Figure 4 distribution of students' achievement of course
objective 3 in art design class
Course Objective 1 corresponds to the
Knowledge Objective, with an achievement level of
69.90; the standard value was achieved, and it was
basically achieved. Course Objective 2 corresponds
to the Competency Objective, with an achievement
level of 77.61. The achievement level is higher than
the standard value, and the course objectives are
better achieved. Course objective 3 corresponds to
the quality objective, with an attainment rating of
91.09, higher than the standard value, and better
achieves the course objectives. The distribution of
individual evaluations reflects that most students
could complete the standard. For course objective 3,
all students met the middle, and students were
usually actively involved in their studies.
5.4 Evaluation of the Reasonableness
of the Evaluation Results
The scientific rationality of the evaluation method:
In each aspect of teaching, the process evaluation
mainly adopts the combination of works, stage tests,
group learning, classroom performance, and course
paper, but the rationality of the corresponding
scoring criteria needs further optimization. For the
weight setting of the evaluation indexes, the primary
basis is the judgment of the strength of the course
objectives on the support of the graduation
requirement index points, which will have some
influence on the accuracy of the final evaluation
results. From the scores of different evaluation index
items, we can see that the data of test-based items,
such as stage tests, midterm works, and final works,
are relatively objective. In contrast, the data of
non-test things are supplemented to effectively avoid
emphasizing results over process and a single
evaluation subject so that the evaluation results can
generally reflect the achievement of students' course
objectives. The quantitative evaluation has the
accomplishment of knowledge objectives relatively.
It is easy to evaluate the accomplishment of
knowledge objectives, but it is more difficult to
assess the ability and quality objectives accurately.
From the actual evaluation results, the achievement
of course objective three is high, mainly because the
evaluation data of course objective three comes from
subjective evaluation. The assessment increases the
participation of evaluation scoring. It allows the
whole class to participate in scoring to take the
average result, effectively avoiding the influence of
a single subjective evaluation on the development.
6 CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
In this paper, the art course system is changed from
changing the single examination-based evaluation
form to a flexible and diversified evaluation form to
be integrated into the course teaching and play the
role of testing, regulating, supervising, and
motivating. Through the research on the design
mode of the teaching evaluation system of art
courses, the comprehensive evaluation method is
used to study the achievement of course objectives
according to the characteristics of the classes, which
can be based on direct evaluation and indirect
evaluation. The immediate assessment of course
goal achievement includes process assessment and
standard test. The indirect evaluation process
collects students' opinions and suggestions on the
course in mid-term talks and teachers' lectures; uses
various evaluation and assessment modes to monitor
and evaluate the course teaching to decompose the
evaluation index and quantify the assessment.
The design model of the teaching evaluation
system of art courses adopts the calculation method
of target weights, establishes the consequences of
each assessment factor according to the supportive
relationship of course objectives to graduation
requirements, analyzes the situation of course
attainment from the process assessment and
result-based assessment results, combines the
results, of course, objective attainment evaluation
and the comparison between the actual scores of
course attainment and traditional values, and
comprehensively evaluates the effect, of course,
teaching to promote teaching activities and promote
the cultivation of application-oriented talents.
The evaluation link items of the teaching
evaluation system of art courses are not set in stone,
0,00
10,00
20,00
30,00
40,00
50,00
60,00
70,00
80,00
90,00
100,00
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32
SERIAL NUMBER
COURSE OBJECTIVE 3