| Annotation |
The article is devoted to the problem of meta-subject outcomes evaluation in general education. The need to consider this issue is justified by the contradictions between the existing approaches to evaluating new results and the lack of approved, accepted diagnostic tools. In addition, there are clear gaps between the activity-based learning framework of the Federal State Educational Standard and the traditional (knowledge-information) system for evaluating educational results. In the course of comparative and problem analysis, a number of benchmarks is identified. This allows to distinguish between approaches, concepts and their bases. Thus, the reference points are the educational system itself and the methods of teaching in which the school and the teacher work (developmental training, Pedagogy of mental and action approach, competence-based approach, etc.). For example, the basis for evaluating the meta-subject results of education in the activity-based approach are the stages of forming mental actions from simple to complex. The criteria basis for evaluating the meta-subject results of education are the concepts of “thinking”, “activity” and “result”, as the indicators of personal development level. The assessment of meta-subject skills in the competence-based approach is focused on “outcome results”. The description of theoretical approaches to the assessment of meta-subject results of education gives grounds for proper selection and application of the necessary assessment tools, thereby contributing to the improvement of general education quality. |
| References |
1. Asmolov, A. G., Burmenskaya, G. V., Volodarskaya, I. A. and others. How to design universal learning activities in elementary school: from action to thought: manual for teachers. M: Prosveshchenie, 2008.
(In Rus.)
2. Glazunova, O. I. Pedagogy of Mental and Action approach as the basis for the implementation of the FSES. The Meta-subject approach in General education: issues of implementation. Ulan-Ude: NovaPrint, 2014. (In Rus.)
3. Golub, G. B., Kogan, E. Ya., Prudnikova, V. A. To question of evaluating meta-subject outcomes in general education. Pedagogy. Questions of theory and Practice, no. 3, pp. 19–24, 2017. (In Rus.)
4. Gosteva, Yu. N., Kuznetsova, M. I., Ryabinina, L. A., Sidorova, G. A., Chaban, T. Yu. Theory and practice of evaluating reading literacy as a component of functional literacy. Domestic and foreign pedagogy, no. 4, pp. 34–57, 2019. (In Rus.)
5. Zotova, S. A. Diagnostics of meta-subject learning outcomes: approaches, problems, prospects. Web. 20.12.2020.https://mgpu-media.ru/issues/issue-4/system-education-quality-assessment/the-diagnostiks-of-metadisciplinary-results-approaches-problems-perspectives.html. (In Rus.)
6. Klarin, M. V. Competence in business. Activity approach in education. M: NP “Author’s Club”, 2018. (In Rus.)
7. Nezhnov, P. G. Diagnostics of educational and subject competencies. M: Non-commercial partnership “Author’s Club”, 2018. (In Rus.)
8. Results of education and their assessment / compiled by T. Y. Mysina. M: Non-commercial partnership “Author’s Club”, 2018. (In Rus.)
9. Remorenko, I. M. Models of designing the content of education: domestic and international practice. Activity-based approach in education. M: NP “Author’s Club”, 2018. 5–18. (In Rus.)
10. Firsova, N. V. Monitoring the quality of basic general education: evaluation of meta-subject results of students. Education: a resource for development. Bulletin of the Leningrad Regional Institute for the Development of Education, no. 1, pp. 37–53, 2016. (In Rus.)
11. Shoydokova, N. C. Meta-subject approach in general education: historical and aspect analysis. Meta-subject approach in General education: issues of implementation. Ulan-Ude: NovaPrint, 2014. (In Rus.)
12. Elkonin, B. D. Educational space: connectivity of different forms of action. Activity-based approach in education. M: NP “Author’s Club”, 2018: 21–36. (In Rus.) |
