检索
在线阅读 --教育科学版 2020年4期《新高考选考科目赋分方案再思考》
新高考选考科目赋分方案再思考--[在线阅读]
罗立祝
福建师范大学 教育学部, 福建 福州 350117
起止页码: 14--20页
DOI: 10.13763/j.cnki.jhebnu.ese.2020.04.003
摘要
2019年4月,河北、辽宁、江苏、福建、湖北、广东、重庆、湖南8个省市成为继2014年高考综合改革启动后的第三批试点省份,目前共有14个省市启动了高考综合改革。新一轮高考综合改革对高考科目设置作出重大制度创新,选考科目赋分改革成为一个极具挑战的难题。这三批高考综合改革试点省市对选考科目如何赋分开展了试错式的改革探索,满足了考试分数正态分布转换和普通高校招生对高考分数区分度的要求,但未能很好解决不同选考科目之间分数转换的等值性和可比性的问题,无法阻止出现功利选科博弈现象。对此,建议尝试采用参照语数英统考成绩的动态比例转换赋分方案,进一步完善现有选考科目赋分方案。

Reflections on the Scoring Scheme for the Elective Subjects of High School Academic Achievement Examinations in Gaokao Reform
LUO Lizhu
College of Education, Fujian Normal University, Fuzhou, Fujian 350117, China
Abstract:
In April 2019, eight provinces and cities,including Hebei, Liaoning, Jiangsu, Fujian, Hubei, Guangdong,Chongqing, and Hunan, became the third batch of pilot provinces after the launch of the comprehensive reform of the College Entrance Examination (Gaokao) in 2014. At present, 14 provinces and cities have launched the comprehensive reform. The new round of reform has made great institutional innovation in the setting of subjects for college entrance examination, and the reform of assigning scores to selected subjects is a very challenging task. These three batches of pilot provinces and cities have carried out trial and error reform on how to assign scores to the selected subjects, which meets the requirements of normal distribution conversion of test scores and differentiation of Gaokao scores. However, there is still much room for improvement in equivalence and comparability of scores between the different selected subjects, and unavoidable utilitarian selection of subjects as in a game of chance. In this regard, it is suggested to try the dynamic proportion conversion scoring scheme by reference to the test scores of Chinese, mathematics and English in the High School Academic Achievement Examinations.

收稿日期: 2020-04-16
基金项目: 国家教育考试科研规划重点课题“新高考学生学业水平等级性考试等级考赋分方式可行性研究”(GJK2017002)

参考文献:
[1]黄晓慧.标准分,还能挺多久[N].人民日报,2013-12-04.
[2]唐佐明.2002年广西的高考改革-兼谈我国高校招生体制的若干问题[J].湖北招生考试,2006(2).
[3]于涵,韩宁.关于改进新高考选考科目赋分方案的若干思考[J].中国高教研究,2018(6).
[4]朱邦芬."减负"及我国科学教育面临的挑战[J].物理与工程,2016(4).
[5]海南省考试局.海南高考为何实行标准分数制度?省考试局解读来了[EB/OL].(2018-06-26)[2020-03-26].http://hainan.sina.com.cn/news/hnyw/detail-ihencxtu1630470.shtml.
[6]温忠麟.新高考选考科目计分方式探讨[J].中国考试,2017(12).
[7]臧铁军,杨君.新高考中学业水平考试成绩转换研究[J].教育研究,2017(12).
[8]李金波.高考选考科目等级赋分制的再思考[J].教育评论,2019(3).
[9]杨志明.基于大数据的学业水平选考科目赋分方案[J].教育测量与评价,2019(1).