跳到主要內容

評估研究

ww

評估研究團隊1)從事不同教育環境下評估相關主題的尖端研究,並增進對評估實踐和過程以及評估、教學和學習之間聯繫的理解; 2) 透過在本地、區域和國際層面產生和傳播基於研究的教育評估知識,促進知識轉移。 
 

與我們合作

 

永續發展目標

2015年,聯合國成員國同意17項全球永續發展目標(SDG),旨在消除貧窮、保護地球、和確保全民繁榮。研究團隊致力於以下永續發展目標的實現:

 

 

ww

 

我們的研究挑戰傳統的以教師為中心的教育規範,將教師主導的評估和學生主導的評估結合起來。我們專注於促進對評估過程的理解,並實施有效的評估實踐,在問責和促進學習這兩種評估目的之間達至平衡。這一趨勢在人工智慧技術不斷發展的背景下顯得尤為重要。 

 

在香港及其他地區,儘管數十年來一直在政府政策層面推動以促進學習評估為重點的評估改革,但有效評估在課堂層面的實施情況仍不令人滿意。我們的研究旨透過探索與情境想匹配的評估實踐並倡導學生充分參與評估過程來應對這一挑戰。透過為教學實踐、專業發展和政策決策提供信息,我們的研究致力於提高教育效率。

 

研究成果有廣泛的受益者,包括學生、教育工作者和政策制定者。透過協同教師主導和學生主導的評估並培養個人化的學習體驗,我們的研究有助於學生成為獨立、自我主導的學習者,為未來的學術和專業努力做好準備。

 

研究資助 

資助計劃

研資局高級研究學者計劃

自下而上的評估改革: 以學生為中心的評估驅動學習平臺

優配研究金

促進還是阻礙學習?生成式人工智能在自我評估過程中的作用

優配研究金

評估中國學生的反饋導向、反饋素養和學習參與度之間的關係:一項結構方程建模方法

優配研究金

利用在線互動式同儕評估發展學生回饋素養:交互模式、行為序列和影響因素

優配研究金

通過自我評估發展學生的評鑑性判斷和回饋素養:一項實驗研究

傑出青年學者計劃

職前教師雙重回饋素養的研究:發展軌跡,交互作用和影響因素

公共政策研究資助計劃

新常態下小學教師的電子評估實踐、意願及影響因素:對 發展電子評估政策的啟示

優配研究金

賦能教師反饋提升學生學習成果:學生反饋導向和學習參與度的作用

優配研究金

探究學生自我評估過程:一項自然情境下的縱向實驗研究

優配研究金

全面理解進展性評估:預測因素、教師意願及實踐

優配研究金

學生自我評估的校準、預測因子及影響

 

出版刊物

  1. Yang, M., Yan, Z., Yang, L., & Zhan, Y. (2024). Understanding and developing student assessment literacy. Routledge.
  1. Yang, L., Chiu, M. M., & Yan, Z. (Eds.) (2024). Unlocking the power of teacher feedback: A student-centric perspective.  Routledge.
  1. Yan, Z. (2022). Student self-assessment as a process for learning. Routledge.
  1. Yan, Z., & Yang, L. (Eds.) (2021 ). Assessment as learning: Maximising opportunities for student learning and achievement. Routledge.

 

期刊文章

  1. Yang, L., Yan, Z., Zhang, D., Boud, D., & Datu, J. A. D. (2023). Exploring the roles of grit and academic self-concept from a perspective of educational psychology. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 1-26.
  1. Zhan, Y., Yan, Z., Wan, Z. H., Wang, X. Zeng, Y., Yang, M., & Yang, L. (2023). Effects of online peer assessment on higher-order thinking: A meta-analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology. 1-42.
  1. Lee, W. S. W., & Yang, M. (2023). Effective collaborative learning from Chinese students’ perspective: A qualitative study in a teacher-training course. Teaching in Higher Education, 28(2), 221-237.
  1. Yan, Z., Lao, H., Panadero, E., Fernández-Castilla, B., Yang, L., & Yang, M. (2022). Effects of self-assessment and peer-assessment interventions on academic performance: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 37, 100484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100484
  1. Yan, Z., & Carless, D. (2022). Self-assessment is about more than self: The enabling role of feedback literacy. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 47(7), 1116-1128.
  1. Yan, Z., Chiu, M. M., & Cheng, E. C. K. (2022). Predicting teachers’ formative assessment practices: Teacher personal and contextual factors. Teaching and Teacher Education, 114, 103718.
  1. Zhan, Y., Wan, Z. H. & Sun, D. (2022). Online formative peer feedback in Chinese contexts at the tertiary Level: A critical review on its design, impacts and influencing factors. Computers & Education, 104341
  1. Yang, L., Hsu, C. L., Ye, T., & Sin, K. F. (2022). Assessing Emotions of Teaching Assistants in Inclusive Education. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 813726.
  1. Yan, Z. (2020). Self-assessment in the process of self-regulated learning and its relationship with academic achievement. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(2), 224-238.
  1. Cai, Y., Yang*, M., & Yao, J. (2022). More is not always better: the nonlinear relationship between formative assessment strategies and reading achievement. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 29(6), 711-728. (*Corresponding author)
  1. Ma, N., Li, Y.-M., Guo, J.-H., Laurillard, D., & Yang*, M. (2022). A learning model for improving in-service teachers’ course completion in MOOCs. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-16. (*Corresponding author)
  1. Zhan, Y. (2022). Developing and validating a student feedback literacy scale. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. 47(7), 1087-1100.
  1. Zhan, Y. (2023). What do college students think of feedback literacy? An ecological interpretation of Hong Kong students’ perspectives. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. 48(5), 686-700.