是关系到各国教育改革成败的关键,而建立科学、规范、富有公信力的高中学业水平考试制度,是提升高中教育质量的重要保障措施。目前,以美国为代表的世界发达国家都先后建立了高中学业水平考试制度,其中以美国的高中学业水平考试制度发展较为完善和成熟,作为引领世界的“评价强国”,其教育评价与测量方面的先进理论和技术,使其成为世界各国效仿的典范。中国正在经历着建国后基础教育领域的第八次课程改革,欲建立与素质教育相一致的课程体系和评价模式,并且我国高校招生制度改革也提出要与高中阶段的评价相挂钩,于是高中学业水平考试应运而生。在这一点上,中国这个有着五千年历史的“考试古国”与美国这个年轻的“评价强国”产生了超越历史的共鸣。我国的高中学业水平考试才刚刚起步,将其与美国高中学业水平考试相比较,有利于为我国的考试工作提供有益的参考和经验,发现和纠正我国考试工作中存在的问题,防微杜渐,“为之于未有,治之于未乱”。中美两国的高中学业水平考试是实践领域的事务,牵涉面甚广。本文旨在通过特定的五个维度对两国的考试进行描述、解释、并置和比较,找出两国考试在诸多方面的异同,最后在前述比较的基础上总结出两国考试各自的特点、问题和未来的发展走向。具体而言,本论文分析的维度包括历史的维度、教育评价的维度、教育测量的维度、教育行政的维度和未来的维度,中间三个维度重在对两国考试现状的描述与分析,由此构成对两国考试从历史、到现在,再到未来的纵向研究,而每个维度内部却是从不同方面进行的横向研究,意欲通过这样纵横交错的方式尽可能全面地分析两国的考试。其中,历史的维度是对考试的产生背景与发展历程作分析比较,旨在回答两国的考试“从何而来”的问题。本文认为,两国的高中学业水平考试都是由两国的政治经济环境促成的,体现了教育的政治经济功能。该考试在中国的发展源于素质教育改革的推动,而其最根本的原因是需要在知识经济时代为我国的民族振兴培养具有创新能力的人才；该考试在美国的出现也是由于政治经济原因。从七八十年代最初的“最低能力测验”到如今的“综合考试”和“课程结业考试”,每一次考试难度的提升和考试内容的扩充,其背后最有力的推手都是国家政治经济需要。对两国考试现状的考察从教育评价、教育测量和教育行政三个维度展开。教育评价的维度是对考试内涵与定位的分析比较,旨在从教育评价本身来考察两国的考试“是什么”、“是什么样的考试”。其中包括考试的性质、功能、与高中其他评价体系的关系以及考试的意义。中国各地对高中学业水平考试的性质目前尚缺少统一的认识。各地对该考试的功能预设主要有导向功能、监管功能、鉴定功能和选拔功能。在与高中综合素质评价体系的关系上,主要存在两种关系：“整合式”和“并列式”。该考试在中国的意义表现为有利于高中新课改的深化、有利于高校招生制度改革的深化,而且有利于加强国际交流与合作；美国各州高中学业水平考试都是基于各州课程标准的州级考试,都是在特定年级的课程结束后进行的终结性考试；在考试功能上,美国的考试与中国相似,都具有导向功能、监管功能和鉴定功能这些学业水平考试的基本功能,不同之处在于美国的高中学业水平考试还具有问责功能；其高中学业水平考试与各州的教育问责体系具有“嵌入式”和“剥离式”两种关系。高中学业水平考试在美国的意义主要体现在督促学生、教师和学校为提高学生学业成绩并改善公立教育而负起责任,最终保持美国在全球的竞争力。教育测量的维度是对考试要素与实施的分析比较,旨在从教育测量的要素和实施过程来考察两国考试“怎么考”的问题。具体为考试内容、考试方式、考试时间安排、考试命题、成绩评定和考试结果使用六个方面。整体而言,中国的考试内容覆盖面广,考试方式比较多样,能比较全面的评价学生的学习结果,然而同时也增加了学生的负担。考试命题上不够严谨,致使教育测量所收集的信息缺乏信度和效度,后期对考试结果的等级处理加重了测量的不规范问题,特别是最后如何把考试结果应用于高校招生,各地的做法尚不明朗,加重了学生的心理负担；美国高中学业水平考试在考试内容上呈逐渐多样化的趋势,但仍以传统的阅读、写作、数学和科学作为核心考试科目,考试的类型也正在由综合考试逐步过渡到课程结业考试,考试方式较为单一。但美国的整个考试过程更为科学严谨,在信度、效度和可操作性上具有明显优势,在结果上也更好地发挥了教育测量对教育实践的反馈效果；教育行政的维度是对两国考试的组织与管理进行的分析比较,旨在从行政管理工作的角度来考察两国的考试“怎么管”的问题,具体包括管理体制、负责机构和规章制度。在管理体制上,中国的考试大多采取省市区(县)的三级管理体制,有个别地方还把学校明确纳入管理体制,形成四级管理体制；中国考试的具体负责机构较为多样,可大致分为四类；在考试的管理规章方面,各地大多出台了有关考试的通知和细则；各省区在考试是否要向考生收费以及收费标准方面存在很大差异,收费的依据不够明确。总体而言,中国高中学业水平考试在组织和管理上还需进一步理顺关系、精简机构,政府机关对考生的服务意识有待提升；美国的高中学业水平考试实行二级管理体制,这是由美国特有的教育行政体制决定的；美国各州的考试负责机构通常都是州和学区的问责评价部门,机构设置简约清晰,管理层级少,信息沟通更为通畅；美国各州的考试都是州议会以立法的形式确立的,具有法律效应；对残障学生和英语学习生等弱势群体的考试政策更是体现了其有教无类的人本主义思想。几乎所有州的高中学业水平考试都是免费的,其教育行政部门都具有很强的服务意识。未来的维度是指对两国考试进行的探讨与展望,旨在总结两国考试的特点和问题的基础上,对其未来发展走向做出建议或展望,从而回答两国考试“去往何处”的问题。中国高总学业水平考试在整体上体现了三个特点：首先是在组织和管理上的行政化,其次是在考试内容与方式上的多元化,以及在参与程度和考试范围上的全面化；中国的高中学业水平考试目前存在的问题包括：对考试的性质缺乏统一认识、考试的组织管理亟待加强、考试命题及成绩评定缺乏科学性、考试结果缺乏通用性、如何与高考合理挂钩不明朗等五大问题。其未来发展应首先更新管理观念,树立服务意识；其次要大力发展专业测评,引入专业考试服务机构；最后还需要完善高中评价体系,理顺上下关系；美国高中学业水平考试具有三个特点：一是体现在整个考试活动中的民主化精神；二是在考试政策的创设和执行过程中所体现的“依法治考”；三是考试组织和管理方面的专业化。美国考试的问题主要为：考试费用过高、对考试结果的过度使用、考试公平性不足、考试经济价值估计过高,以及考试导致高中教育功能异化的问题。为了解决这些问题,美国高中学业水平考试预计未来会做出如下努力：首先就是尽可能在源头上确保所有学生具有公平的教育机会；其次是完善现有的高中学业水平考试制度,统一全国考试标准,扩大考试评价范围；此外还有建立多元化的高中教育评价体系,引入替代性评价方式,评价学生的高级思维技能。论文最后对两国高中学业水平考试做出共同思考,既有对教育管理体制和高中学业水平考试组织管理的深度思考,也有对基于标准的教育改革运动的逆向思考,以此为结语。更多还原

【Abstract】 Today more than ever the competition between countries relies on the talent pool of each country. Since education is considered responsible for cultivating the high quality human resources for the future development and prosperity of any country, its importance can never be overestimated in this age. So as to gain or retain the upper-handed position in the emerging of the new economic pattern, worldwide educational reforms have been and are being conducted. The reform on high school has attracted the most attention as high schools play a very important role in each country’s educational system. Secondary education can help the country to strengthen its foundation and base, and then make it possible for the country to enjoy an everlasting talent pool and develop sustainably. Students in Senior high schools are faced with different choices. Some will start their jobs after graduation; the others will go the colleges to continue their study. Thus, senior high schools are faced with dual functions and responsibilities. On one hand, it must live up to the expectation of the labor market by making the high school graduates qualified on both their knowledge and skills; On the other hand, it has to live up to the expectation of the post-secondary educational institutes by supplying qualified influx of new students. What’s more, it has to be responsible for their students by providing high quality education. This is especially meaningful for high school students in countries where high school education is not compulsory. In those countries students pay their tuition to get the education service, so their payments deserve to be valued. Senior high schools have to provide them with adequate knowledge and skills needed for labor market or higher education. To sum it up, high school education can definitely influence the human resources foundation of each nation. An efficient academic proficiency exam system can be an important guarantee for the quality of high school education. So far, most developed countries have already established such an exam system. Owing to the most cutting edge theories and technologies in educational assessment and measurement field, the academic proficiency exam system for US senior high schools has become the world leading example. China is now experiencing the eighth curriculum reform after the founding the new nation, which aims at setting up a new curriculum structure and assessment system in order to fit in the whole Quality Education scenario. Above all this, the reform on admission requirement of the higher education institutions also calls for the reference of a student’s high school academic achievement. Thus the academic proficiency exam system for Chinese senior high schools emerged to cater for all those needs. At this point, China, an old country with more than a thousand year history of exams, and US, a country young but strong on modern education assessment, come to a common area. As a beginner, China can learn advanced experience from US. The comparative study between the two countries’exam systems will sure help China to identify its problems and take some preventive measures.The Proficiency Exam for Senior High Schools in both countries is far-reaching and involved with many practical affairs. This paper aims to 1) describe, interpret, juxtapose and compare the two test systems from five perspectives; 2) find out the similarities and differences between them; and 3) summarize the features, problems and future development trend of them. The five perspectives are namely historical perspective, education assessment perspective, education measurement perspective, education administration perspective. The three perspectives in the middle focus on describing and analyzing the present situation of the two test systems. As a result, the vertical study of the two systems’past, present and future was formed. The horizontal study of each stage was conducted in each individual perspective. In the historical perspective, the paper described and compared the emerging background and development history of each exam system. By doing this, the paper was trying to figure out the question of’where did it come from’. The research found that both exam systems were promoted by each country’s political and economic environment, which embodied education’s political and economic function. The one in China was directly propelled by the Quality Education Reform, but the ultimate reason was the urge to cultivate creative talents for the nation in the Knowledge Economic Age. The one in US was more influenced by political reasons at its first appearance. From the 1970’s Minimum Competence Test to the present Comprehensive Exam and the End-of-Course Exam, the escalation of difficulty level and the expansion of test content mostly answered the calls of the nation’s political and economic needs.The study of the two exam systems’status quo was conducted from the three perspectives of education assessment, education measurement and education administration. The education assessment perspective focused on analyzing and comparing the definition and positioning of the Exam, which aimed to answer the question of’what kind of exam it is’. The definition, function, relationship with other assessment systems and the impacts of each exam system were studied one by one. The findings include that 1) all the provincial level regions haven’t reached a unanimous recognition of the exam; 2) there are two kinds of relationship between the Proficiency Exam system and the high school comprehensive assessment system in China. One is Integrated Mode; the other is Juxtaposed Mode.3) this exam in China is beneficial to the implementation of new curriculum reform, admission reform of higher education institutions and China’s international communication and collaboration with other countries; 4) the Exams in US are all based on the curriculum standards of each state and are summative exams; 5) similar with China’s Exam system, the US Exam also performs guiding function, supervising function and assessment function. The only difference lies in its accountability function; 6) the US Exam’s impacts are its helpfulness to urge students, teachers and high schools to assume responsibilities to improve themselves and then to enable the nation to maintain its world-leading position. The education measurement perspective focused on the study of the key elements and the implementation of the Exam in both countries, which aimed to answer the question of’how to test’. The exam content, exam methods, time arrangement, test items’development, score calculation and the application of test result were analyzed separately. The findings are 1) the Exam in China has a richer content and various exam methods, which can measure students’ learning outcomes in a comprehensive way, but may add students’already-heavy study burden; 2) the test item development in China’s Exam is not very professional, which leads to the lack of validity and authenticity. The conversion from raw score to standard grading levels is not scientific, which needs to be improved. As for how to use the Exam results in the higher education admission process is still not clear enough, which aggravate students’ worries; 3) the Exam content in US has a tendency to be versatile, but is still dominated by core subjects like reading, writing, mathematics and science. The Exam type is undergoing transformation from Comprehensive Exam to End-of-Course Exam; 4) the whole implementation of the Exam process in US is more reliable and efficient. The Exam feedbacks are more usable in supporting the education practice. The education administration perspective focused on the study of the organization and management of the Exam in China and US, which aimed to answer the question of’how to organize’. The management system, responding institution and management rules and regulations were researched accordingly. The findings are 1) the management system of the Exam in China is mostly a three-leveled hierarchy. The exception is that some places may specifically include senior high schools in the system, which will compose a four-leveled hierarchy; 2) the responding institutions in China are manifold, but can be categorized into four types; 3) different places in China have established rules and regulations to keep the Exam in order. Notifications and specifications are also publicized. Each provincial government has different regulations as to questions of whether or not to charge students for exam fee, and how much the fee should be; 4) the provincial governments in China need to simplify their management hierarchies of the Exam and cultivate the sense of serving the students; 5) the Exam system in US is dominantly two-leveled hierarchy which is shaped by the American educational administration system. The responding institutions of the Exam are usually the departments responsible for accountability and assessment; 6) the administration system of the Exam in US is generally more efficient since it has fewer levels of hierarchy. The regulations and rules of the Exam in US are established in the law. The Exam is almost free in every state and the rights of students are sincerely respected. The government education departments serve the students and teachers in an active way. Last but not least, the alternate exam policies for students with disabilities and language difficulties reflect the nation’s humanitarianism and pursuit of educational equality.The future perspective aimed at summarizing and anticipating the future development of the Exam in both countries. The features and the problems were summarized and the future developments were anticipated. This part was trying to answer the question of’where to go’. The key findings include:1) the Exam in China has three outstanding features:bureaucracy-oriented on organization and management of the Exam, diversified on Exam content and methods, comprehensive on implementation and involvement of local governments. There are mainly five problems in the Exam:different places need to reach an unanimous recognition of the Exam’s nature, the administration of the Exam need to be improved, test development process and scoring process need to be more professional, the Exam result need to be applicable nationwide and be used reasonably in the college admission process. In the future the government might need to work mainly on three aspects to solve the problems. First is to revitalize its management ideology. Second is to promote the development of professional assessment and measurement and introduce educational service companies. Third is to optimize and simplify the many senior high school assessment systems; 2) the features of the Exam in US are the democracy reflected in the whole Exam system, the rule-by-law spirit expressed in the implementation of the Exam and the professionalism shown in organization and management of the Exam. The common issues in different states are the high expenditure of the Exam, the overuse of the Exam result, the deficiency in the equality, the overestimation of economic value of the Exam, and deformation of the function of senior high school education. To tackle with these issues, the federal government and states might make efforts on the following aspects:to guarantee each student with equal education opportunities, to optimize the present Exam system by unifying the test standards of different states and expanding the Exam content, and to set up a comprehensive assessment system for senior high school education by introducing alternative assessments and by assessing students’high-order thinking skills. Based on all the comparisons between two countries, the paper made some contemplation on the common issues faced by both countries, such as the centralized and decentralized education administration systems and the possible backwash affects brought by the standards-based education reform.更多还原