Article
Article name Factor Dynamic Model of Pedagogical Monitoring
Authors Popova N.N. Candidate of Pedagogy, nnp18@mail.ru
Bibliographic description Popova N. N. Factor Dynamic Model of Pedagogical Monitoring // Scholarly Notes of Transbaikal State University. 2021. Vol. 16, No. 1. РР. 13–19. DOI: 10.21209/2658-7114-2021-16-1-13-19.
Section MODERN APPROACHES IN EDUCATION
UDK 37. 061
DOI 10.21209/2658-7114-2021-16-1-13-19
Article type
Annotation The article examines the topical problems of scientific validity and practice-oriented monitoring in education in the context of increasing requirements for individualization, diversification and differentiation of education. Based on the data of psychological and pedagogical diagnostics, a dynamic factor model of pedagogical monitoring has been developed. For this, the essential characteristics of pedagogical monitoring as a continuous, dynamic and multifactorial technology for supporting students have been determined. Representative representation of the monitoring results was carried out on a sample of students from a number of educational institutions of the Transbaikal Territory, numbering 250 people. The focus of the article is on the creativity of students as a manifestation of their non-standard and individuality, capable of ensuring their success in professional activities. The results of dynamic monitoring of students creativity indicators collected using a battery of tests of verbal and non-verbal creativity, as well as a number of personal techniques are presented. It has been empirically proven that the factorial dynamic model, built on measuring the level of development of the main indicators of creativity, ensures the comparability of results and the identification of latent factors (activity, personality creativity and values). These explain the presence or absence of dynamics in the studied indicators (creative attitude to the profession, originality, uniqueness and personality traits). The data obtained demonstrate the presence of statistically significant changes at the level of originality, the uniqueness of the developed fluency and flexibility in the process of the correlation conditioning of the dynamics of the integral characteristics of the personality (values: traditions, hedonism; self-esteem; emotionality, sociability, high normality of behavior and sensitivity).
Key words pedagogical monitoring, creativity, dynamic model, factor analysis, students
Article information
References 1. Batotsyrenov, V. B. Factors and mechanisms of the development of creativity of Russian and Chinese students: cross-cultural research World of science, culture, education, no. 6, pp. 320–323, 2012. (In Rus.) 2. Gavrilova, G. N. Pedagogical conditions for the development of creativity in secondary school students in the process of extracurricular work: on the material of physics. Cand. ped. sci. diss. abstr. Cheboksary, 2010. (In Rus.) 3. Kovbasov, S. N. Development of the creative function of the personality of senior pupils in the conditions of their mastering of computer technologies.Cand. ped. sci. diss. abstr. Volgograd, 2001. (In Rus.) 4. Kukuev, A. V. Pedagogical monitoring of personality-oriented educational process. Cand. ped. sci. diss. abstr. Rostov n / a, 2001. (In Rus.) 5. Livova, I. V. Psychological factors in the development of personality creativity.Cand. ped. sci. diss. abstr. Kemerovo, 2005. (In Rus.) 6. Mayorov, A. N. Elements of pedagogical monitoring and regional standards in management. SPb., 1992. (In Rus.) 7. Mironova, M. V. Qualimetric approach to the development of a system of pedagogical monitoring at the university. Cand. ped. sci. diss. abstr. Izhevsk, 1998. (In Rus.) 8. Orlov, A. A. Monitoring of innovative processes in education. Pedagogy, no. 3, pp. 9–15,1996. (In Rus.) 9. Osipova, T. Yu. Psychological conditions for the development of communicative creativity among students of a technical university: on the materials of the special course «Psychology of communication». Cand. ped. sci. diss. abstr. Tomsk, 2000. (In Rus.) 10. Ostroumova, O. F. Development of the communicative competence of students of the Faculty of Foreign Languages in the context of organizing a creative educational process. Cand. ped. sci. diss. abstr. Kazan, 2006. (In Rus.) 11. Popova, N. N. Factor structure of the relationship between value orientations and creativity of students Scientific Review. Series 2: Humanities, no. 1–2, pp. 26–30, 2010. (In Rus.) 12. Shishov, S. E., Kalney, S. E. Monitoring the quality of education. M: Pedagogical Society of Russia, 1999: 43. (In Rus.) 13. Erdyneeva, K. G., Popova, N. N. Comparative analysis of the results of factorization of data from cross-cultural research of creativity. International Journal of Experimental Education, no. 5, pp. 154–155, 2010. (In Rus.) 14. Erdyneeva, K. G., Chernyavskaya, V. S. Predictors of the effectiveness of student education in the context of self-disclosure of their abilities. Scientific Review, no. 6, pp. 78–90, 2017. (In Rus.) 15. Alencar, E. S., Fleith D. Creativity in higher education: inhibiting factors. Evaluation, no.15, pp. 201–206, 2010. (In Engl.) 16. Armstrong, D. The Contributions of Creative Cognition and Schizotypal Symptoms to Creative. Creativity Research Journal, no. 24, pp. 177–190, 2012. (In Engl.) 17. Claxton, A. F. Developmental Trends in the Creativity of School. Age Children Creativity Research Journal, no. 4, pp. 327–335, 2005. (In Engl.) 18. Garcеs, S., Pocinho, M., Jesus, S. N. The impact of the creative environment on the creative person, process, and product. Psychological Assessment, no. 15, pp. 169–176, 2016. (In Engl.) 19. Livingston, L. Teaching creativity in higher education. Arts Education Policy Review, no. 111, pp. 59–62, 2010. (In Engl.) 20. Lubart, T. I. Models of the creative process: Past, present, and future. Creativity Research Journal, no.13, pp. 295–308, 2001. (In Engl.) 21. Plucker, J., Renzulli, J. Psychometric approaches to the study of human creativity. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Handbook of Creativity. 2009: 35–61. (In Engl.) 22. Ponomarev, I. A. Prospects for the Development of the Psychology of Creativity (I) Investigation into problems of methodology. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, no. 3, pp. 17–93, 2008. (In Engl.) 23. Sternberg, R. J. A three-facet model of creativity. The nature of creativity. Cambridge: Cambr. Press, 1988: 125–147. (In Engl.) 24. Taggar, S. Individual creativity and group ability to utilize individual creative resources: A multilevel model. Academy of Management Journal, no. 45, pp. 315–330, 2002. (In Engl.) 25. Torrance, E. P. Predictive validity of the Torrance test of creative thinking. Journal of creative behavior, no. 6, pp. 236–252, 1982. (In Engl.) 26. Vinogradova, G. A. Releasers as factor of student ecological focus formation. Ekoloji, no. 106, pp. 1409–1415, 2018. (In Engl.) 27. Wechsler, S. M. Multidimensional assessment of creativity: A necessary reality. Psychology school and educational, no. 2, pp. 89–99, 1998. (In Engl.)
Full articleFactor Dynamic Model of Pedagogical Monitoring