JP6664706B2 - Evaluation support device and evaluation support program - Google Patents

Description

  The present invention relates to an evaluation support device and an evaluation support program for supporting evaluation of a result of an evaluation target person.

  In a company, executives and managers evaluate remuneration of employees to determine remuneration and consider measures to improve their skills. In the case of an educational institution, faculty and staff evaluate the student's ability to change the curriculum and provide guidance to students to improve learning achievements. Therefore, educational institutions are trying to visualize learning outcomes.

  For example, in the “education information management computer program and education information management computer system” described in Patent Document 1, a radar chart based on grades and a radar chart chart based on self-evaluation are arranged side by side for learning and education goals (by education goal information). Display and visualize. Also, in Patent Document 1, for each self-evaluation item, information obtained by dividing the association between the acquired self-evaluation value and the test evaluation value in a certain group is displayed as a bubble chart in the certain group, It is possible to recognize student identification information belonging to a certain group.

JP 2015-99452 A

  However, in the “educational information management computer program and the educational information management computer system” described in Patent Document 1, a score which is an objectively evaluated score and a self-evaluation which is a subjectively evaluated score are respectively represented by radar charts. It is displayed as a bubble chart or as a bubble chart. From the contents of this display, faculty staff and students who are the subject of evaluation should find out what points are wrong and how to improve learning outcomes It is difficult to determine whether or not.

  Therefore, the present invention can perform an accurate evaluation for an evaluation target from an objective evaluation score, which is a score evaluated objectively, and a subjective evaluation score of the evaluation target, and improve the results. The purpose of the present invention is to provide an evaluation support device and an evaluation support program capable of providing appropriate guidance for the purpose.

  The evaluation support device according to the present invention is configured such that an item group that is a set of items for achievement, a capability element group that is a set of capability elements for achieving the item, and the capability element corresponding to the item are set. Score means, storage means for storing an evaluation index set by an evaluator, first means for outputting a self-evaluation input screen for allowing a subject to input a subjective evaluation point for each of the capability elements, and the item Multiplying the objective evaluation point and the score for the evaluation target in the second means to calculate an acquisition evaluation point based on the sum of each of the ability elements, the acquisition evaluation point and the subjective evaluation point, And a third means for outputting a deviation between the evaluation result based on the evaluation index and the evaluation index.

  Further, the evaluation support program according to the present invention may include a computer for executing an item group, which is a set of items for achieving results, a capability element group, which is a set of capability elements for achieving the item, and the capability corresponding to the item. Storage means for storing a score set for an element, first means for outputting a self-evaluation input screen for allowing a person to be evaluated to input a subjective evaluation point for each of the capability elements, objective for the person to be evaluated in the item Second means for multiplying a general evaluation point and the score, and calculating an acquisition evaluation point based on summing for each of the capability elements, an evaluation result based on the acquisition evaluation point and the subjective evaluation point; And a third means for outputting a deviation from the evaluation index set by the evaluator.

  According to the present invention, the second means multiplies the objective evaluation point for the evaluation subject in the item by the score, and obtains the evaluation score calculated based on the sum for each capability element, and outputs the obtained evaluation point. The third means outputs the difference between the evaluation result based on the subjective evaluation score input on the self-evaluation input screen and the evaluation index set by the evaluator, so that the subjective evaluation score is overestimated. Or underestimation, it is possible to provide appropriate guidance to the evaluation subject.

  Fourth means for plotting the evaluation result on a graph on which the evaluation index is drawn can be provided. Since the fourth means plots the evaluation result on the graph on which the evaluation index is drawn, the evaluator can visually grasp the difference between the evaluation result and the evaluation index.

  A fifth means for selecting the evaluation index may be provided. If it is determined that the actual subjective evaluation point is correct for the evaluation index, the evaluation index can be selected and switched by the fifth means.

  The evaluation support device of the present invention can be used for evaluation at an educational institution by setting the item as a subject of study in a subject and setting the objective evaluation score as a score in a test.

  Since the above-mentioned item is business and the objective evaluation point is scored by a manager, it can be used for evaluation of a company employee in a company or a teacher in an educational institution.

  According to the present invention, it is clear that the subjective evaluation points are overestimated or underestimated, so the objective evaluation points, which are objectively evaluated scores, and the evaluation target person From the subjective evaluation points, accurate evaluation can be performed for the evaluation target person, and accurate guidance for improving the results can be achieved.

FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating an evaluation support device according to Embodiment 1 of the present invention and a terminal device connected to the evaluation support device via the Internet. FIG. 2 is a block diagram illustrating a configuration of the evaluation support device illustrated in FIG. 1. It is a figure which shows an example of the setting content display screen in which the score was set for every ability element corresponding to a learning subject. It is a figure showing an example of a capacity tabulation display screen. It is a figure showing an example of a self-evaluation input screen. It is a figure showing an example of a self-evaluation input screen. It is a figure which shows an example of the graph which shows the correlation which made a horizontal axis the acquisition evaluation point and the vertical axis | shaft made self-evaluation points. It is a graph which shows the example of an evaluation index. FIG. 11 is a diagram illustrating an example of a setting content display screen in which points are set for each capability element corresponding to a task.

(Embodiment 1)
An evaluation support device according to a first embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings.
The evaluation support apparatus 10 according to the first embodiment shown in FIG. 1 is a computer on which an evaluation support program operates. The evaluation support device 10 according to the first embodiment is used when faculty members of a university, which is an example of an educational institution, evaluate student performance.
The evaluation support device 10 is installed, for example, in a computer room of a university. The evaluation support device 10 is communicably connected to a terminal device T1 operated by a student to be evaluated and a terminal device T2 operated by a faculty member via an intranet (not shown), which is an example of a telecommunication line, and the Internet W. Have been.

  The evaluation support device 10 includes a communication unit 11, a display screen output unit 12, an acquired evaluation point calculation unit 13, a self-evaluation point calculation unit 14, a deviation calculation unit 15, a plotting unit 16, and an evaluation index selection unit 17. , A print control unit 18 and a storage unit 19.

The communication unit 11 inputs transmission data from each unit of the evaluation support device 10 and transmits it to the terminal devices T1 and T2, or receives reception data from the terminal devices T1 and T2 and outputs it to each unit. Has functions.
The display screen output unit 12 has a function as a first unit that reads a display screen from the storage unit 19 in response to a request from the terminal devices T1 and T2 and transmits the display screen via the communication unit 11.

The acquired evaluation point calculating means 13 multiplies an objective evaluation point for a student (evaluation target) in a learning subject (item of achievement) by a score, which will be described later, and calculates an obtained evaluation point summed for each ability element. It functions as a second means for performing the operation.
The objective evaluation score may be a grade score of a periodic examination, a grade score of a report on an assignment, or the like, which is provided by the faculty and staff for evaluating the student's achievement of learning.

  The self-evaluation point calculation means 14 has a function of averaging the subjective evaluation points (self-scoring) input on the self-evaluation input screen for each middle class of the ability element to calculate the self-evaluation points.

  The divergence calculating means 15 functions as a third means for outputting a divergence between an evaluation result based on the acquired evaluation points and the self-evaluation points and an evaluation index set by the evaluator. In the first embodiment, the achievement rate that can be calculated by dividing the score (the objective evaluation score) by the maximum score when the score is a perfect score is defined as the acquired evaluation score.

The plotting means 16 functions as a fourth means for plotting the evaluation result on a graph on which the evaluation index set by the teaching staff (evaluator) is drawn.
The evaluation index selecting means 17 functions as a fifth means for selecting and switching the evaluation index.
The printing control unit 18 has a function of controlling a printing unit 20 such as a printer to output print data, and printing by the printing unit 20.

The storage unit 19 has a function of storing and holding various types of information. The storage unit 19 can be a hard disk drive or an SSD (solid state drive) using a flash memory.
The storage means 19 stores a subject group (item group), which is a set of learning subjects (items) received by the student, a capability element group, which is a set of capability elements required to achieve the learning subject, and The set score and the evaluation index set by the evaluator are stored.
The storage unit 19 stores an operation screen for operating the terminal devices T1 and T2.

The operation and use state of the evaluation support device 10 according to Embodiment 1 of the present invention configured as described above will be described with reference to the drawings.
First, it is assumed that points are set by teachers and stored in the storage unit 19. It is also assumed that the number of test points (objective evaluation points) obtained as a result of the test for each subject that the student has taken is stored in the storage means 19. In addition, it is assumed that the student belongs to the "Children's Faculty, Children's Department" aiming at elementary school teachers, kindergarten teachers, and nursery teachers.

  When the faculty member sets the score, the faculty member operates the terminal device T2 to transmit a request for setting the score to the evaluation support device 10. By doing so, the display screen output unit 12 of the evaluation support device 10 reads out the setting page of the score from the storage unit 19 and transmits it to the terminal device T2. Then, the teaching staff operates the terminal device T2 to input and set the points for each learning subject on the setting page.

FIG. 3 shows a setting content display screen P1 showing the content set by the setting page.
On the setting content display screen P1, a study subject group Y1 which is a set of study subjects is displayed in the vertical direction on the left side, and a capability element group X1 which is a set of capability elements is displayed in the upper horizontal direction.

  The ability element group X1 is roughly classified into a “general ability element” and a “special ability element”. The “general ability element” is an element common to the subjects of study. The “professional capability factor” is a professional factor. "General-purpose ability element" and "professional ability element" are classified into "attitude / intentionality", "knowledge / understanding", "skill / expression", and "action / experience / creative thinking", respectively. ing. The middle-classified performance elements are sub-classified into 1) to 3). The descriptions of 1) to 3) are omitted on the display screen.

  For example, "1)" in "Attitude and intentionality" of "General-purpose ability element" indicates that "Independently act yourself and act cooperatively and cooperatively to achieve goals. Yes. " Also, if "1)" of "attitude / orientation" of the "special ability element", "you can think about the social mission and occupational ethics of educational and childcare workers. Roles of educators and childcare workers Think about the ethics of educators and nursery teachers. "

Faculty members are assigned a score for each of the skill elements corresponding to each of these learning subjects, and for achieving the learning content of the learning subject.
For example, “Modern Society and Ethics” is a two-credit course in the first and second years of the first year, but “1)” in “Attitude and orientation” of “General-purpose ability element” , 5% is set. In “Modern society and ethics”, “1)” in “Attitude / intention” of “Professional ability element” is set to 20%.
Since the score set in this way indicates the weight of the ability element as a ratio, the sum of the scores of the learning subjects (total of the rows) is 100%. In the ability element, such a score is set in advance for each learning subject.

Since the score is set, the acquired evaluation point calculation means 13 multiplies the number of test points (objective evaluation points) for each subject by learning and sums up each of the ability elements (total in the column direction), and Is calculated.
By calculating the acquired points for each performance element, the display screen output unit 12 can output a table as shown in FIG.

  On the ability tally display screen P2 shown in FIG. 4, the acquired points totalized for each ability element and the maximum points that the student can acquire for each ability element are displayed. For example, the student shown in FIG. 4 can obtain 219 points as the maximum point in 1) of “attitude and intentionality (1)” of “general-purpose ability element”, but obtained 173 points. In addition, 540 points could be acquired as the maximum point in the “attitude / intentionality (1)” of the “general-purpose ability element”, but the total number of acquired points was 417 points. Therefore, the ability total display screen P2 indicates that the student's acquired evaluation point (learning achievement (achievement rate)) is 77%.

  If the score can be calculated, the ability elements are aggregated into attitudes (attitude / intentionality), knowledge (knowledge / understanding), skills (skills / expression), and behaviors (behavior / experience / creative thinking), and "general-purpose skills" It can be a bar graph P21 in which "elements" and "specialized ability elements" are stacked.

  In addition, if the acquired evaluation points (learning achievement level) can be calculated, the ability elements (attitude (attitude / intention)), knowledge (knowledge / understanding), skills (skill / expression), and behavior (action / experience / creative thinking ability) And a radar chart P22 that displays the respective achievement levels of the “general ability element” and the “professional ability element” and the average of these as the four cross-shaped axes. can do.

  Next, the student inputs a subjective evaluation score (self-grading), which is a self-evaluation for each ability element. When inputting the self-scoring for each capability element, the terminal device T1 is operated to access the evaluation support device 10. In the evaluation support device 10, the display screen output unit 12 reads out the self-evaluation input screen for allowing the student to input the self-scoring for each ability element from the storage unit 19 and transmits the screen to the terminal device T1.

  In the terminal device T1, a self-evaluation input screen P3 is displayed as shown in FIG. The self-evaluation input screen P3 is an example of a screen for inputting a self-scoring for “general-purpose ability element”. As the self-evaluation input screen, there is a screen for inputting a self-scoring of a professional ability element (not shown).

In the self-evaluation input screen P3 shown in FIG. 5, the self-scoring for the first half of the first year and the second half of the first year are displayed for reference because the screen is used to input the self-scoring for the first half of the second year.
In the self-evaluation input screen P3, the self-scoring input in the first half year and the second half year is displayed as a bar graph P31. Further, on the self-evaluation input screen P3, the average value of the self-scoring is displayed as a radar chart P32.
When inputting the self-scoring, the student presses the link L31 described as "Details" when he wants to confirm the content of the ability element again.

In the self-evaluation input screen P3, 1) to 3) of attitude (attitude / intentionality), 1) to 3) of knowledge (knowledge / understanding), 1) to 3) of skill (skill / expression), and action (behavior) An "input" button B31 is displayed for each of 1) to 3) of "experience and creative thinking".
When inputting the self-scoring, the student presses the "input" button B31 of each ability element. When the “input” button B31 is pressed, a self-evaluation input screen P4 as shown in FIG. 6 is popped up.

On the self-evaluation input screen P4, an explanatory sentence indicating the content of the ability element corresponding to the pressed “input” button B31 (see FIG. 5) is displayed. Further, on the self-evaluation input screen P4, level buttons B41 to B45 for setting self-scoring to five levels and a "close" button B46 are displayed. An explanatory note indicating an evaluation criterion is displayed on each of the level buttons B41 to B45.
For example, the student reads the explanatory note indicating the evaluation criteria displayed on the level buttons B41 to B45, evaluates the degree of achievement of his / her own learning subject, and determines that the self-scoring has not reached level 1; Press button B41 (less than LEVEL1). When it is determined that the student's self-scoring is level 4 or higher (LEVEL 4 or higher), the level button B45 is pressed.

The student can self-evaluate the ability element to be input and press the corresponding level buttons B41 to B45 to input a subjective evaluation score corresponding to the ability element as a self-scoring.
In the self-evaluation input screen P4 of FIG. 6, the general-purpose ability element has been input, but the professional ability element is also input on the self-evaluation input screen.

  In this way, when the self-scoring is input for each ability element, the self-evaluation score calculating means 14 determines the attitudes (attitude / intentionality) 1) to 3) and the knowledge (knowledge / understanding) 1) to 3). ), Skills (skills / expression) 1) to 3), and behaviors (behavior / experience / creative thinking) 1) to 3) Is calculated.

Here, in the storage means 19, a target correlation between the acquired evaluation point (learning achievement degree) and the self-evaluation point is set as an evaluation index by the teaching staff as an evaluator.
The divergence calculating means 15 outputs a divergence between an evaluation result based on the acquired evaluation points and the self-evaluation points and an evaluation index set by the evaluator.
For example, FIG. 7 is a graph showing a correlation with the abscissa indicating the obtained evaluation points and the ordinate indicating the self-evaluation points. In the graph shown in FIG. 7, the evaluation index is set such that the higher the acquired evaluation point (learning achievement), the higher the gradient, and the more the self-evaluation point (learning result) suddenly becomes higher than the proportional relationship.

As shown in Fig. 7, there are four types of graphs for "general ability element": "attitude / orientation", "knowledge / understanding", "skill / expression", and "action / experience / creative thinking". A total of eight types are created, including four types of "attitude / intention", "knowledge / understanding", "skill / expression", and "behavior / experience / creative thinking ability" of the abilities component.
The faculty member operating the terminal device T2 prints the graph created in this way by the printing device 20 connected to the evaluation support device 10 by the print control device 18, or prints the graph (FIG. 1) connected to the terminal device T2. (Not shown).

  For example, as shown in graphs A1 to A3 in FIG. 8, the evaluation index can be set such that the gradient becomes gentler as the acquired evaluation point (learning achievement degree) increases, and graphs B1 to B3 As shown in FIG. In addition, the self-evaluation point in the evaluation index may be a minimum line that allows a level less than level 1 or a minimum line that allows a level of 1 or more.

  As shown in FIG. 7, the evaluation indices are, as shown in FIG. 7, centered on the reference index X (solid line), the areas on both sides including the reference index X are “I layer”, and the outside thereof are “above the II layer” and “below the II layer”. Further, the respective areas are set such that the area outside the “upper layer II” is “upper layer III” and the outer area below “lower layer II” is “lower layer III”.

The divergence calculating means 15 obtains how much the evaluation result based on the acquired evaluation point and the self-evaluation point deviates from the reference index X of the evaluation index. Further, the evaluation result is plotted on a graph by the plotting means 16.
Specifically, the divergence is calculated by the divergence calculating means 15 for each capability element, such as the acquired evaluation point and the self-evaluation point, and the degree of divergence such as “I layer” to “III layer above” or “III layer below”. The area to be shown can be represented as a list or a plot for each capability element as shown in FIG. By doing so, faculty and staff can visually grasp the difference between the evaluation result and the evaluation index.
In the first embodiment, the evaluation index is represented by an area such as “layer I” to “above layer III” or “below layer III” around the reference index X. The distance of the evaluation result from the reference index X may be set as the deviation.

By plotting student evaluation results on a graph, students and faculty and staff can visually grasp the evaluation results. Faculty and staff can guide students based on student evaluation results.
For example, if the evaluation result is the position A in the “I layer”, the faculty and staff can provide guidance for improving learning achievement (acquired evaluation points) while keeping students at a cognitive level. At this time, the achievement level of each ability element is checked, and guidance on weak points is strengthened.

Also, if the evaluation result belongs to “on the III layer”, it can be understood that the self-evaluation point with respect to the acquired evaluation point is excessive. Therefore, in order to lower the recognition of self-evaluation in response to this overestimation, faculty members can be instructed to change their self-perception through practical activities outside the university. In addition, it is important to proceed with caution because downward revisions may reduce the students' motivation to study.
In particular, if the evaluation result is the position B belonging to “on the III layer”, there is a shortage of acquired evaluation points with respect to self-evaluation points. Therefore, the faculty and staff instructs to improve the acquired evaluation points (learning achievement). can do.

  If the evaluation result is the position C belonging to “on the III layer”, a high score is obtained, but the self-evaluation point is excessively large with respect to the score. Such students are given practical activities and applied tasks outside the university, for example, to give them correct recognition and to instruct them to suppress excessive self-evaluation.

  If the evaluation result is the position D belonging to “lower layer III”, a high acquired evaluation point is obtained, but the self-evaluation point is too small relative to the acquired evaluation point. Like the students at the C position, such students are given practical activities and applied tasks, for example, outside the university, and are instructed to give correct recognition and correct underestimated self-esteem.

  In this way, the faculty and staff immediately prompt the students in the C position and the D position to become aware of "not done" or "done" in interviews and actual activities. We can give guidance and give guidance to raise awareness.

  If the actual self-evaluation score is judged to be correct for the evaluation index by the faculty or staff, the evaluation index is reviewed and corrected, and the terminal device T2 is operated to select another one from the graph shown in FIG. The user selects a graph and requests the evaluation support apparatus 10 to switch to another graph. In the evaluation support device 10, the evaluation indices indicated by the graphs A1 to A3, B1 to B3, and C1 to C3 selected from the graph shown in FIG. Then, the divergence calculating unit 15 and the plotting unit 16 output the divergence between the evaluation result and the evaluation index, so that the evaluation with the new evaluation index can be performed.

  The Certificate of Academic Achievement is assessed and evaluated based on the score obtained in the final semester (achievement level) and the self-evaluation score of the final semester. During the study period, by providing guidance based on the totaled results at the end of each semester, students must be at the level 1 or higher within the range of "I-tier" shown in Fig. 7 at the final stage of the student's achievement certificate. It aims to.

  Then, the self-evaluation points of over / under evaluation and the high or low acquisition evaluation points (learning achievement) are listed for each ability element, and the correlation between the self-evaluation points and the acquisition evaluation points (learning achievement) and the evaluation index are evaluated. Evaluate the tendency of deviation. Based on this evaluation, we will formulate guidelines for university-wide learning support, and based on this, plan specific guidance and support contents in each department. As a result, organizational support as well as voluntary guidance by individual faculty members has been realized based on data.

  Learning support / guidance is broadly divided into "improving the level of recognition of students" and "improving the achievement of learning." Faculty members will use the curriculum checklist to balance the proportion of missing learning elements, share information between departments, and strengthen educational guidance in class and extracurricular activities. In addition, based on the achievements of each element and self-evaluation materials, we will provide guidance using individual interviews and teacher comment fields on the student portal site.

  At all levels, the improvement in the achievement of learning will be implemented with guidance and support plans for each capability element toward the (excellent) level.

  With respect to the improvement of the recognition level, it is determined that the “I layer” is correctly recognizing the learning results, and provides guidance for further results. This instruction can be performed, for example, by providing leader training in problem solving learning. The underestimated people in the "lower II class" and "lower III class" will be instructed to discover the cause of the underestimation through interviews, etc., and to give them objective confidence through various activities. The overestimated class members of the "II class" and "III class" are allowed to discover the cause of the overestimation through interviews, etc., and to instruct them so that they can objectively and correctly evaluate them through various activities. For students in these upper and lower classes, aiming at improving their cognitive level by re-recognizing their ability levels, taking up the achievement goals and evaluation indices, for example, in solving real problems such as problem solving / task creation learning .

  As described above, according to the evaluation support apparatus 10 according to the first embodiment, the acquired evaluation score calculation means 13 calculates the score based on multiplying the score in the subject by the score and adding the scores for each capability element. The divergence calculating means 15 calculates the divergence between the evaluation result based on the obtained evaluation score and the self-evaluation point input from the self-evaluation input screen output from the display screen output means 12 and the evaluation index set by the evaluator. The output makes it clear that the self-evaluation point is overestimated or underestimated. Therefore, appropriate guidance can be given to the evaluation target person, and accurate guidance for improving the results can be achieved.

(Embodiment 2)
An evaluation support device according to a second embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings.
The evaluation support device according to the second embodiment supports the evaluation of teachers and staffs in educational institutions and company employees in companies. The configuration is the same as that shown in FIG.

In the first embodiment, as shown in FIG. 3, the points are set for each learning subject. In the second embodiment, as shown in FIG. 9, a score is set for each task.
The total of the points can be set to 100% corresponding to each task. Further, for example, when there is a situation such that the work of the department C is concurrently performed with the work of another department, the total of the points can be set to 200%.
In FIG. 9, daily tasks called routine work are classified into tasks common to each department and tasks for each department, and are arranged in a column in an item group.
Further, tasks with a time limit and tasks that are set up and worked on specially are arranged in a column direction as a group of items.

In addition, for each item, a performance element group, which is a set of performance elements, is arranged in a row.
As in the case of FIG. 3, the "general-purpose ability element" and the "professional ability element" are classified into "attitude / orientation", "knowledge / understanding", "skill / expression", and "skill / expression", respectively. Behavior, experience, and creative thinking ability "are classified in the middle, and the intermediately classified ability elements are subdivided into 1) to 3).

For example, 1) of "attitude and intentionality" of "general ability element" is defined as "achievement-oriented" and "understand your responsibilities, maintain calmness and enthusiasm in your assigned work, Until you achieve it, you can be responsibly and persistently working on things. "
In addition, 2) of "attitude and intentionality" of "general ability element" is "communication", and "after fully understanding the situation and emotions of the other party, We can form an agreement based on mutual trust. "
In addition, 3) of "attitude and intentionality" of "general-purpose ability element" as "self-control, stress tolerance and self-confidence" Can be properly controlled. "

  For A belonging to the department B, the common tasks “common task content A” to “common task content C”, “department B task”, and, for example, “business A” and “business B” are assigned tasks. Therefore, A belonging to the department B is evaluated based on the item marked in FIG. 9, and the maximum score of the obtained evaluation points of the item is 600 points.

In this way, the score is set corresponding to the item group and the ability element group, and the evaluation by the manager for each task is set as an objective evaluation point, and the acquired evaluation point calculation shown in FIG. The means 13 can calculate the acquired evaluation points.
The self-evaluation point can be calculated by the subject to be evaluated (teacher or company employee) inputting a subjective evaluation point (self-scoring) on the self-evaluation input screen P3 shown in FIG.

  By doing so, a list listing areas indicating the degree of deviation, such as the acquired evaluation points and self-evaluation points, and “I layer” to “above III layer” or “below III layer” can be obtained, as shown in FIG. By creating a graph for each capability element, the manager can grasp the difference between the evaluation result and the evaluation index as in the first embodiment.

  The evaluation support apparatus and the evaluation support program of the present invention can evaluate various persons as evaluation targets, and thus are suitable for companies, organizations, educational institutions, and the like, and are particularly suitable for evaluation of students in educational institutions.

DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 10 Evaluation support apparatus 11 Communication means 12 Display screen output means 13 Acquired evaluation point calculation means 14 Self-evaluation point calculation means 15 Deviation calculation means 16 Plotting means 17 Evaluation index selection means 18 Printing control means 19 Storage means 20 Printing means T1, T2 Terminal Device W Internet P1 Setting contents display screen Y1 Academic subjects group X1 Ability element group P2 Ability total display screen P21 Bar graph P22 Radar chart P3 Self-evaluation input screen P31 Bar graph P32 Radar chart L31 Link B31 "Enter" button P4 Self-evaluation input screen B41 B45 Level button B46 "Close" button A1-A3, B1-B3, C1-C3 Graph X Reference index

Claims (6)

An item group that is a set of items for achievement, an ability element group that is a set of ability elements for achieving the item, a score set for the ability element corresponding to the item, and an evaluator that sets Storage means for storing the evaluation index,
First means for outputting a self-evaluation input screen for allowing a subject to input a subjective evaluation point for each of the capability elements;
Second means for multiplying an objective evaluation point for the evaluation target person in the item and the score, and calculating an acquisition evaluation point based on a sum of the ability elements;
An evaluation support apparatus comprising: a third unit that outputs a difference between an evaluation result based on the acquired evaluation points and the subjective evaluation points and the evaluation index.   The evaluation support apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising: a fourth unit configured to plot the evaluation result on a graph on which the evaluation index is drawn.   The evaluation support apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising a fifth unit that selects the evaluation index.   The evaluation support device according to any one of claims 1 to 3, wherein the item is a learning subject of a subject, and the objective evaluation point is a score in an examination.   The evaluation support device according to any one of claims 1 to 3, wherein the item is a task, and the objective evaluation score is a score by a manager. Computer
Storage means for storing an item group that is a set of items for achievement, a capability element group that is a set of capability elements for achieving the item, and a score set for the capability element corresponding to the item. ,
First means for outputting a self-evaluation input screen for allowing a subject to input a subjective evaluation point for each of the capability elements;
Second means for multiplying an objective evaluation point for the evaluation target person in the item and the score, and calculating an acquired evaluation point based on summing for each of the ability elements;
An evaluation support program functioning as third means for outputting a difference between an evaluation result based on the obtained evaluation points and the subjective evaluation points and an evaluation index set by an evaluator.