Researchers who need valid and objective data for evaluating their theories or the efficacy of educational methods and programs have to choose between two equally undesirable alternatives: either they can use “objective” methods which have a questionable validity, or they can turn to “subjective” assessment methods with better validity. In other words, while subjective approaches to the study of human traits may be, or really are, valid, they lack objectivity, that is, they may be biased toward the researcher’s theory. On the other hand, objective approaches to the study of psychological traits often lack psychological underpinning but are solely designed to fit a certain statistical model. Thus, we cannot know what these instruments really measure. Here I present a new approach to the study of human traits, which claims to be objective as well as psychologically valid, namely the concept Experimental Questionnaire (EQ). An EQ lets us make traits visible without relying on dubious statistical assumptions. Thus, it makes it possible for the researcher to test the psychological theory underlying its designs. The EQ methodology is not only an idea, but it has been applied for constructing the Moral Competence Test (MCT) and for testing the assumptions about the nature of moral competence which were used to design it. So far, all the studies have clearly confirmed their validity. This makes the MCT suitable for testing hypotheses regarding the relevance and teachability of moral competence, and, therefore, also for evaluating the efficacy and efficiency of educational methods of fostering this competence. Experimentally designed questionnaires can also be used in other fields of educational and psychological research in which testable theories about the nature of its objects have been developed.
Anyone who seeks the service of psychology (which translates to “science of the mind”) faces a persisting dilemma. One has to choose between two psychologies: “Subjective”, also called “qualitative”, psychologists believe that the focus on studying the internal structure of the human mind will provide important insights needed in therapy and education. Yet the human mind, they argue, can be studied only with subjective methods like clinical interview, not with standardized tests. In contrast, “objective” or “quantitative”, psychologists argue that if psychology wants to be recognized as a science, it must enlist only objective methods of measurement. Yet this excludes, they argue, the study of internal psychological factors of the human mind. While the subjective approach is based on psychological assumptions regarding the nature of the target measurement object, the objective approach is based on purely statis-tical theories. Must we really have to abandon psychological objects like intellectual and moral capaci-ties if we want our measurement to be objective? In this paper I show that both approaches are based on questionable theories about the relationship between visible behavior on the one side and psychological objects on the other. I also show that we can measure psychological traits objectively and validly if we use an experimental approach. Experimental Question-naires can be used in all fields of psychology in which testable theories about the nature of its object have been developed. We have successfully used this new approach, for example, for the construction and validation of the Moral Competence Test (MCT).
While forgiveness is considered an important value in life, the assessment of students through standardized tests is an unforgiving system within the educational setting. How do teachers perceive the connection between testing and forgiveness? The purpose of this study was to investigate this question. Thirty-one high school teachers were asked to respond to four questions, after being presented with a specific definition of forgiveness, suggesting that forgiveness means allowing people, and students, to make mistakes without judgment until they start doing things right. Teachers’ responses were recorded, transcribed and analyzed. The content analysis yielded ten categories, some of which indicate that there is a tension between a) teachers’ feelings toward their students and their wish to support and help them, and b) the formal top-down demands of the educational system. Teachers also pointed to the importance of there being limits to forgiving students’ wrongdoing.
PL
Rola przebaczenia według nauczycieli szkół średnich – czy uważają, że testowanie i ocena uczniów wiążą się z przebaczeniem? Podczas gdy przebaczanie uznaje się za istotną wartość, ocena uczniów prowadzona z użyciem standardowych metod testowania jest rozwiązaniem bezlitosnym. Celem tego opracowania było zbadanie kwestii, jak nauczyciele postrzegają związek między testowaniem a przebaczeniem? Trzydziestu jeden nauczycieli szkół średnich poproszono o odpowiedzi na cztery pytania, po przedstawieniu im konkretnej definicji przebaczenia, sugerującej, że przebaczenie oznacza pozwolenie ludziom i uczniom na popełnianie błędów bez osądzania, dopóki nie zaczną robić tego, co należy. Odpowiedzi respondentów nagrano, przepisano i przeanalizowano. Po przeanalizowaniu zawartości uzyskano dziesięć kategorii. Niektóre z nich wskazują, że istnieje napięcie pomiędzy (a) uczuciami nauczycieli wobec uczniów i ich chęcią wspierania i pomagania im, a (b) formalnymi, odgórnymi wymaganiami systemu szkolnictwa. Badani nauczyciele wskazywali również na rolę istnienia granic wybaczania uczniom ich przewinień.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.