O A RIGINAL RTICLE

2020
Advances in Environmental Biology, 7(8): 2020-2029, 2013
ISSN 1995-0756
This is a refereed journal and all articles are professionally screened and reviewed
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Comparing the Skills and Attitudes of Descriptive and Quantitive Plan of Grade 3 Students in Dezful
Elementary Schools
1
Effat Piry, 2Masoud Boroumand Nasab, 3Naser Sarraj Khorramy and 4Shahrzad Khosravi
Negad
1
Islamic Azad University of Khorasegan, Khorasegan, Esfahan, Iran
Islamic Azad University of Dezful, Kuye Azadegan, Dezful, Iran
3
Islamic Azad University of Dezful, Kuye Azadegan, Dezful, Iran
4
Islamic Azad University of Dezful, Kuye Azadegan, Dezful, Iran
2
Effat Piry, Masoud Boroumand Nasab, Naser Sarraj Khorramy and Shahrzad Khosravi Negad;
Comparing the Skills and Attitudes of Descriptive and Quantitive Plan of Grade 3 Students in Dezful
Elementary Schools
ABSTRACT
Evaluation is no separable part of education process and development curriculum. Descriptive evaluation is
a creative event in educational area in Iran that aims to make basic changes in several areas. The goal of this
study was comparing the learning skills of experimental science and attitudes of third grade elementary students
involved in the quantitive and descriptive evaluation plan in Dezful in 2010-2011. The research way was casual
– comparative. The statistic population was all third grade students in Dezful elementary schools including
5738. 200 students were involved in the descriptive evaluation and 200 students were in the quantitive one,
which were selected with accidental multi – stages sampling way method. The tools used in this research were:
1) Seven performance tests evaluating learning skills in the experimental science (observation, communication,
classifying, assessing, using tools, interpreting the findings and predicting), 2) Learning skills rank scale, 3)
Rank scales evaluating individual, social and learning attitudes. For the analysis of data, in inferential analysis,
Multivariate MANOVA and ANOVA test by the level of α = 0/01 significant was used. Findings indicated in
the learning skills of experimental science and attitude elements, the performance descriptive evaluation
students was significantly more than those of quantitive ones.
Key words: Learning skill, Attitude, Descriptive evaluation, Quantitive evaluation 1.
Introduction
Evaluation is an unseparatable process of
education and curriculum development. Beam and
Field believe evaluation is "the process of
identifying, getting and preparing descriptive data,
judging about values and qualities of goals, designs,
performance and conclusions, in order to lead
deciding, services to the needs of replying and
understanding more of the phenomenon under taken
[45].
Andrewz, Chen et al and Turner emphasize that
evaluation affects how we present something in the
class [9]. Capper [18] believe a well-designed system
of evaluation can help to improve the quality of
education and a bad- designed system of evaluation
can damage all done trials for getting educational
quality. Black, Harison, Lee, Marshal and William
([13,17]) presented strong documents that evaluation
can improve the bases of learning.
Changes in class evaluation system, that
nowadays are seen in many countries of the world, is
affected by two approaches: the first is new
psychological learning approaches like cognitism and
constructivism and the other is educational reforming
revolution and curriculum changes and international
comparisons in different texts subjects and necessity
of increasing educational standards [74]. These
evaluation approaches co-stem with own ancient
philosophy (the philosophy of Kant, Soghrat …) and
co-bias with cognitive psychology (Like the
psychology of Piaget, Vigotski and Glemin) getting
far from classic models of behaviorism [52].
Concentration of classic evaluation first is on
cognitive abilities [67] and in pack evaluation
systems; it makes students practically kept in low
domains of thought, often conceptual knowledge
[44]. From Black and William view [11]. Also this
way of evaluation, encourage students to parrot
learning and other training aspects like moral,
connected with talent and … make vain and
unconcept.
Quantitive classical evaluation is a branch of
evaluation involved with data numbers and
Corresponding Author
Effat Piry, Islamic Azad University of Khorasegan, Khorasegan, Esfahan, Iran
E-mail: [email protected]
Tel: +0-916-645-3099
2021
Adv. Environ. Biol., 7(8): 2020-2029, 2013
quantitive analysis [25]. In this model, the students'
progression is determined by marks [8]. The tools
and quantitive scales involving gust with inspirit
inflexible numbers have the lack of learning,
reforming and growth of students especially in
teaching-learning [56].
As a whole; valid evaluation, following new
excellent ways searching for goals and effects of
learning, qualitive techniques like careful class
observation and using reliability records, being more
important than quantitive techniques like standard
tests [54].
Descriptive evaluation is an innovative event in
Iran educational system. In this evaluation; necessary
data, valid and documentive to recognize learners
wholly in different learning dimensions, using tools
and suitable ways are got along the teaching-learning
process; according to that, necessary quantitive
feedbacks to help better teaching-learning in suitable
emotional atmosphere for students, teachers and
parents [1].
Nowadays; according to usual training
approaches in the world, the school is believed to be
as a place that its basic task is learning. So in a
school, different student dimensions are paid
attention and attitude, skillful and knowledgeable
goals are emphasized the same [35].
Descriptive evaluation approach; having curable
identity, by considering process and deleting
weaknesses and learning barriers and removing them
somehow, improve teaching-learning process [33].
80th experiments of quantitive evaluation system in
our country make the weaknesses to be appeared.
Concerning range of unsucceeded students in
elementary level along 1996-2002, the TIMSS and
PIRLS results which are international tests, also the
range of leaving education by students in 2000 shows
the shortages and problems in elementary grade [22].
Elementary grade is the basis of all educational
levels; so paying attention to its problems is very
important and necessary. Being these problems in
educational system especially in the field of
educational evaluation, the lack of using and
applying suitable norms and standards in evaluation
by the teachers, extended emphasizing of teachers on
the contents of books instead of skills and attitudes,
encouraging the individuals involved with
educational system in concerned with the importance
of paying attention to the process of teachinglearning, helping to the planners related to evaluation
to know the problems in two approaches of
evaluation are the reasons for choosing the topic by
the researcher.
The success in any educational system depends
on the trail and paying attention to the modern
evaluation methods and using process-based
evaluation more than before. In process-based
evaluation, the teacher is going to know how and
what kind of quality the student has learned and
emphasizes on process-based teaching [37].
Qualitive evaluation as a searching approach; in
contrast with the usual models of evaluation, by
paying attention to curriculum and development plan
norms, considers the depth and quality of students'
learning instead of quantitive view [79].
In this plan, instead of emphasizing on getting
knowledge, the process of teaching-learning in
skillful attitude domains is taken into account [7].
The ways of thinking scientifically are called
learning skills, that in fact are the ways of learning.
Learning skills as well as knowledge got by skills
and also scientific values and the thinking habits are
all include in knowledge [39].
The attitude is a positive or negative emotional
gesture toward a topic and in fact is a concept that
determines the way of behaving individuals [64].
Descriptive evaluation by emphasizing on learning
process, training learning skills, learner activity,
group activities, motivating internal motivations of
learners and emphasizing on significant learning and
cognitive strategies, have been leaded to valuable
results [33].
Some observations have showed that the
students in these classes have more ability in taking
part in activities, participating and exchanging with
their classmates and teachers [30,57,61]. The
teacher's and parent's views show the decreasing of
stress phenomenon [81,58,42].
O, considering the replacement of descriptive
evaluation with quantitive evaluation in elementary
grade and high energy and expenses spent for
performing well of this plan, it's necessary to know
whether the availability amount of the learning and
attitude skills in the students involving the
descriptive and quantitive evaluation are different.
2. Previous Research:
In Amiri's research, studying the amount of
effectiveness of descriptive evaluation plan in 20052006, the study was leaded to these results: the
quality of teaching-learning process of mentioned
students in mental last-living elements, the amount of
motivation toward doing home-works and the
amount of availability toward physical goals were
better than those in quantitive evaluation.
Rezaee and seif also in a research about the
effect of descriptive evaluation on cognitive,
emotional and psycho-activating characteristics of
students 2006 stated the level of student' progress in
descriptive evaluation plan in cognitive variables, the
information amount metacognitive and also the
variables of psycho-activity domain is significantly
more than students in public schools that were the
same level with them, but in emotional variables'
domain no significant difference was seen. In other
words, educational evaluation is getting so far from
gathering data goals, for deciding about learner
progress and is going to help the learners in learning
process.
2022
Adv. Environ. Biol., 7(8): 2020-2029, 2013
Denis and Kluge [20] found out that applying
qualities evaluation on the reading performance and
increasing the knowledge of metacognition in learner
has a positive effect. In their opinion, prepared
feedbacks got by qualitive evaluation make the
student able to control and check their reading
activities.
Romberg [71] in a research on the teachers
found out that when they participated in the
educational courses of being familiar with qualitive
evaluation, the learner' progress was improved.
The findings of Hasani's research [34] also
showed the reading progress of the students involved
with descriptive evaluation in comparison to other
learners. Van Evera [84] in a research, showing
effectiveness of feedback in qualitive evaluation
increased the individual usefulness of learner
significantly.
In Shavelson opinion, if evaluation is an
unseparatable part of teaching, it can support
learning.
Green Stein [29], also in the article of "every day
in the class" stated that the results came to the point
if assessment is considered as an unseparatable part
of teaching-learning process; it then can be
concluded to the learner's improvement in learning.
Hubner [38] emphasized that final assessment
cannot give update information about the way of
teaching or the change in the strategy, but effective
use of formative evaluation can give information
which help teachers in teaching-learning process.
Friedman [25] in a study about descriptive
evaluation in elementary grade showed that the
teacher's descriptive reports have affected the
student's behavior and correct feedback to the
students and emphasizing on their improvement have
caused a significant decrease on the student's
behavioral problems involving the descriptive
evaluation plan.
The results of Karimi's research [43] showed
that behavior disorders in the school involving
descriptive evaluation plan are decreased.
Zari also in [87] in a research showed that the
students involved in descriptive evaluation have
better attitude toward school than those in classical
schools and their improvement is also better than the
second ones.
Heidari et al [36] stated that qualitive evaluation
can affect the psychological hygiene teachinglearning environment acceptably.
Arambani [4] in a following study believed the
students in first grade of elementary school involving
descriptive evaluation are in better conditions in
psychological health and motivation, having less
stress than of qualitive evaluation. Many studies have
showed that examination stress, the fear from telling
that I am present and here, the lack of selfconfidence and psycho logic reactions in the schools
involving descriptive evaluation is so less [46,68,61].
In smith's view [77] this has caused all the
teaching- learning process wholly in the field of
important aspects like moral and behavioral be
present and so active. For this reason most of the
planners and scientists in education in west have
concluded the most important domains of human is
neglected and cognitive domain increasing is
emphasized through its surface.
Mulford [59], showing positive picture of
oneself, supportive atmosphere, preparing enjoyable
work conditions and making them healthy for
students named as classes with positive
characteristics.
Kohvand [49], in a research believes in final
classical tests just pay attention to the educational
results quantitively dimensionally and it causes
educational goals to be limited and most of them
have processing aspect and also most of qualitive
goals like thinking skills and creativity, training
hometown, co-employee, responsibility and … not
being evaluated in tests.
One of the descriptive evaluation tools is
portfolio. Those who believe in using portfolio have
reasons that using it causes the learners how to think
and leads to problem-solving ways and creativity
giving the teachers more data than the classic
evaluation methods, making the students have more
active and effective role in their improvement [51].
Bloom and Bacon [15] studing twenty cases about
the effect of portfolio on the learning and behavior
process concluded, using portfolio as paying
attention to the learners positive characteristics
growth, decreases their behavior problems.
3. Hypotheses:
Based on the research problem, the research has
two main hypothesis and ten sub-hypothesis. The
main hypotheses are as followed:
H1: The availability amount of skills in the
experimental science course for the students involved
in the descriptive evaluation is more than the
quantitive evaluation. (This main hypothesis includes
seven sub-hypothesis and for the learning element's
skills in experimental science the items like
observation, communication, classifying, assessing,
using tools, interpreting the findings and predicting
are investigated).
H2: The availability amount of attitudes of students
involving in the descriptive evaluation plan is more
than students involving in quantitive evaluation.
(This main hypothesis includes three sub-hypothesis
for the attitude elements including individual, social
and learning attitudes which were investigated).
4. Research Method:
The research method was casual-comparative.
The tools used in this research were eleven ones
including: 1) Seven performance tests to assess seven
2023
Adv. Environ. Biol., 7(8): 2020-2029, 2013
skills; six researcher-made tests and one standard
test. The test's validity was determined by getting the
expert's views in this field and the numbers for
assessment
of
observation,
communication,
classifying, assessing, using tools, interpreting the
findings and predicting skills in order were 0/97,
0/93, 1, 1, 0/90, 1, and 0/93. Also reliability of tests
by test-retest method in order was determined 0/75,
0/70, 0/78, 0/85, 0/80, 0/85, and 0/70. 2) The
researcher-made scale of ranking in learning skills of
experimental science according to expert's views was
0/90 and agreement on sub-elements was calculated
between 0/80 till 0/97. The scale reliability according
to Chronback alpha was 0/95. 3) Three ranking
scales for assessing individual attitudes, social and
learning ones, which its validity according to expert's
views was 0/90 and the agreement of them on subelements was between 0/80 till 0/97. The reliability
of the scales was determined by Chronback alpha
and the number was 0/91.
5.4. Sample:
The research society includes all third grade
students in Dezfoul elementary level in 2010-2011,
by the ages between 9 and 10. The numbers were
5738 including 2776 girls and 2962 boys.
5. The Results of Hypotheses Testing:
5.1. Results of Testing H1:
The first theory of research: Level of
achievement to skills in empirical science in
descriptive evaluation students was more than
quantitive evaluation students. (This theory is used
for observation, communication, classifying,
assessing, using tools, interpreting the findings and
predicting skills). The results of variance analysis
related to this theory are given in tables 1 and 2.
Table 1: Summary results of Variance analyzing for multivariate on Means of experimental science learning skills in two groups of
descriptive and quantitive evaluation.
Effect
Test
Value
F-ratio
DF of hypothesis
DF of error
Sig.
group
Piillai's Trace
0/858
338/884
7
292
0/0001
Wilk's Lambda
0/142
338/884
7
292
0/0001
Hotelling's
6/052
338/884
7
292
0/0001
Trace
Roy's lagest
6/052
338/884
7
292
0/0001
root
Content of table 1 show that among involved
groups in research (descriptive and quantitive
evaluation) of at least one of the dependent variables
of learning (observation, communication, classifying,
assessing, using tools, interpreting the findings and
predicting skills) there is a certain difference. On the
other hand, tetrapliod tests of multi variable variance
analysis related to 7 theories of research are
statistically meaningfull and mean that that the
among group of students involved in descriptive
evaluation and group of students involved in
quantitive evaluation at least in one of the seven
comparable variables. There is a meaningfull
difference.
In order to investigating the difference of above
mentioned dependent variables in groups, The one
way variances in Manova test was done on each of
the dependent variables. The results of this analysis
are shown in table 2.
Table 2: Results of one way variances in Manova test for comparing dependent variables on learning skills in two groups of descriptive and
quantitive evaluation.
dependent variables
Sum of squares
DF of freedom
Mean Square
F-ratio
Sig.
(learning skills)
Observation
10130/422
1
10130/422
624/613
0/0001
Communication
15813/063
1
15813/063
773/039
0/0001
Classifying
8235/563
1
8235/563
303/134
0/0001
Assessing
23870/250
1
23870/250
1707/718
0/0001
Using tools
8372/25
1
8372/25
1086/277
0/0001
Interpreting
33948/063
1
33948/063
1147/253
0/0001
the findings
Predicting
3158/44
1
3158/44
318/275
0/0001
Content of table 2 show that, all acquired
amounts of F for skill components, are statistically
(p<0/001) meaningful. On the other hand, the results
say that, students who took quantitive evaluation
have meaningful differences in observation,
communication, classifying, assessing, using tools,
interpreting the findings and predicting skills. Which
this confirms the theory also according to means
comparisons, means of skills of students took
descriptive evaluation is more than mean of students
who took quantitive evaluation.
5.2. The Results of Testing H2:
The second theory of research: theories of
descriptive evaluation students are more than
quantitive evaluation students. (This hypothesis was
studied for individual, social and learning attitudes).
2024
Adv. Environ. Biol., 7(8): 2020-2029, 2013
The results of variance analysis are given in tables 3
and 4.
Content of table 3 shows that there is a
meaningful difference among groups, participating in
the research in at least one attitude dependent
variables (individual, social and learning attitudes).
On the other hand, tetrapliod tests of multi variable
variance analysis related to 3 variables of the
research are statistically meaningful and it can be
said that group of students who took descriptive
evaluation and group of students who took quantitive
evaluation are different in at least one of the three
comparable variables.
In order to check the difference of groups in
attitude dependent variables, analysis of one way
variances in Manova test was done on each of the
dependent variables. The results of this analysis are
given in table 4.
Table 3: Summary results of Variance analyzing for multivariate on Means of attitudes in two groups of descriptive and quantitive
evaluation.
Effect
Test
Value
F-ratio
DF of hypothesis
DF of error
Sig.
group
Piillai's Trace
0/180
29/048
3
296
0/0001
Wilk's Lambda
0/820
29/048
3
296
0/0001
Hotelling's
0/220
29/048
3
296
0/0001
Trace
Roy's largest
0/220
29/048
3
296
0/0001
root
Table 4: Results of one way variances in Manova test for comparing dependent variables on learning skills in two groups of descriptive and
quantitive evaluation.
dependent variables
Sum of squares
DF of
Mean Square
F-ratio
Sig.
(Attitudes)
freedom
individual
14592/64
1
14592/64
84/107
0/0001
social
12600/063
1
12600/063
50/234
0/0001
learning
7030/822
1
7030/822
5/85
0/0001
As observed in table 4, the entire F amount
calculated for theatrical dependent variables in
(p<0/001) level are meaningful. These results show
that descriptive evaluation students and quantitive
evaluation students have meaningful differences in
individual, social and learning attitudes. Above result
confirms the hypothesis of research. Comparison of
means of course show that mean of attitudes of
students who took descriptive evaluation is more
than mean of students who took quantitive
evaluation.
6. Summary and Concluding Remarks:
With attention to acquired results it's obvious
that level of achievement to learning skills in
empirical science for students who are evaluated with
descriptive evaluation is more than students who are
evaluated with quantitive evaluation. So, the first
hypothesis of research is confirmed and it can be
concluded that evaluation guidelines used in
descriptive evaluation method have prepared needed
conditions for growing learning skills. The results
gained from this theory are accordance with views
and results researches of Amiri [3], Rezaee & Seif
[70], Norouzi [63], Reihani & Hoseini [69], Mahdavi
Far [53], Sadeghi Motlagh [73], Hasani [34], Nabavi
& Rezaee Rad [60], Denis & Kluger [20], Fuchs et al
[26], Black & William [12], Romberg [71], Olina
[65], Black [13], Arthur [5], Van Evera [84], Wu &
Tsai [86], Shavelson, [72], Huebner [38], Green
Stein [29], Buldu & Buldu [17], but they are not in
accordance with Kalhor [44], Mir Hoseini [37], Nick
Far et al [61] and Waddle [85] researches. In
specification of these results, which are on the basis
of constructivism theory? We deal with some
characteristics of descriptive evaluation Feedback:
Different researches have confirmed the usefulness
of genetic evaluation and giving feedback in students'
performances [75,84,50,11]. In this design, the result
of tests in the form of learning feedbacks is returned
to students to understand their errors and its distance
from their performance. These cases are of principals
which are emphasized in "constructivism theory ".
Paying attention to recognition and self-adjusted
learning: For Hacker, metacognition not only
involves awareness of many of his knowledge,
processes and his cognition and emotional
conditions, but also is related to conscious abilities of
supervision and adjusting knowledge and cognitive
and emotional conditions [47]. In descriptive
evaluation method, students are directed to manage
their learning process and they themselves with being
active in learning process and evaluation become
aware of their learning, because procreators
challenge students in field of reasoning, asking
questions, communication, views evaluation, framing
problems, acquiring and implementation of clues,
knowledge creation and creating new products. Use
of performance evaluation: Experience has showed
that such evaluations are attractive and meaningful
for students [16]. Eisner quoted from Talkhabi [82]
that in order to testing student's abilities, for
knowledge application and application in real and
different situations, evaluation of operation is very
useful. According to Wiggins, we must retrench our
evaluations on the basis of valid performance
problems, assessments and worthwhile researches
2025
Adv. Environ. Biol., 7(8): 2020-2029, 2013
[54]. Using different instruments: Teachers in
addition to evaluating knowledge, skills and attitudes
of students with using different tools can reinforce
these goals. In comparison with traditional tests,
descriptive evaluation prepares more useful
information's. Since these information's came from
various resources and teacher for evaluating students
satisfied with only written tests. In this approach
teachers with using of objective observations while
building something, doing research and cooperation
with others, utilization of checklists and etc can
acquire exact information about students. Emphasize
on self- evaluation: This concept have close
connection with metacognition. Task of education
system is confront of mind with world and acquiring
experience and data process and students himself is
pivot of learning and with self- evaluation and selfdirection he can establish his basis of knowledge.
Studies carried out by Moohen and Stalling and
Arthur et al [5] have shown positive effect of selfassessment on students performance specially in
difficult paper works and self- assessment is known
as a powerful and acceptable method in student
evaluating because of a positive effect that it has on
students performance through increasing inner
impetus and increasing self- confident [28]. A
research has shown that compound of selfassessment with teacher's testing has a positive effect
on learner's performance [65].
According to second theory of the research and
results amount of achievement to insights in students
with descriptive evaluation is more than students
who are evaluated with quantitive method. Therefore
we can conclude that evaluating guidelines used in
this research prepare needed conditions for growth of
desired attitudes in students. The results gained from
this theory are accordance with views and results
researches of Karimi [43], Behravi [8], Alizade [2],
Hasani [35], Hamedi [31], Hasani [32], Zari [87],
Farzan Pour [23], Heidari et al [36], Arambani [4],
Slavin [80], Friedman [25], Kocavski & Endler [48],
Bassey [7] and Bloom & Bacon [15] but they are not
in accordance with Amiri [3], Khosh Kholgh & Shir
Mohammadi [46], Rezaee & Seif [70], Fath Abadi
[24] and Shir Mohammadi [78] researches. In
specifying these results we refer to some features of
descriptive evaluation: Fading the role of exam and
teacher's conclusion with respect to various fields:
Traditional evaluation focus on individual
performance of student and students often perform
on a competitive situation. While competing,
students not only don't observe the function of their
process but also they just pay attention to result of
their performance Johnston [40]. Gay [27] believe
that norm tests increases educational competition
among students, but at elementary or even middle
school creating educational competition among
students is not necessary nor is acceptable.
Descriptive evaluation through paying attention to
learning process and using continuum assessments
can fade the role of exams and increase mental
hygienic of teaching- learning environment. This
caused students to learn better and behave more
accurately. Mohammadi [57] showed that students in
descriptive evaluation benefit from a higher selfconfident than common school's students. Using
ordinal scale, reducing stress and improving
behavior: For Ball [6] stress is factor of stimulation if
it was normal and is a necessary condition for any
sensitive and exact activity, but as these stresses
increases the improvement of learning decreases.
Some researchers have shown that there is a negative
and meaningful relationship between stress and
educational progress [41,76]. Biabangard while
confirming above mentioned effect refers to results
of researches of Saramon and Mendly, Pall and
Erickson and Saramon that they achieved to the
same results and showed that stress affect
educational progress. In descriptive evaluation
method, used ordinal scales have flexible
characteristics and decrease competition among
students and their stress. Using portfolio: The use of
student's works in continuum evaluation is a crucial
case and using them according to this belief that one
thing that has most importance in instructional
situations.
Therefore
continuum
evaluation
emphasizes on individual instructional plan [54].
Portfolios in descriptive evaluation do not compare
students with each other, so unsound competitions
that damage communication network of students
cannot be create. Kathy believes that the process of
student is decision in selecting portfolio's material,
positively affect attitude's students in the field of
their activities and schools.
Observation: In this project also observation is
one the most useful methods in a data collecting from
class and process of student's learning. Because in
descriptive evaluation emphasis on evaluation is
normal and natural. Casta [66] says: "characteristics
of conscious behavior like assiduity, listening,
flexibility in thinking, metacognition and accuracy in
performance can be reinforced through observing
student's performance. Doing project: students
through doing projects walk in the direction of
reinforcing their attitudes. Project method is
systematic methods which through a wide research
process develop cognitive skills including analysis,
compound and evaluation. Also it instructs students
the basic processes of live such as programming,
communion, decision making and cooperation and it
persuades self-motivated learning [83].
7. Research suggestions:
• Giving continuum instructions in order to
familiarize teachers with new methods of evaluating
and trying toward changing teacher's attitudes about
the importance of new methods of evaluation.
• Familiarize teachers with learning skills and way
of instructing skills to the students.
2026
Adv. Environ. Biol., 7(8): 2020-2029, 2013
• Familiarize teachers with necessary attitudes and
how to developing them in students.
• Holding congress, meeting and workshop
sessions in order to familiarize teachers with good of
each lesson.
References
1.
Ahmadi, A., T. Hamze Beigi, T. Rastegar, F.
Frouzbakhsh, Z. Yassini, 2009. Teacher guidline
in qualitive (descriptive) evaluation. Tehran:
Corporation of edition and publication of Iranian
textbooks.
2. Alizade, A., 2008. Methods of assessment and
qualitive evaluation of educational progress.
Booshehr: Hazrat Masoomeh, 291-303.
3. Amiri, T., (2005-2006). Checking the level of
usage and usefulness of descriptive evaluation
method in the first grade and second third grade
of elementary school in Choharmahal Bakhtiari
province, research instructional council of
education system of Choharmahal Bakhtiari.
4. Arambani, L., 1991. Descriptive and Numerical
Evaluation in Primary School. School
Psychology and Human Development, 324-336.
5. Arthur, A., 2004. An Exploration of the Impact
of Prior Achievement, Task Complexity,
Cultural Knowledge and Performance Feedback
on the Mathematics Self- efficacy and Selfassessment of African-American Preadolescent
Students. (Doctoral dissertation). Howard
University.
6. Ball, S., 1990. Motivitation in the education
system (translated by Seied Ali Asghar
Mosadded). Shiraz: Shiraz University.
7. Bassey, B.A., 2002. Student's Evaluation of
Instruction, Attitude towards Mathematics and
Mathematics in Southern Cross River State.
(Unpublished Master's Degree Thesis). Faculty
of Education, University of Calabar, Calabar,
Nigeria.
Available
at:
http://www.ncsu.edu/ncsu/aren/seksiens.html.
8. Behravi, F., 2008. Comparative studying on
teachers and administrators attitudes concerning
usage of qualitive and quantitive evaluation in
first, second and third grade of elementary
school of Susa at educational (2007-2008).
(Unpublished
M.A
dissertation).
Azad
University of Dezful, Iran.
9. Beirami Pour A., M.J. Liaghatdar, S.M. Sharif,
2008. Investigating the amount if usage and
effect of "teaching- learning process" and
"evaluation" of English course in Shiraz high
school. New educative thoughts. Period, 4(4):
73-95.
10. Biaban Gard, E., 1999. Stress of exam. Tehran:
Islamic culture contribution office.
11. Black, P.J., D. William, 1998. Assessment and
Classroom Learning. Assessment in Education:
Principles Policy and Practice, 5: 7-73.
12. Black, P.J., D. William, 2001. Assessment for
Learning: 10 Principals for Guiding Classroom
Practice. English, 77.
13. Black, P.J., 2004. Working inside the Black
Box. Phi Delta Kappan. ERIC Data Full Text
Library.
14. Blok, H., M.E. Otter, J. Roeleveld, 2002. Coping
with Conflicting Demands: Student Assessment
in Dutch Primary School. Studies in Educational
Evaluation, 28: 177-188.
15. Bloom, L., E. Bacon, 2003. Professional: An
Alternative on the Preparation of Teachers of
Students with Behavioral Disorders. Journal of
Behavioral Disorders, 20(4): 2-300.
16. Brualdi, A., 1998. Implementing Performance
Assessment in the Classroom, Practical
Assessment. Research & evaluation, 6(2).
17. Buldu, M., N. Buldu, 2010. Concept Mapping as
a Formative Assessment in College Classroom:
Measuring Usefulness and Student Satisfaction.
Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2:
2099-2104.
18. Capper, J., 1994. Testing to Learn … Learning
to Test: A Policy-Maker's Guide to Batter
Educational Testing. Washington. Academy for
Educational Development.
19. Cathy, G., 1992. The Portfolio and Its Use:
Develop Mentally Appropriate Assessment of
Young Children. ERIC Digest.
20. Denis, T., C. Kluger, 1996. Designing and
Assessing Curricula, Sanfransisco. USA, 114.
21. Farahani, M., 2004. Qualitive evaluation of
graduated students. Tehran: Monadie Tarbiat
institute.
22. Farajollahi, M., F. Haghighi, 2007. The role of
continuum evaluation on depth of students
learning in second grade in elementary school of
Tehran. Training, 92: 79-116.
23. Farzan Pour, A., 2010. Comparison of cognitive,
emotional
and
psychological-dynamic
performance with respect to and quantitive and
descriptive evaluation of students in Dezful.
(Unpublished
M.A
dissertation).
Azad
University, Dezful, Iran.
24. Fath Abadi, J., 2006. Checking the effect of
descriptive evaluation in achieving to cognitive,
emotional and psychological-dynamic goals in
elementary school of Markazi province, Council
if training research of educational system of
Markazi province.
25. Friedman, T., 1998. Descriptive Evaluation and
Behavior Problem. ERIC Digest, 38-43.
26. Fuchs, L., D. Fuchs, K. Karnes, C. Hanlett, M.
Katzaroff, 1999. Mathematics Performance
Assessment in the Classroom: Effects on
Teacher Planning and Student Problem Solving.
American Educational Research Journal, 36:
609-646.
27. Gay, L.R., 1985. Educational Evaluation and
Measurement: Competencies for Analysis and
2027
Adv. Environ. Biol., 7(8): 2020-2029, 2013
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
Application. Ohio: Chales E. Merrill Publishing
Company.
Gilak, M., 2008. Qualitive evaluation and
instruction self-assessing to the students, Paper
of national congress of evaluation and
educational
progress.
Booshehr:
Hazrat
Masoomeh, 317-370.
Green Stein, L., 2009. Every Day in Every
Classroom, Educational Leader ship. 67.
Availale
at:
www.
Ascd.org/Publications/Educational- Leader ship.
Vol 67, Num 03, Every- Day –in- EveryClassroom.aspx.
Haghighi, F., 2005. Role of continuum
evaluation in depth of learning in second grade
students at educational in 2004-2005.
(Unpublished M.A dissertation). Payam Noor
University, Tehran, Iran.
Hamedi, H., 2009. Evaluation from doing
programs of qualitive and quantitive evaluation
in Semnan (unpublished M.A dissertation).
Alzahra University, Iran.
Hasani, M., 2009. Descriptive evaluation and
morality training of students. Available at:
www.bahar.blogfa.com.
Hasani, M., H. Ahmadi, 2009. Descriptive
evaluation (new method in educational
evaluations). Tehran: School.
Hasani, Sh., 2011. The effect of qualitive and
quantitive evaluation methods on student's
reading skills, growth of elementary instruction,
Tehran: The office of educational publications,
period, 14(116): 38-40.
Hasani, M., 2008. Descriptive evaluation
according to children rights' view, papers of
international congresses of evaluation and
educational progress. Booshehr: Hazrat
Masoomeh, 42-62.
Heidari, Sh., N. Azizi, F. Heidari, 2011. Attitude
of Sanandaj teachers about qualitive evaluation,
Summary of papers of third national training
congress. Tehran: Shahid Rajaee University
(adjusting of research and technical).
Hoseini Panah, Z., 2005. New methods of
evaluating. Booshehr: Hazrat Masoomeh, 229245.
Huebner, T.A., 2009. Balanced Assessment,
Educational Leadership. Volume 67, Number 3
Multiple Measures.
Rezba, J.R., C. Sprag, R.L. Feyel, H. James
Fung, 1995. Teaching and evaluating learning
skills (translated by Hossein Daneshfar and
Tahereh Rastegar, 2000). Tehran: School.
Johnston, P.H., 1992. Construction Evaluation of
Literate Activity. New York Long man sc &
Tech.
Jokar, B., G.H.R. Chalabianloo, 2003. Stress of
exams and the ways to counter against them,
evaluation congress in the third millennium,
Shiraz.
42. Kalhor, M., 2005. Checking the amount of
coming true the goals of descriptive evaluation
in Qazvin, Research report of educational
system of Qazvin (unpublished).
43. Karimi, A., 2005. Checking the effect of new
method of evaluation on behavioral disorders in
elementary students of Shiraz, Council of
researches of Fars education system.
44. Khalkhali, S.M., 2002. Pathology of Iran
educational programming system and some
ways for amending them. Tehran: Sogand.
45. Khorshidi, A., M.R. Malek Shahirad, 2006.
Educational evaluation. Tehran: Yastaroun.
46. Khosh Kholgh, I., H.P. Sharifi, 2005-2006.
Operating descriptive evaluation in elementary
schools of some regions of the country,
Training, 88: 117-147.
47. Klenowski, V., 2002. Developing Portfolios for
Learning and Assessment. London: Routledge,
Fallness.
48. Kocavski, N.L., N.S. Endler, 2000. Selfregulation, Social Anxiety and Depressing.
Journal of Applied Behavioral research, N5, 20g1.
49. Kohvand, Z., 2008. Qualitive evaluation,
differences and similarities to other evaluation's
approaches, Paper of national congress of
evaluation and educational progress. Booshehr:
Hazrat Masoomeh, 317-370.
50. Kord, B., 2003. Checking the effect of feedback
on formative evaluation and on educational
progress Bookan in (2002-2003). (Unpublished
M.A dissertation). Teacher training university of
Tehran, Iran.
51. Kubiszyn, T., G. Borich, 2003. Educational
Testing
and
Measurement:
Classroom
Application and Practice. (7th ed), USA: John &
Sons.
52. Lotf Abadie, H., 1996. Assessment and
measurement in educative sciences and
psychology. Tehran: samt.
53. Mahdavi Far, M., 2002. Qualitive evaluation and
learning, Paper of national congress of
evaluation and educational progress. Booshehr:
Hazrat Masoomeh, 371-384.
54. Marsh, C.J., G. Willis, 2007. Curriculum:
Alternative Approaches, Ongoing Issues. New
Jersey: Pearson, Merrill Prentic Hall.
55. Mir Hosseini, N., 2007. Checking the location of
schools libraries in descriptive evaluation of
Khorasan
Razavi
elementary
schools.
(Unpublished M.A dissertation). Ferdosi
University of Mashhad, Iran.
56. Mohammad Mirzaee, A.R., H. Gorbani Pour
Mohammadi, 2008. Section quality to evaluating
educational progress, Paper of national congress
of evaluation and educational progress.
Booshehr: Hazrat Masoomeh, 145-167.
57. Mohammadi, F., 2005. Checking the effect of
descriptive evaluation on student's self-confident
2028
Adv. Environ. Biol., 7(8): 2020-2029, 2013
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
in third grade elementary schools of Tehran.
(Unpublished M.A dissertation). Alzahra
University of Tehran, Iran.
Mortezaee Nejad, E., 2005. Checking teachers
and parents attitudes about using descriptive
evaluation in first and second grade elementary
schools of Tehran in (2004-2005). (Unpublished
M.A dissertation). Azad University, Shahre Rey,
Iran.
Mulford, B., 1985. Indicators of Effectiveness:
A practical Approach. Can Berra, Australian
Council for Educational Administration.
Nabavi, S.A., M. Rezaee Rad, 2010. Effect of
basic and classic assessment approach on the
amount of English course's learning and having
in mind for basic science students, abstract
articles of 10th conference of Iran curriculum
studying association, Tehran, Shahid Rajaee
Teacher Training University.
Nick Far, N., K. Poushne, M. Askarian, 2011.
Assessment possibility of using Assessment
methods' progress of students-based comparing
with the teacher-based ones from Tehran
elementary teachers' views. Abstract articles of
3rd education international conference, Tehran,
Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training University.
Nejad, S., 2007. Comparision of the effect of
evaluation (quantitive and qualitive) on the
amount of third grade student's stress in Tehran.
(Unpublished M.A dissertation). Alzahra
University of Tehran, Iran.
Norouzi, M.A., 2008. Qualitive evaluation and
teaching-learning feedbacks, Paper of national
congress of evaluation and educational
progress. Booshehr: Hazrat Masoomeh, 401419.
Nouri, N., 2010. What is the attitude? Available
at: www.yasinian.com/.../no%201/negarish.htm.
Olina, Z., 2002. Teacher Evaluation, Student
Self-evaluation and Learner Performance.
(Dissertation Abstracts). International Section,
2(30).
Rastegar, T., 2009. Evaluation at the service of
training. Tehran: Monadie Tarbiat institute.
Raven, J., 1992. A Model of Competence,
Motivation and Behavior and a Paradigm for
Assessment. New York: SUNY (State
University of New York), 85-116.
Razm Ara, S., 2006. Studding the role of
Descriptive evaluation in decreasing stress and
enhancing the level of educational progress in
coeducational schools and second grade of
Tehran in (2005-2006). (Unpublished M.A
dissertation). Payam Noor University, Tehran,
Iran.
Reihani, A.R., S.D. Hoseini, 2008. New method
of evaluating students' knowledge according to
continuum evaluation, paper about national
congress and educational progress. Booshehr:
Hazrat Masoomeh, 271-290.
70. Rezaee, A., A.A. Seif, 2006. The effect of
descriptive evaluation of cognitive features,
emotional and psychological-dynamic feature.
Instructional inventions, 18: 11-40.
71. Romberg,
R.A.,
2001.
Professional
Development in Classroom Assessment. WECR
Publication, See, 2: 88-90.
72. Shavelson, R.J., 2006. On the Integration of
Formative Assessment in Teaching and Learning
with Implications for Teacher Education. Paper
Prepared for the Stanford Education Assessment
Laboratory and the University of Hawaii
Curriculum Research and Development Group.
73. Sadeghi Motlagh, P., 2010. Studying the need of
descriptive evaluation and it's pathology from
point of view of education experts and teachers
of first grade students performing this plan in
Dezful. (Unpublished M.A dissertation). Azad
University, Dezful, Iran.
74. Seif, A.A., 2003. Concept of evaluation and its
effect on the way of teacher's training and the
quality of student's learning, papers of first
congress of educational evaluation. Tehran:
Tazkieh, 199-212.
75. Sepasi, H., 2008. Comparision of genetic
evaluation on educational progress of Shahid
Chamran university students. Educative science
and psychology, period, 3(1): 39-50.
76. Sha'eeri, M.R., 2003. Studying exam stress and
educational progress, with paying attention to
sex and major of high school students,
Evaluation progress in third millennium, Shiraz.
77. Shamshiri, B., 2003. Introducing a method for
recognition of pathology of common system in
exams evaluation in educational system of Iran.
Tehran: Office for educational and cultural
evaluation, (The first congress of educational
evaluation).
78. Shir Mohammadi, J., 2008-2009. Comparative
investigation of the effect of descriptive
evaluation method (new method) and quantitive
method (traditional method) on quality of school
life, stress of exam and creativeness of third
grade students in elementary school of Mashhad
in (2008-2009), research plan of Allame
Tabatabaee university student.
79. Shokouhi,
M.,
B.
Gharedaghi,
2009.
Management of port folio. Tehran: Kourosh
press.
80. Slavin, R.E., 1987. Mastery Learning Reconsider. Review of Educational Research, 60:
300-302.
81. Sobhani Fard, T., 2005. Report of second year of
operating descriptive evaluation method.
Tehran: Adjusting of public training, education
office and preschool.
82. Talkhabi, M., 2008. Comparison of methods of
evaluated (a framework for selecting an effective
evaluation method), set of papers of
international congresses of evaluation and
2029
Adv. Environ. Biol., 7(8): 2020-2029, 2013
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
educational progress. Booshehr: Hazrat
Masoomeh, 12-14.
Thomas, J.W., 2000. A Review of Research on
Project Based Learning.
Available at:
www.autodesk.com/foundation.
Van Evera, W.C., 2004. Achievement and
Motivation in the Middle School Science
Classroom: The Effects of Formative
Assessment Feedback. (Doctoral Dissertation).
George Maason University.
Waddell, C.A., 2004. The Effect of Negotiated
Written Feedback within Formative Assessment
on Fourth-Grade Students Motivation and Goal
Orientations. (Doctoral Dissertation). University
of Missouri-Saint Louis.
Wu, Y., C. Tsai, 2005. Development of
Elementary
School
Students'
Cognitive
Structures and Information Processing Strategies
under Long-term Constructivist-oriented Science
Instruction. Science Education, 89: 822-846.
Zari, J., 2009-2010. The effect of descriptive
method on educational progress and attitude
about school in fourth grade elementary school
students. Piran Shahr. (Unpublished M.A
dissertation). Tbriz University, Iran.