Measures to increase the objectivity of assessment procedures. Federal news
Head of Rosobrnadzor: Regions should use the results of assessment procedures to improve the quality of education
Objectivity of all assessment procedures in education, from the state final certification to the All-Russian verification work and final essays, and building an effective system for using the results of this assessment to improve the quality school education– such tasks were set by the head of the regional education authorities in Russia Federal service for supervision in the field of education and science Sergei Kravtsov during the All-Russian meeting “Prospects for the development of regional education systems.”
“The latest results of international studies on the quality of education have shown that Russia has made a serious leap forward. This was also due to the achievement of objective assessment in the final assessment in 11 grades,” noted Sergei Kravtsov.
However, according to him, when conducting other assessment procedures, such as All-Russian testing works and the final essay, there are problems with the objectivity of the assessment. This will be taken into account during the transition to a new model of control and supervisory activities in education at the federal and regional levels. Schools that demonstrate abnormal indicators based on the results of assessment procedures, the reliability of which there is reason to doubt, will be the objects of inspection in the first place.
Sergei Kravtsov spoke about the constituent elements and principles of constructing a unified system for assessing the quality of education, which has now been created in Russia and includes state final certification in grades 9 and 11, All-Russian testing works (VPR), national studies of the quality of education (NIQR), international comparative research into the quality of education and research into teacher competencies.
“Our next task is to link all assessment procedures with the work of the inspectorate, advanced training institutes and methodological rooms. The results of assessment procedures should be analyzed and used in practical work. Everything should work within the system and for development,” said the head of Rosobrnadzor.
The Federal Institute for Educational Quality Assessment (FIOKO) is now accumulating unified system results of all assessment procedures at the federal level. According to Sergei Kravtsov, similar centers need to be created in the regions on the basis of regional information processing centers (RPIC).
These centers should conduct all areas of research into the quality of education in the region (VPR, NIKO, participation in international studies) and analyze the data obtained. The results of this analysis should be used by regional educational authorities, institutes for advanced training and methodological services to work with each school and teacher.
Another urgent task for the regions, according to the head of Rosobrnadzor, is the formation of an expert community to assess the quality of education. In control and supervisory activities in relation to schools, it is necessary to involve teachers and principals who show high results as experts, so that during the inspection they can help the school being inspected formulate a development program.
During the meeting, Deputy Minister of Education and Science of the Russian Federation Irina Kuznetsova spoke about the work being carried out by the Russian Ministry of Education and Science to improve quality Russian education. Among the urgent tasks, she named the modernization of federal state educational standards, in which it is necessary to more clearly formulate learning outcomes, both in relation to the content of education in academic disciplines and in relation to the personal results of students. Also, according to her, it is necessary to focus on targeted work with schools that have low educational results, improving the system of teacher education and the system of advanced training for teachers.
“It is necessary to expand the system of independent objective assessment of the quality of students’ training, including by building a system of All-Russian testing works, which will allow not only to develop the practice of objective assessment in schools, but also to formulate uniform approaches for the entire country to the selection of key educational content and a system for assessing learning outcomes,” - noted the Deputy Minister.
Acting Head of the Department public policy in the field of general education of the Russian Ministry of Education and Science, Irina Manuilova focused on increasing corporate culture pedagogical community in matters of assessing the knowledge of schoolchildren.
“The task of the school is not to prepare the student for the final certification and some other testing procedures, but to organize the full development of that educational program, which has been adopted, and at each stage of its development, each student should be assessed objectively, taking appropriate measures that will contribute to the adjustment of individual curricula and ensure the gradual achievement of sufficiently high results for each student,” said Irina Manuilova.
She also stated the need to modernize the work of regional institutes for advanced training of teachers. The advanced training programs they implement have often not changed for years and do not take into account the problems in the region’s education system identified as a result of various assessment procedures.
The high quality of work of the experts participating in the survey has a decisive influence on obtaining accurate and reliable results.
The quality of experts is determined by the following groups of properties: competence, interest in the results of the examination, efficiency and objectivity (impartiality).
Expert competence should apply to the object of examination (professional competence) and assessment methodology (qualimetric competence).
Professional competence includes knowledge of the technological stages of product production, the value of quality indicators of its various types, and product development prospects. consumer requirements, conditions and nature of consumption.
Qualimetric competence provides a clear understanding by the expert of the approach to assessing product quality as a measure of how it satisfies consumer needs; knowledge of quality assessment methods, especially expert methods; ability to use various qualimetric scales that differ a large number gradations.
Interest the expert's results of the examination depend on many factors: the degree of workload of the main work, with which the examination is usually combined; possibilities of using the results obtained; examination purposes; the nature of the conclusions that can be drawn based on the results of the examination; individual characteristics expert.
Efficiency the expert includes composure, mobility and elasticity of attention, allowing you to quickly switch from assessing one quality indicator to assessing another; contact, i.e. ability to work with people to solve problems conflict situation; motivation of the assessments made.
Objectivity (impartiality)-- the ability to take into account only that information that determines the satisfaction of the needs of a given product. Expert bias consists in overestimating or underestimating the object of examination for reasons not related to quality, for example, due to the inability to resist the opinion of the majority of other experts due to uncertainty in one’s own rightness (manifestation of conformism).
Methods for assessing the quality of experts are divided into five groups:
· heuristic (subjective);
· statistical;
· test;
· documentary;
· combined .
Each of these groups is divided into types (private estimates) and methods for obtaining them.
Heuristic (subjective) assessments – assessments assigned by a person and based on the assumption of the correct reflection of the quality of the expert through the assessment of others or self-assessment.
Distinguish the following types heuristic assessments:
· self-esteem;
· mutual assessment;
· assessment of reasoning and familiarity with the object of examination;
· expert assessment by the working group.
Self-esteem - type and method of heuristic assessment of competence by the expert himself. It has been established that the greater the average value of self-esteem of group members, the higher the reliability of the average expert assessment. At the same time, it should be borne in mind that self-esteem is characterized by significant subjectivity, and this entails certain disadvantages. Self-esteem depends on psychological characteristics experts (the presence of high or low self-esteem, sometimes unreasonably), the degree of self-satisfaction, understanding of the rating scale. This explains the discrepancy between the results of self-assessment and mutual assessment.
To reduce subjectivity, self-assessment is carried out in a differentiated manner, which increases the accuracy of the results. For this purpose, the self-esteem indicator is defined as a function of two coefficients: familiarity and argumentation. For expert assessment of goods, it is recommended that the expert’s self-assessment be determined taking into account his awareness and familiarity with the products being assessed by filling out the “Self-Assessment Questionnaire”. The expert notes the regularity of reading the sources of information listed in the questionnaire and the degree of familiarity with the products being assessed.
Self-esteem ( K ca m j) is calculated using the formula
K ca m j= ΣM i K ij ,
where M i– the weight of indicators of awareness and familiarity; K ij– an assessment depending on the degree of awareness and familiarity.
Since Σ M i= 1.00, and 0 ≤ K ij≤ 10, then 0 ≤ K ca m j ≤ 10.
Taking into account the specifics of the products being evaluated, the weight individual indicators(M i) can be adjusted by an expert group.
Mutual assessment- type and method of heuristic assessment, defined as the average of the assessments assigned by other experts. This assessment is intended to reduce the subjectivity of assessing the competence of each expert. It has been established that there is a close connection between the expert’s competence and his average assessment received from colleagues. The essence of this type of assessment is that each expert gives an assessment to all other experts, and then the average result is calculated.
Depending on the number of experts in the group, two different procedures are applied:
· when the number of experts in a group is less than 15 people, each expert evaluates all the others;
· if the number of experts is 15 people or more, a special questionnaire is filled out, in which the experts are divided into three groups according to their qualifications – above average, average and below average qualifications, as well as by ranks within subgroups (6 each – 8 people in each). Then the experts of each subgroup are ranked. Rank 1 – the most qualified expert, 2 – next in qualification, etc. Each assessed expert is assigned a numerical score from 10 points (the most qualified) to 0 (completely unqualified) with an accuracy of 0.5 points.
The disadvantages of mutual assessment are as follows:
· experts may not know each other well;
· the assessment results may be influenced by mutual likes or dislikes;
· experts, as a rule, tend to avoid ultra-high and ultra-low assessments;
· ambiguity in the perception of the concept of “expert quality”.
· apply peer assessment only in those groups in which the majority of experts know each other well. If some of the experts being assessed are unfamiliar, it is recommended to put a dash in the corresponding column;
· Conduct anonymous surveys;
· explain that the results of the questionnaire will be used only to adjust product ratings;
· familiarize experts with the structural diagram of properties and their partial assessments.
Assessment of reasoning and familiarity with the object of examination - type and method of heuristic assessment of the degree of specialization of an expert and factors influencing his competence. Heuristic assessment of competence, based on the degree of specialization and familiarity, is highly effective and reliable, provided that methods for quantifying each of these factors in the form of assessment questionnaires are carefully developed. In this case, only those factors are assessed that can only be characterized subjectively in the form of self-assessment; the expert quantitatively assesses the degree of his specialization according to this species products and the form of acquaintance with it. Then, using a special questionnaire (similar to a self-assessment questionnaire), he determines the coefficient of argumentation of his knowledge and gives an assessment of the degree of his familiarity with the problem under study. The competence coefficient is calculated as the arithmetic mean of the coefficients of argumentation and familiarity.
Expert assessment by the working group – type and method of heuristic assessment intended for quantitative characteristics the expert’s interest in the expert assessment and his attentiveness during the survey. The assessment is given by specialist analysts conducting a survey of experts. At the same time, they evaluate the experts’ attitude towards the examination being carried out and their activity in discussing the assessments. It is advisable to evaluate the working group on a 10-point scale.
Statistical estimates – assessments obtained as a result of processing expert judgments about the object of assessment.
These estimates are used to reduce, as far as possible, the errors arising from expert assessments. Their necessity is due to the fact that, unlike measurements using technical devices Based on the comparison of unknown quantities with known ones, with expert methods there is often no known quantity (or sample, or standard of a product), the value of which is taken as real, that is, as close as possible to the true one.
The accuracy of the result may be influenced by the organization and methodology of the assessment; the quality of constructing a structural diagram of quality indicators, the number of quality indicators, methods for determining assessments, the nature of the relationship between experts, etc.
Thus, the accuracy of expert assessment is influenced by many objective (depending on the assessment methodology) and subjective (depending on the expert) factors, resulting in assessment errors that have systematic and random components.
Systematic error – constantly repeated part of the error. The main reason for its occurrence is insufficient or incorrect information among experts. It can be reduced by familiarizing the expert with necessary information before the start of the examination or through briefing, as well as discussion, during which the expert receives additional information from specialist analysts or other experts. In addition, since the expert's systematic error is random for a group of experts, averaging the group's ratings makes it possible to increase the accuracy of quality assessment. Systematic error can be assessed by the degree of deviation from the average opinion of the expert group.
Random error depends on the psychological and physiological characteristics of the expert (composure, confidence in the rightness, attentiveness, other personal qualities) and decreases with repeated repetitions of assessments. Its value can be determined by the reproducibility of the results.
The following types of statistical estimates are distinguished:
· assessment based on deviation from the average opinion of the expert group;
· assessment of the expert’s objectivity.
Score based on deviation from the average opinion of the expert group– an assessment based on the premise that the actual value of the group expert assessment is the average assessment of the expert group. Therefore, the smaller the deviation of an individual expert assessment from the group one, the higher the quality of the expert who gave this assessment is recognized.
Individual expert assessments can be of two types:
· ranking by the expert of the estimated values (in descending or ascending order);
· determination by an expert numerical values estimated values (for example, when determining the weighting coefficients of quality indicators, experts assign certain numerical values to each coefficient).
The assessment of deviation from the average opinion of the expert group can be expressed through a set of absolute deviations (D і) , calculated as the difference between the average group score ( X s.d) and individual assessment ( X i):
D i = X c .g – X i . .
The greater the D i , the higher the deviation of the individual expert’s opinion from the average opinion of the expert group.
Assessing the objectivity (impartiality) of the expert – assessment of the expert’s compliance with the principle of objectivity, his ability to impartially evaluate specific samples of goods. This one is very important characteristic the quality of the expert significantly affects the accuracy of the results of the group expert assessment. Statistical methods for directly assessing the objectivity of experts have not been developed, so in practice they are content with an indirect assessment based on deviation from the average opinion of experts.
Test scores – assessments by testing the psychological and physiological characteristics of experts. These assessments are intended to assess the objectivity, qualimetric and professional competence of the expert. The advantage of these assessments is the ability to assess the personal qualities of an expert, for which other methods and types of assessments are unacceptable. Their disadvantage is that the results obtained during testing cannot be compared with data obtained by any objective method.
When conducting test assessments, the following requirements apply to tests:
· understanding by the subject expert of the formulation of the test problem and the conditions that its solution must meet;
· the probability of randomly guessing the solution to the problem should be close to zero;
· the test problem must have an exact solution;
· justification of the closeness of the test task and those real problems that an expert has to solve when assessing product quality.
The types of test assessments are:
· assessment of the reproducibility of results;
· qualimetric competence of the expert;
· objectivity in adjusting your assessments.
Assessment of result reproducibility – assessment of the degree of closeness of individual expert assessments carried out at certain intervals. It is usually used in cases where the quality of experts is assessed in several rounds, and the assessments of the same author in different rounds are compared. Most often, assessment of the reproducibility of results is used in the organoleptic analysis of food products.
It should be noted that the period of time between rounds should be short in order to exclude the influence of possible new information, changing his judgment, but at the same time is sufficient for the expert to forget the assessment data in the previous round.
If a ranking of quality indicators is carried out, then the assessment of the reproducibility of the results is calculated using the formula
Where – j th expert; Rj– rank correlation coefficients for j-th expert, determined by the formula
Where d ij– the difference between the ranks assigned i- mu quality indicator j- expert in the first and second rounds of the survey; n– number of ranking objects.
If experts calculate the numerical values of the weight coefficients, then the assessment of the reproducibility of the results is calculated using the formula
Where – reproducibility rate j th expert; ρ j– distance from the average opinion of the group for j-th expert, calculated by the formula
where M ij* and M ij ** – values i-th weight coefficient assigned j- expert in the first and second rounds, respectively.
The reproducibility coefficient of an expert's results can vary from 0 to 10. It is recommended that experts with a reproducibility of results of 6 or higher be admitted to the examination of product quality.
Assessment of the expert’s qualimetric competence – assessment of theoretical knowledge of quality assessment methods and the ability to apply them. An assessment of an expert's theoretical training can be carried out through oral or written knowledge control using tests in a specific area of knowledge. The situation is somewhat more complicated with skill testing, which is divided into three types:
· ability to use different types rating scales;
· ability to determine subjective probabilities;
· ability to distinguish a sufficient number of gradations of the property being assessed.
Ability to use different types of rating scales. A scale is an ordered series of marks corresponding to the relationship between successive values of measured quantities. In qualimetry, a scale is a means of adequately comparing and determining the numerical values of individual properties and qualities of various objects. The following types of qualimetric scales are practically used: a name scale, an order scale, an interval scale, a ratio scale and an absolute value scale.
Name scale used in cases where several unknown sizes need to be compared with one and determine which of them are equal to the size chosen as the basis for comparison and which are not. According to the scale of names, sizes are classified on the basis of equivalence, identity, equality. This measurement is the simplest, but the least informative. In this case, it is not determined which of the unequal sizes is larger or smaller than the size taken as the base one, i.e. the order of increasing or decreasing sizes is not established. Measurement consists only in determining the sameness (equality) or difference (inequality) of a particular size from a predetermined value. Consequently, the defining relationships between measured dimensions are: equal or unequal, i.e. in symbols = or ≠.
The mathematical expression of the essence of measurements on a scale of names can be written as follows:
Р i = Р j or Р i ≠ Р j ,
where P i– the size with which they are compared (base size); R j – j th size of the compared sizes ( j= 1,2,3, … , n); n– number of sizes being compared.
When comparing and measuring sizes according to a scale of names, for example, control and assessment of the quality of something is carried out according to an alternative principle: pass - fail; suitable - not suitable; corresponds - does not correspond, etc.
Order scale– this is a sequential series of values that gives a systematic idea of the simplest ratios of the values of comparable sizes of properties, characteristics or qualities in general of the objects being assessed.
When comparing all measured sizes in pairs, it is determined which size is larger or smaller than the other, which is better or worse than the other. If there are identical sizes, then this ratio is also determined. Next, the established size ratios are ranked in order of increasing and/or decreasing (decreasing) of their values. The values themselves remain uncertain. The series of values obtained as a result of ranking is a scale of order of increasing or decreasing sequence.
Using order scales, size values can be classified (evaluated) not only by the criterion of “the same or not,” but also by the ratio of what is “more or less” than another or “what is better and what is worse” than another.
The mathematical expression of the relationships between pairwise comparable sizes is:
R i= P j or P i≠ P j or P i> P j or P i < R j.
As a result of comparing the dimensions P i and P j determine which size is larger or smaller than another, as well as which sizes have the same values, i.e. on the order scale, the following relations are determined: equal to (=), not equal to (≠), greater than (>), less than (<).
The disadvantage of measurements using order scales is that the results obtained in the form of a ranked series are the least informative. In particular, with such a measurement there is no way to determine how much one size is larger or smaller than another, better or worse than another. However, the main advantage of measurements using order scales is that with their help, instrumentally unmeasured quantities can still be assessed (measured) quantitatively. Those measured on order scales include such properties of objects as taste, smell, attractiveness, aesthetics, comfort, etc. On the order scale, general expert assessments of the quality of several compared objects are often made.
Interval scale used in cases where it is not possible to measure the sizes of the observed quantities themselves, but it is possible (or there is a need) to measure only the differences (differences) between the sizes cognizable by comparison.
The differences between the compared sizes are recorded on the measuring scale of intervals. This form of displaying the quantities being measured is more advanced, since on the interval scale there are conditional, but well-defined units of measurement, which makes it possible to quantitatively (numerically) characterize the ratio of the studied sizes.
The mathematical notation for comparing two homogeneous sizes with each other based on their difference has the form:
ΔР i,j= P i– R j.
Using the interval scale, the following size ratios are determined: equal to (=), not equal to (≠), greater than (>), less than (<), сумма (+), разница (– ).
A classic example of interval scale measurements is temperature measurement on the Celsius scale. Using an interval scale, it is impossible to determine how many times one size is larger or smaller than another.
Relationship scale– this is a measuring scale on which the numerical value of a quantity is counted (determined) qi as a mathematical ratio of the measured size P i to another known size, taken as a unit of measurement [P].
Any measurement on a ratio scale involves comparing an unknown size with a known one and expressing the first through the second in a multiple or fractional ratio.
The mathematical notation of a measurement on a ratio scale has the form:
Where i = 1, 2, 3, … , n– this is the number of the size being measured.
The ratio scale is an interval scale in which the zero element is defined - the origin, as well as the size (scale) of the unit of measurement [P].
Using the ratio scale, the following values of measured dimensions are determined: equal to (=), not equal to (≠), greater than (>), less than (<), сумма (+), разница (– ), multiplication (×), division (:). Consequently, many logical and all arithmetic operations can be performed with the relative values of the measured sizes.
The ratio scale is most suitable for measuring most quality indicators, especially for such numerical characteristics as the geometric dimensions of objects, their density, strength, tension and others.
Absolute scale used in cases where a quantity is measured directly. For example, the number of defects in a product is directly calculated. Number of units of production products, etc. In such measurements, the absolute quantitative values of what is being measured are marked on the measuring scale. Such a scale of absolute values has the same properties as a scale of ratios, with the only difference being that the values indicated on this scale have absolute rather than relative values.
The results of measurements on a scale of absolute values have the greatest reliability, information content and sensitivity to inaccurate measurements.
Scales of intervals, ratios and absolute values are called metric, since measures are used in their construction, i.e. dimensions accepted as units of measurement.
Characteristics, parameters or characteristics of the properties of objects, measured on a naming scale or on an order scale, are not quantitative, but quality, i.e. uncertain in their true magnitude and in the magnitude of the differences between them. The size determined by any of the metric scales is a quantitative value, and these scales themselves are quantitative.
Qualimetric scales, their defining relationships, the types of quality characteristics they measure, as well as some examples of what is measured are given in Table. 4.1.
Each of the qualimetric scales has its own meaning and its own area of application, and therefore they are most often not interchangeable when solving a particular expert problem. The ability to determine subjective probabilities is the ability of an expert to assess the likelihood of certain events occurring. Experts who do not have this ability should not be involved in forecasting-related expertise.
Ability to determine subjective probabilities when making certain types of assessments. For example, when determining the weight coefficients of certain events, an expert sometimes has to use the concept of subjectivity of the probability of their occurrence. They often resort to special tests that can be used to assess the ability of a candidate expert to accurately determine subjective probabilities.
The ability to distinguish a sufficient number of gradations of the property being assessed– the expert’s ability to perceive differences in the intensity of manifestation of each property. This ability is largely due to the expert’s sensitivity to the most insignificant changes in the properties and indicators of the objects of examination. For example, during organoleptic analysis, testers are tested for their ability to identify differences in tastes, smells, shades of color, etc. The accuracy of individual and group expert assessments also depends on the expert’s ability to distinguish between gradations of the property being assessed, therefore test tests to identify this ability should help select for the expert group high quality specialists.
Table 4.1. Types of qualimetric scales
The objectivity of the assessments is ensured by:
The independence of the certification body and the experts it involves from the applicant or other parties interested in the results of assessment and certification;
The full composition of the expert commission. In total, the commission must have knowledge of quality system standards, testing techniques, as well as the specifics of product production and regulatory requirements for it. The commission must include a specialist in the type of economic activity being inspected. If necessary, the commission may include specialists in metrology, economics, etc.;
Competence of experts conducting certification. Experts must be certified to carry out certification of quality systems or production certification and registered in the Register of Experts of the GOST R Certification System.
Reproducibility of the results of inspections and assessments of quality systems
Reproducibility of inspection and assessment results is ensured by:
Application of rules and procedures based on uniform requirements when conducting inspections and assessments of quality (production) systems;
Conducting audits and assessments based on evidence;
Documentation of the results of inspections and assessments of quality systems;
Clear organization of the system of accounting and storage of documentation by the certification body.
Confidentiality
The certification body, its experts and all specialists involved in the work of the commission (including trainees) must maintain the confidentiality of all information about organizations received at all stages of certification, as well as conclusions characterizing the state of the quality (production) system. Conditions for maintaining confidentiality of information are provided:
For the staff of the certification body - by establishing confidentiality requirements in job descriptions;
Confidentiality of orders of the head of the body;
For personnel involved in certification work - by establishing confidentiality requirements in employment contracts concluded between the certification body and the specialists involved;
For trainees - establishing confidentiality requirements under the conditions of the organization being audited.
Information content
The Register must ensure quarterly publication of official information about certified quality systems (productions) of certificate holders. In addition, current information on issued certificates of conformity of quality systems and production, suspension or cancellation of their validity should be published in operational sources of information (periodical publications of Rosstandart of Russia and its institutes).
The official source of information on the above issues is the consolidated list of certified quality systems and production facilities of the Register.
Specialization of bodies for certification of quality systems
Certification bodies must be specialized in areas of accreditation in accordance with the classification by type of economic activity adopted in the GOST R Certification System. A condition for inclusion in the area of accreditation of a particular type of economic activity is the presence of experts in the certification body (its own and/or attracted ) for certification of quality systems, for certification of production, for certification of products, for certification of services, as well as technical experts (own and/or attracted) specialized in relevant types of economic activities.
Verification of compliance with the requirements for products (services) in the legally regulated area
Subject to the presentation of mandatory requirements for products (services), established in accordance with the current legislation of the Russian Federation in state standards or other documents during certification of quality systems (production certification), the organization’s ability to ensure compliance with these requirements is checked.
Reliability of evidence from the applicant of compliance of the quality system (production) with regulatory requirements
When certifying quality systems, the certification body evaluates the reliability of the applicant’s evidence of compliance with the requirements of GOST R ISO 9001.
Current rating is a procedure individual promotion assessments in mastering the curriculum of the subject. Ongoing assessment can be formative, i.e. supporting and guiding the student’s efforts, and diagnostic, facilitating the identification and awareness by the teacher and students of existing problems in learning. The object of the current assessment is thematic planned results, the stages of development of which are recorded in thematic planning. The current assessment uses the entire arsenal of verification forms and methods (oral and written surveys, practical work, creative work, individual and group forms, self- and mutual assessment, reflection, promotion sheets, etc.) taking into account the characteristics of the academic subject and the characteristics of the control and assessment teacher activities. The results of the current assessment are the basis for individualizing the educational process; at the same time, individual results indicating the success of learning and the achievement of thematic results in a shorter period (compared to those planned by the teacher) can be included in the cumulative assessment system and serve as the basis, for example, for exempting the student from the need to perform thematic test work 11.
Thematic assessment is a procedure achievement level assessments thematic planned results in the subject, which are recorded in educational methodological kits recommended by the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation. For subjects introduced by an educational organization independently, the thematic planned results are established by the educational organization itself. Thematic assessment can be carried out both during the study of the topic and at the end of its study. Evaluation procedures are selected so that they provide for the possibility of assessing the achievement of the entire set of planned results and each of them. The results of the thematic assessment are the basis for correcting the educational process and its individualization.
Portfolio is a procedure assessmentsdynamics of educational and creative activity student, focus, breadth or selectivity of interests, severity of manifestations of creative initiative, as well as levelhighest achievements shown to these students. The portfolio includes both the student’s work (including photographs, videos, etc.) and reviews of these works (for example, award certificates, diplomas, certificates of participation, reviews, etc.). Selection of works and reviews for the portfolio is conducted by the student himself together with the class teacher and with the participation of the family. The inclusion of any materials in the portfolio without the consent of the student is not permitted. The portfolio, in terms of the selection of documents, is formed electronically throughout all years of study in primary school. The results presented in the portfolio are used in developing recommendations for choosing an individual educational trajectory at the level of secondary general education and can be reflected in the characteristics.
In-school monitoring represents procedures :
assessing the level of achievement of subject and meta-subject results;
assessing the level of achievement of that part of personal results which are associated with the assessment of behavior, diligence, as well as with the assessment of educational independence, readiness and ability to make an informed choice of educational profile;
assessing the level of professional skill of a teacher, carried out on the basis of administrative testing, analysis of lessons attended, analysis of the quality of educational tasks offered by the teacher to students.
The content and frequency of intra-school monitoring is established by a decision of the pedagogical council. The results of in-school monitoring are the basis for recommendations both for the ongoing correction of the educational process and its individualization, and for the improvement of teacher qualifications. The results of in-school monitoring in terms of assessing the level of student achievement are summarized and reflected in their characteristics.
Interim certification is a certification procedure for students at the level of basic general education and is carried out at the end of each quarter (or at the end of each trimester) and at the end of the academic year for each subject studied. Interim certification is carried out on the basis of the results of the accumulated assessment and the results of thematic testing work and is recorded in the education document (diary).
An intermediate assessment, which records the achievement of subject-specific planned results and universal educational activities at a level not lower than the basic one, is the basis for transfer to the next grade and for the student’s admission to the state final certification. During the period of introduction of the Federal State Educational Standards LLC, in the case of using standardized measuring materials, the criterion for achieving/mastering educational material is set as completing at least 50% of the basic level tasks or receiving 50% of the maximum score for completing basic level tasks. In the future, this criterion should be at least 65%.
The procedure for conducting intermediate certification is regulated by the Federal Law “On Education in the Russian Federation” (Article 58) and other regulations.
State final certification
In accordance with Article 59 of the Federal Law “On Education in the Russian Federation,” the state final certification (hereinafter referred to as the State Final Attestation) is a mandatory procedure that completes the development of the basic educational program of basic general education. The procedure for conducting state inspection is regulated by the Law and other regulations 12.
The purpose of the GIA is to establish the level of educational achievements of graduates. The GIA includes two mandatory exams (Russian language and mathematics). Students take exams in other academic subjects on a voluntary basis of their choice. The GIA is carried out in the form of the main state exam (OGE) using control measurement materials, which are sets of tasks in a standardized form and in the form of oral and written exams using topics, tickets and other forms as decided by the educational organization (state final exam - GVE).
Final grade(final certification) for a subject consists of the results of internal and external assessment. To the results external evaluation include the GIA results. To the results internal assessment include subject results recorded in the cumulative assessment system and the results of completing the final work in the subject . This approach makes it possible to ensure complete coverage of the planned results and to identify the cumulative effect of learning, providing an increase in the depth of understanding of the material being studied and the freedom to operate with it. For subjects not included in the State Examination, the final grade is based on the results of the internal assessment only.
The final grade in the subject is recorded in a state-issued document on the level of education - a certificate of basic general education.
Final grade for interdisciplinary programs is based on the results of in-school monitoring and is recorded in the student’s profile.
Characteristic prepared on the basis of:
objective indicators of educational achievements of a student at the level of basic education,
graduate portfolio;
expert assessments of the class teacher and teachers who taught this graduate at the level of basic general education.
In the graduate profile:
the educational achievements of the student in mastering personal, meta-subject and subject results are noted;
Pedagogical recommendations are given for the choice of an individual educational trajectory at the level of secondary general education, taking into account the student’s choice of areas of specialized education, identified problems and noted educational achievements.
Characteristics of assessment procedures and tools for assessing results
and quality of general education
Main pedagogical task in this area in the coming academic year comes down to building the evolution of assessment procedures when moving students from 1st to 9th grade , a description of assessment procedures for a network high school(grades 10-11).
The school system for assessing the results and quality of education must be considered in two time cycles:
two - four - five year cycles assessment systems: initial diagnostics of the readiness of first-graders, fifth-graders and tenth-graders to learn at the next level of education; intermediate diagnostics of second-graders and seventh-graders for differentiation of education and final assessment of fourth-graders, final certification for the course of basic and secondary general education.
In this cycle, external (independent) assessment of the results and quality of education plays a large role;
annual cycle The school system for assessing the quality of education is organized exclusively by the educational institution, which is built through three focuses: initial diagnostics at the beginning of the school year; assessment of the implementation of the educational program during the academic year to achieve the planned results in the work curricula; intermediate certification (final assessment) at the end of the academic year.
Let us first consider the annual cycle of the system for assessing the results and quality of education, the ultimate goal of which is to record individual progress in learning for each student with the identification of optimal conditions for the emergence of progress in learning.
2.1. Initial diagnostics of students at the beginning of the school year
An important point in the educational activities of schoolchildren is “rhythms” of the educational process, as one of the necessary conditions for the implementation of the tasks of school education. These “rhythms” are found primarily in the organization of the school year.
During the academic year, three phases are distinguished: the phase of joint formulation and planning of the year’s tasks (September), the phase of solving educational problems (October-April), and the reflective phase of the academic year (May). The indicated phases of the academic year correspond in general to the structure of educational activities.
A special place in the structure of the academic year is occupied by “launch” phase (joint setting and planning of the year’s goals. At this stage of the school year, students, on the one hand, determine the necessary subject “base” for further study of the academic subject, on the other hand, students, together with the teacher, can already imagine and plan a “general plan” of actions at the beginning of the year for a fairly large period of the school year (quarter, half-year, year).
The “launch” phase for different levels of school education should be built with taking into account the evolution of starting assessment procedures.
2.1.1. Launch phase in primary school
At this stage of education, it is necessary to separately highlight the starting diagnostics in the first grade (see below for more information on this) and the organization of the “launch” phase in grades 2-4.
The central place in this phase is starting test work , which, on the one hand, determines the current level of necessary knowledge and skills for further study of a particular academic subject, on the other hand, determines the “prospect” in the study of the academic subject for the new academic year.
The updated format for organizing the “launch” phase in grades 2-4 for the upcoming school year may look like this (Table 3):
Table 3
Organization of the “launch” phase in primary school
Stages
Week,
days of the week
Contents of the stages
Comments
Prepare
telny
Before the start of classes: the teacher highlights the necessary key subject skills from previous years of study for the new stage of learning. For each skill, a standard type diagnostic task is compiled.
Diagnostics
Monday,
1 hour
Students do this work on a special form:
Skill
Exercise
Grade
student
Grade
teachers
Examination
work
Monday, after school
The teacher checks all the students’ work and evaluates the completion of each task on the same sheet of diagnostic work
Comparison of ratings,
definition
deficits
Tuesday,
training session
by subgroups,
2-3 hours
Students are given a sheet with diagnostic work. Students compare the teacher's assessment with their own assessment. They record all their “deficiencies” directly in the diagnostic work itself.
One lesson
for each student
Workshops
Wednesday,
training session
by subgroups,
4-5 hour
Work in small groups with discovery notebooks. Finding the necessary information in the discovery notebook to eliminate students' problems and difficulties.
One lesson
for each student
Starting
test
Job
Thursday,
6 o'clock
Carrying out initial testing work. It is necessary to have at least two options (of the same type) for such work.
Checking work
Thursday,
after school
The teacher checks the work and evaluates each assignment. Prepares a set of homework assignments for students to work independently.
Comparison of ratings,
definition
deficits
Friday, training session in subgroups,
7-8 hours
Students are given a test sheet. Students compare the teacher's assessment with their own assessment. They record all their “deficiencies” on a special assessment sheet. Students are given assignments for independent homework.
One lesson
for each student
Consultation
any two days
second week
9-10 o'clock
Consultation
any two days
second week
11-12 o'clock
Students come to consultations at their request from 8.30 to 9.15 in order to ask questions to the teacher as they complete their homework.
Checking
job #1
Monday, 13 o'clock
Carrying out a test based on the results of homework
fourth
week
Working with Startup Jobs
Tuesday,
14 o'clock
Return to the starting test work, analysis of tasks “to break”
Setting up for
dachas for the current
academic year
Wednesday,
15 o'clock
Based on the identified “problem areas” of the starting test work, constructing a “map” of studying the academic subject this year in the form of questions.
Workshop
once - twice
during the week
16-17 hours
Students are invited to thematic workshops (and students also come at their own request) who have encountered certain problems during the test work.
To the workshops
are taken out
common
in class
problems
Comparison
ratings,
definition
deficits
Friday,
training session
by subgroups,
18-19 hours
Students are given a test sheet. Students compare the teacher's assessment with their own assessment. They record all their “deficiencies” on a special assessment sheet. Students are given homework assignments for independent work.
One lesson
for each student
Related articles
The best amulets against the evil eye and damage Amulet against the evil eye with hands for children
How to read the Psalter correctly
Delicious dishes with sausages
A glimpse of Bella. Romantic chronicle. A glimpse of genius. Messerer about Akhmadulina Boris Messerer glimpse of Bella romantic chronicle
I dreamed that I was sailing on a boat on the river
How to cook beef entrecote in a frying pan
About the company Foreign language courses at Moscow State University
Which city and why became the main one in Ancient Mesopotamia?
Why Bukhsoft Online is better than a regular accounting program!
Which year is a leap year and how to calculate it