Clicca qui per scaricare

Condividi
La valutazione come strumento di empowerment organizzativo e professionale
Titolo Rivista: RIV Rassegna Italiana di Valutazione 
Autori/Curatori: Stefania Capogna 
Anno di pubblicazione:  2018 Fascicolo: 70  Lingua: Italiano 
Numero pagine:  20 P. 98-117 Dimensione file:  512 KB
DOI:  10.3280/RIV2018-070006
Il DOI è il codice a barre della proprietà intellettuale: per saperne di più:  clicca qui   qui 


Il saggio affronta il tema della valutazione come strumento di empowerment. A partire da una ricostruzione della rapida diffusione delle pratiche valutative, e di alcuni aspetti problematici attorno ai quali sono maturate prospettive critiche, l’autrice offre una breve presentazione dei più significativi contributi che guardano l’adozione degli approcci auto-valutativi nei sistemi educativi, con particolare attenzione alla School Self Evaluation. Di questa si ripropongono brevemente i principali assunti di valore e le criticità ad essa correlate, per giungere a mettere in evidenza, nelle conclusioni, la centralità del supporto gestionale e dei sistemi di leadership che sottendono al processo. Adottare un approccio di questo tipo per favorire, in seno all’autonomia dei sistemi educativi, la costruzione di competenze e capacità di valutazione organizzativa e professionale, significa, infatti, riconsiderare i processi di accompagnamento verso la nascente cultura della valutazione, e la necessità di formare nuove competenze strategiche all’interno di questo peculiare tipo di organizzazioni.


Keywords: Valutazione; Empowerment; Auto-Valutazione; Leadership; Clima Organizzativo; Scuola come Organizzazione.

  1. Beerens D.R. (2000). Evaluating teachers for professional growth. Creating a culture of motivation and learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
  2. Benadusi L., Serpieri R. (2000). Organizzare la scuola dell’autonomia. Roma. Carocci.
  3. Biesta G.J.J. (2004). Education, Accountability, and the Ethical Demand: Can the Democratic Potential of Accountability Be Regained?. Educational Theory, 54 (3).
  4. Bonaccorsi A. (2015). La valutazione possibile. Il Mulino, Milano.
  5. Bonazzi G. (2002). Come studiare le organizzazioni. Milano Il Mulino
  6. Campbell, R.J., Lindsay G. and Phillips, E. (2002). Primary headteachers' professional development: The paradox of ownership. School Leadership and Management, 22 (4), 359- 370., DOI: 10.1080/1363243022000053394
  7. Capogna S. (2010). Dirigenza scolastica e autonomia. Amministrazione in cammino. 14.10.2010. ISSN 2030-3711
  8. Capogna S. (2006). La traduzione locale di un sistema formativo integrato. Milano. Franco Angeli.
  9. Capogna S., Massimo Castagnaro (2014). La via italiana alla valutazione. Medicina e Chirurgia, 61/2014.
  10. Capogna S. (2015). “Challenges and opportunities for the school system”. Policy Futures in Education, March 3.
  11. Chrispeels J.H., Martin K.J, (2002). Four school leadership teams define their roles within organizational and political structures to improve student learning. School Effectiveness and School improvement, 13 (3), 327-365.
  12. Cocozza A. (2006). Direzione risorse umane. Politiche e strumenti per l’organizzazione e la gestione delle relazioni di lavoro. Milano. FrancoAngeli.
  13. Cocozza A. (2010). Persone, Organizzazioni, Lavori. Milano. FrancoAngeli.
  14. Cocozza A. (2011). Il Diversity Management. La gestione delle differenze negli ambienti di lavoro. Milano. FrancoAngeli.
  15. Cocozza A. (2012). Il sistema scuola. Autonomia, sviluppo e responsabilità nel lifewide learning. Milano. FrancoAngeli.
  16. Coryn Chris L. S (2008). Reforming the Evaluation of Research. New Directions for Evaluation, Number 118. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  17. Creemers B., Reezigt G.J. (1999). The role of school and classroom climate in elementary school learning environments. In H.J. In: Freiberg H. J., a cura di, School Climate: Measuring, Improving and Sustaining Healthy Learning Environment. London: Falmer Press, 30-48.
  18. Deming W.E. (1986). Out of the crisis. Quality, productivity and competitive position. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
  19. Department for Education and Employment (DfEE) (1998). Evaluation matters. London: HMSO.
  20. Fetterman D., Wandersman A. (2007). Empowerment Evaluation: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow. American Journal of Evaluation 28 (2).
  21. Fitz-Gibbon, C.T. (1996). Monitoring education: Indicators, quality and effectiveness. London: Cassell/Continuum.
  22. Fitz-Gibbon C.T., Tymms P. (2002). Technical and ethical issues in indicator systems: Doing things right and doing wrong things. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10 (6), 1-25.
  23. Fullan M. (1993). The new meaning of educational change. London: Cassell.
  24. Getzels J.W., Guba E.G. (1957). Social behavior and the administrative process. Social Review, 65, 423-441., DOI: 10.1086/442411
  25. Goldstein, H. (1995). Multilevel statistical models. London: Arnold.
  26. Gray J., Wilcox B. (1995). Good school and bad school: Evaluating performance and encouraging improvement. Buckingham: Open University Press.
  27. Greene M. (2001). Reflection on teaching. In Richardson V., a cura, Handbook of research on teaching (4th Edition). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
  28. Guba E.G, Lincoln Y.S. (2007), La valutazione di quarta generazione. Stame N. (a cura di) Classici della Valutazione, Franco Angeli, Milano.
  29. Hansen D.T. (2001). Teaching as a moral activity. In Richardson V., a cura, Handbook of research on teaching (4th Edition). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
  30. Hargreaves A. (Ed) (1998). International handbook of educational change. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
  31. Hargreaves A., Shirley D. (2012). The Global Fourth Way: The Quest for Educational Excellence. Paperback, Corwin.
  32. Harris A. (2001). Building the capacity for school improvement. School Leadership and Management, 21 (3), 261-270., DOI: 10.1086/442411
  33. Harris A. (2002). Effective leadership in schools facing challenging contexts. School Leadership and Management, 22 (l), 15-26.
  34. Hopkins D. (2001). School improvement jot real. London: Routledge-Falmer.
  35. Hoy W.K., Miskel C.G. (2001). Educational administration. Theory, research and practice (6th Edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.
  36. Kyriakides L., Campbell R.J. (2004). School Self-Evaluation And School Improvement: A Critique Of Values And Procedures. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 30, 23-36.
  37. Kyriakides L., & Huddleston P. (1999). Ethical issues arising from the political dimensions of programme evaluation. Lessons from two evaluation studies. Proceedings of the Fifth UK Evaluation Society Conference, Edinburgh.
  38. Kyriakides L., Campbell R.J. and Christofidou E. (2002). Generating criteria for measuring teacher effectiveness through a self-evaluation approach: A complementary way of measuring teacher effectiveness. School Effectiveness and School Improvement. International Journal of Research, Volume 13, 2002 - Issue 3.
  39. MacBeath J., Schratz M., Meuret D., and Lakobsen L. (2000). Self-evaluation in European schools. London: Routledge Falmer.
  40. Meuret D., Morlaix S. (2003). Conditions of success of a school's self-evaluation: Some lessons of an European experience. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 14 ( I ), 53-71.
  41. Muijs D., Reynolds D. (2001). Effective teaching. Evidence and practice. London: Sage.
  42. Nevo D. (1995). School-based evaluation. A dialogue for school improvement. Oxford: Pergamon.
  43. Northouse P. (2001). Leadership: Theory and practice (Second edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  44. OECD (1998). Education at a glance. Paris: OECD.
  45. OECD (2012), Monitoring and Evaluating Empowerment Processes, Holland H., Ruedin L., a cura di: -- https://www.oecd.org/dac/povertyreduction/50158246.pdf
  46. Palumbo M. (2015). Il processo di valutazione. Decidere, programmare, valutare. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  47. Patton M.Q. (1991). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. London: Sage.
  48. Reynolds D., Creemers B., Stringfield S., Teddlie C. and Schaffer G. (2002). World class schools. International perspectives on school effectiveness. London: Routledge.
  49. Rosenholtz S.J. (1989). Workplace conditions that affect teacher quality and commitment. The elementary School Journal, Vol 89, No. 4, 421-439., DOI: 10.1086/461584
  50. Scheerens J. (1992). Effective schooling: Research, theory and practice. London: Cassell.
  51. Scheerens J., Bosker R. (1997). The foundations and educational effectiveness. Oxford: Pergamon.
  52. SchÖn D.A. (1984). The reflective practitioner. How Professionals Think In Action. London: Temple Smith.
  53. Scott W.R. (1981). Le organizzazioni. Milano. Il Mulino.
  54. Scriven M. (2008). Evaluation in The New Millenium: Thre Transdisciplinary Vision. Donaldson S.I & Scriven M. (a cura di) Evaluating Social Programs and Problems: Visions for the New Millennium. Tylor & Francis e-Library.
  55. Stame N. (2016). Valutazione pluralista, Franco Angeli, Milano.
  56. Stoll L., Fink D. (1996). Changing our schools. Buckingham: Open University Press.
  57. Stufflebeam D.L., Shinkfield A.J. (1990). Systematic evaluation. Lancaster: Kluwer- Nijhoff.
  58. Teddlie C., Reynolds D. (2000). The international handbook of school effectiveness research. London: Falmer.
  59. Visser A. (2016). Testing toward Utopia: Performativity, Pedagogy and the Teaching Profession. In Evers J. e Kneyber R., a cura di, Flip The System. Routledge, London-NewYork.
  60. Waslander S., Pater C. e Van der Weide M. (2010), Markets in Education. An Analytical Review of Empirical Research on Market Mechanisms in Education. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 52.
  61. Weber M. (2000), L'etica della responsabilità, La Nuova Italia, Firenze.
  62. Wiggins G., McTighe J. (1998). Understanding by design years. London: Paul Chapman. Zan S. (1988). Logiche di azione organizzativa. Il Mulino. Milano.

Stefania Capogna, in "RIV Rassegna Italiana di Valutazione" 70/2018, pp. 98-117, DOI:10.3280/RIV2018-070006

   

FrancoAngeli è membro della Publishers International Linking Association associazione indipendente e no profit per facilitare l'accesso degli studiosi ai contenuti digitali nelle pubblicazioni professionali e scientifiche