Number of words: 269<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The approach in non-physical sciences should be less forbidding. It should rely less upon the applications of validity. It should rely more upon evidence that is derived from observation: questionnaires, interviews, informal conversations, diaries and documents. In such evaluations, oddities and side effects may prove particularly illuminating. It may not have the exact mass of a scientific evaluation. It is like an impressionist painting done from life conveying and understanding of the whole class of objects to which it belongs, no less well than a classical study, that is chiefly done in the studio. The emphasis on evidence must give way to a more pragmatic one: the method of evaluating things on the basis of their palpable effects. This would acknowledge the importance of controlled observation by the teacher, for they have a validity which has a greater predictive value than standardized tests or external examinations.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It is not censure or approval that is significant for learning. It is the understanding by the student of the reply he received in a particular evaluation that is important. This applies equally to the teacher for learning here too will come only when he is capable of constructive self-criticism and analytic self-appraisal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
All good teaching has to become diagnostic. And teachers need to teach children how to learn diagnostically. The feedback principle in programmed learning is significant. The learner needs to realise what he does not know and correct his errors as soon as possible so that wrong learning is not reinforced. He must know the reasons for his mistakes.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n