CC BY
83
DOI: 10.12731/2218-7405-2013-5-32 УДК 373
FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT MODEL OF LEARNING SUCCESS
ACHIEVEMENTS
Mikhailova E.K.
The paper is devoted to the problem of assessment of the school students' learning success achievements. The problem is investigated from the viewpoint of assessing the students' learning outcomes that is aimed to ensure the teachers and students with the means and conditions to improve the educational process and results.
Keywords: formative assessment, learning success achievements, feedback.
МОДЕЛЬ ФОРМИРУЮЩЕГО ОЦЕНИВАНИЯ УЧЕБНЫХ
ДОСТИЖЕНИЙ
Михайлова Е.К.
Статья посвящена проблеме оценивания учебных достижений школьников. Проблема исследуется с точки зрения оценивания, которое имеет целью обеспечить учителей и учеников средствами и условиями для улучшения учебного процесса и результатов обучения.
Ключевые слова: формирующее оценивание, учебные достижения, обратная связь.
Point
The main task of school education development is in renovation of its contents and achieving new quality of its outcomes. The structural element of the pedagogical system that ensures the requirements to the quality of the subjects' learning activity is assessment aimed at the realization of feedback functions in the learning process. Improvement of assessing activity, elaboration of new methods of ensuring learning successes quality, search for such approaches and means that allow assessing knowledge and skills of the students fulfilling their personal learning trajectory are important tasks of secondary school [14]. Nowadays the assessment system of learning success achievements allows using assessment for learning process arrangement in its formative function. Lately the notion "formative" has appeared in such categories as "formative pedagogy" [23], "formative educational paradigm" [16].
We consider the assessment process from the viewpoint to purposefully form the result of education on the basis of diagnosis and monitoring of the learning process throughout when all the products of learning-cognitive activity that show not only the results of learning but the efforts made by a student are marked. In this context we regard the procedure of assessment as a prolonging formative didactic process providing a personal learning trajectory and favoring the achievement of the stated educational level by a student. The formative assessment, unlike the traditional assessment when the results of the tests are the main source of the information about the level of students' knowledge and skills, is fulfilled in close connection with the way the learning process really proceeded.
The origin of the term "formative" goes back to Michael Scriven who introduced it in such notions as «formative evaluation» and «summative evaluation» in 1967 [26].
Since then the term "formative" has been translated into Russian in different ways («формативный», «формальный», «форматный») but they distort a little the real meaning of this notion - "constructive", "making", "developing" [22]. Glossary
on the Bologna Process [28] defines "formative assessment" as a current assessment integrated into the learning process, the results of which are taken into account in the final mark.
I. Fishman and G. Golub in their article "Formative assessment of students' educational results" [7] say that formative assessment presupposes the students' achievements, reveals the gaps in mastering the educational contents in order to meet a lack with maximum efficiency.
Example
We consider the formative assessment to be a process of making learning outcomes aimed at a timely ensuring feedback, improving learning successes achieved within a system-operation and complex approaches which are based on algorithmization and ergonomization of the learning contents and process, rating, criteria and levels in assessment.
The formative assessment gives an opportunity to scrutinize "a noose of quality" in the learning process (mark - improvement programme - realization -mark) [9], [13] and to correlate the assessment functions 1) with "the noose" elements choosing four main assessment functions: diagnostic, organizational-substantive, teaching, controlling and 2) with the quality as an integrative notion (picture 1).
The connection of the notions vertically is the revealing of the logic of the motion towards the goal set within the assessment functions, "the noose of quality", and the quality as an integrative notion.
Assessment functions - «Noose of quality» - Quality
t t *
Diagnostic - Mark - Mark quality
▼
Organizational- Improvement Theme-informational
substantive programme means quality
* ▼
Teaching - Realization - Subj ect-subj ective relation quality
* +
Controlling - Mark - Assessment quality
1
Learning success achievements quality
Pic. 1. Correlation of assessment functions and quality
The horizontal connection stipulates the following motion of the sense:
- the diagnostic function of the assessment allows in "the noose of quality" fulfilling the initial assessment of the learning success achievements, that reveals the insufficient quality of the mark which is connected with the imperfectness of the 5-graded assessment scale:
- the organizational-substantive function of the assessment gives an opportunity in "the noose of quality" to set up a programme to improve the learning success achievements that leads to the qualitative improvement of the theme-informational means;
- the realization of the improvement programme in "the noose of quality" on the basis of the teaching functions creates conditions for the subject-subjective relations quality since the improvement programme in the system "subject-object-subject" is personally oriented;
- the controlling function lets make a final mark that reflects the assessment quality as a result of all the mentioned above procedures which helps us reach the goal set, i.e. provide the learning success achievements.
The correlation of the assessment functions with "the noose of quality" and the quality as an integrative notion brings us to the possibility to define the notion "the noose of quality" more exactly which can be presented like that: "mark - formative assessment - mark".
In this connection we present a formative assessment model as a means and conditions description of attaining the planned outcomes that allows purposefully, systematically, on the criteria-based approach ensuring a guaranteed quality of learning success achievements and regulating teachers' and students' activity. The formative assessment model is a unity of goals, diagnostic means, and appropriateness of teachers and students interaction.
The formative assessment allows
- concluding about a student's personal learning trajectory by comparing not only with an average standard and other peer-students but by comparing his new outcomes with the previous ones;
- connecting the student's marks with his personal increase of learning outcomes;
- providing the student with accessible information about his personal achievements favoring the student's self-assessment;
- developing the student's skills to assess his own learning outcomes giving him an opportunity to choose both the ways of attaining the learning outcomes and the level of their mastering;
- assessing the student without counting the number of mistakes made but counting the number of mistakes corrected [23].
The indications of the formative assessment by which it differs from the traditional assessment, the goals realized by it, teachers' and students' activity, learning outcomes, conditions that guarantee the quality of the learning success
achievements are presented below in a model.
Formative assessment model Indications
- diagnostics of learning success achievements and their correction
- providing feedback in the learning process
- active involving students into assessment process
- usage of up-to-date approaches in assessment
- introducing the assessment criteria
- level assessment
- various temporal periods of assessment
- individual approach in mastering school material Goals
- to help students see the educational goals and reach them
- to favour students to comprehend and attain the quality of the personal learning activity
- to help the teacher discern the students' learning problems
- to correct the learning process to overcome the appearing problems
- to assess students' learning success achievements on the basis of impartial assessment with criteria and rating
Teacher's activity
- defining the current goals and learning outcomes planned
- learning material arrangement on the basis of algorithmization and ergonomization
- picking out the key control points of every theme
- planning the learning outcomes in every theme and activity
- arranging students' activity to attain personally important learning outcomes
- monitoring students' learning success achievements
- criteria assessment
- final criteria-level assessment
- fixing the level of achievements on the rating basis
- criterial elaboration of transformation of the outcomes gained into a traditional assessment system
- timely help in eliminating of students' learning gaps
- correction of a student's personal learning trajectory Student's activity
- accepting learning goals
- setting out an individual learning trajectory
- using feedback in mastering the school subject
- fulfilling school tasks to get desired outcomes
- adjusting time of task implementation
- self-assessment and peer-assessment of current learning achievements on the criterial basis
Learning outcomes
- learning success achievements quality insurance
- considering the student a subject of assessing activity
- forming students' assessing self-dependence
- developing adequate self-assessment
- favoring system-operation learning Quality guarantee
- combination of Standard high requirements with purposeful pedagogical support of students' learning activity
- stable feedback insurance that allows informing the student about his success or failure and helps overcome learning problems
The formative assessment includes the following components:
- purpose (cultivating the result of teaching);
- substantive (theme-informational means including the school material that is
structured on the key points on the basis of the ergonomic approach);
- process (algorithmic approach to the work with the theme-informational means that includes a Card of Knowledge and Feedback Sheets);
- criterial (feedback arrangement while mastering the theme-informational means on the basis of the criteria-oriented and criteria-level approaches);
- mark and outcome (realization of the current and intermediate assessment within the criteria-oriented approach, and final and rating assessment within the criteria-level assessment).
The main components of the formative assessment (picture 2):
Pic. 2. Formative assessment components
These components represent the didactic basis and pedagogic methods and realize the algorithm of the teacher' and students' activity.
The special teaching tools with the help of which the learning process is managed and corrected are control and assessment. Control deals with the school material that represents the informational contents of a school subject and that is organized as a set of key points on the basis of the algorithmic and ergonomic approaches. While ensuring the feedback in the learning process they keep up with the student's personal learning trajectory on the Card of Knowledge and form the
procedure of reaching the learning aims set with the help of the Feedback Sheets.
Considering the theme-informational means to be a didactic component that can be modeled we think that the organization of students' activity to master the contents of a school subject is the task of paramount importance in the learning process. This task includes the arrangement of pedagogical conditions of teaching, learning and control-assessing activities.
Having stated the theme-informational means as a link between the subjects of education we regard it as a system of intercourse with the school knowledge. The theme-informational means serves to keep, structure, present, transmit, convert and enrich the information. It includes the material of a school subject that contains heterogeneous information having unequal 'weight' and good. In this connection picking out the key points of the material studied is necessary to arrange and structure knowledge, skills and competences in a certain field. It allows creating didactic material to the key concepts of a school subject contents. The necessity to pick up the key points of minimum sufficiency is stipulated by the principle of minimax [19] that means insurance of possibility for the student to acquire minimum of the contents stated by the Standard and giving an opportunity to master the educational contents on the maximum level while working with the theme-informational means of any school subject.
The intercourse with the school material is fulfilled by every student on his personal learning trajectory. Nowadays the idea of organization of the students' learning trajectory with the purpose to stimulate their activity in the learning process is being elaborated in different aspects, hence in the literature there appeared such terms as: individual educational trajectory [2], [4], [17], [11[; individual educational routes [5], [20]; individual school plan [12]; 'card of knowledge' on s subject [4]; feedback sheets [7]; individual teaching packet [28]; card of success [27]; programme of learning success achievements[25]; individual card of development [29]; technological card of lessons [10], etc.
Every term contains both certain distinctive moments that allow it to exist as a
separate didactic notion and the common basis that enables to regard them as the synonymic things since each of them involves the data with a set of learning goals, criteria, methods, ways of teaching, samples of individual educational programs, and other means of teaching and control-assessing activity.
We chose the notion 'personal learning trajectory' that in the learning process is presented as a 'Card of Knowledge' since any intercourse including the pedagogical one tends to the economy of the verbal means that leads to reduction of the complex notions and terminology and to their replacement into the ergonomic ones.
A 'Card of Knowledge' on a subject is a special means of planning throughout a school year, keeping subject logic and reflection of a student's individual motion in the subject [4]. It gives the students an opportunity to fulfill their own way in the subject mastering, to make suppositions about their further possible substantial motions.
The systematization, algorithmization and ergonomization of the school material are clearly graduated in volume and forms of activity in the 'Card of Knowledge'. Working out a 'Card of Knowledge' which defines the current goals of teaching on the basis of the calendar-theme plan is the main stage in the system of forming assessment's arrangement, the latter being in the intermediate position between the student's previous experience and his future activity in achieving learning results. Every year for the student is his personal trajectory in a certain subject that depends upon the student himself and is seen in two aspects: reflexive-cognitive and motivate-communicative [31]. The trajectory starts with a definite point in the educational programme and with an appointed level of mastering the school material on the basis of the final assessment in the end of the previous school year. The first test at the beginning of the following year gives a stimulus for every student to start his motion on his personal learning trajectory with maximum efficiency, though start possibilities will be different for the students.
A 'Card of Knowledge' enables parents to see their child in time and space of
the learning process and helps ha student to move in the desired rhythm and with the possible speed. If the results of the task do not satisfy the student, he can come back to it again and again till he finds them pleasing his wish (table 1).
Table 1
Card of Knowledge_
№ Task Points Points received Mark
1.
2.
3.
etc.
Assessment criteria points «5» «4» «3» «2» Total:
The assessment in the 'Card of knowledge' is made with the help of criteria that allow using two approaches in assessment: criteria-oriented during current and intermediate assessment and criteria-level while making final and rating assessment.
Rating assessment usage presents the experience of points distribution proceeding from the tasks types, mastering level and ranges them basing more often on reasonable and logical gradation. The scientific grounds of 'weight' coefficient of the points distributed in the system of rating assessment still lie in wait since practice leaves theory behind in this question. For example, the programme of learning achievements made by T.N. Perevoshikova and A.I. Golubeva [25] who based on the researches by P.F. Anisimov, V.P. Bespalko, I.Ya. Lerner, V.E. Sosonko, N.F. Talyzina, V.D. Shadrikov and others also considers diapason of assessing points depending on the levels of the activity fulfilled: perceptive level activity - from 0 to 4 points, reproductive - 2-12, variative - 9-15, problem-oriented - 11-25, but they are concluded just by an experimental method.
In practice another device to ensure formative assessment is Feedback sheets [7]. In the learning process arrangement it is necessary to organize feedback [15]
which can give information about difficulties and success in the process of learning. Feedback is a result of analysis, reflection and control that is received by the teachers and students while fulfilling joint activity [24]. Such an informing channel of feedback gives the teacher an opportunity to make diagnostics of the learning process, assess the results, correct the teachers' and students' actions, work out the further stages of education on the basis of the outcomes reached, differentiate methods, take into account students' personal learning trajectory.
The Feedback sheets (table 2) are not widespread yet in the world practice but nevertheless in some countries such sheets are used to assess written tasks, students' activity at the seminars, practical works. The most effective usage of Feedback sheets at school is while working on the written tasks at the English lessons. The written speech is characterized by many levels: it is necessary to master, on the one hand, different linguistic means correlated with the aspects of the language (lexical, grammatical, phonetical); on the other hand, skills in different kinds of speech activity that accumulate knowledge, skills and competence of speaking, reading, listening [1].
Table 2
Feedback sheet. Sample
Writing (40 minutes) Task
Comment on the following statement:
Now people are absolutely dependent on modern technologies, they will not survive
without them
Use the following plan: 1st para: state the problem 2nd para: give some reasons to explain it
3rd para: give some arguments for the other viewpoint; explain why you don't agree with
it.
4th para: sum it up.
Use the following:
Conditionals, Complex Subject, Comparisons, words from your own Glossary
Write 200 - 250 words
Feedback sheet in written creative tasks (postcard, composition, essay, report,
etc.) [6] is a document used by the teacher for qualitative and quantitative assessment of intermediate and final results of students' activity. This sheet allows the student
- setting up his own goals in mastering school material and planning the activity to reach them;
- receiving information about the results of his activity without getting a final mark (up to several times) and therefore having motivation for the further activity;
- getting comments permitting the student to plan the activity to reach the results of a higher level;
- learning algorithm of his own motion assessment [7];
- starting the tasks with the algorithmic and ergonomic approaches to save time and efforts.
The feedback sheet is checked at least twice, the last mark is given only after the final presentation of the sheet to the teacher since the mark given prematurely, according to I.S. Fishman and G.B. Golub, influences badly [7]. Every time the feedback is returned to the student it contains the teacher's remarks expressed with the help of standard symbols (table 3).
Table 3
Symbols in written tasks
Mark out paragraphs Para
Grammar mistakes: Gr
- wrong verb form Wv
- wrong question Wqu
- wrong word order WO
Details Det
Complete the volume Vol
Correct logic mistake CL
Correct arguments Carg
Sum it up Sum
Spelling mistake Sp
Show logic connection L
Give arguments in the end Arg
Punctuation mistake P
Develop the idea Dev
Make a conclusion Conc
Formulate clearly ?
Factual mistake F
The mistakes and shortcomings analyzed by the students personally or in the
cooperation with his peer-students (depending upon the level of school subject possession) and checked by the teacher more than once give the information about the problems that the student has to solve and about the way he moves on his learning trajectory using his own time, speed, and methods of mastering the school material.
One more device to ensure formative assessment is a criteria-oriented approach that helps define the value of the result within the level differentiation, take stock of the percent of knowledge, and establish threshold point for separating the students who coped with the control tasks and the students who didn't succeed in it even on the basic level. In this way a personal rating on the scale of success and failure is determined. Then the approach to the assessment becomes criteria-level approach [21].
If the rating scale looks like a summation of the marks or points given for the test, the level scale lets join the mark interpretation of a student as regards the results of other students and the levels of contents mastering that are based on the criteria. Such scale with the diapason of 100 points correlates with the levels of learning success achievements. These levels can coincide with the traditional assessment scale but also it allows considering the field of an unsatisfactory mark in its depth and more exactly make diagnostics of retardation in contents mastering.
We see a certain possibility to regard a level differentiation of an unsatisfactory mark "2" using a principle "Minus Class" since, according to V.Yu. Eltsova, we must not formally equalize all cases of poor progress. It is necessary to differentiate them showing the gaps and achievements of every student [30].
The table 4 given below allows distributing 100 points in the test (in the scale 90 - 75 - 50) not in the usual categories («5», «4», «3», «2») but much wider deepening into the 'retardation field' of an unsatisfactory mark that lets correlate the process of defining of the knowledge level with the process of establishing the value of knowledge level.
Table 4
Criteria-level assessment ('Minus Class')
Points Mark / Level
( defining the knowledge level ) ( establishing the value of knowledge level )
100 - 90 «5»
89 - 75 «4»
74 - 50 «3»
49 - 40 Minus 1 class
39 - 30 Minus 2 classes
29 - 20 «2» Minus 3 classes
19 - 10 Minus 4 classes
9 - 0 Minus 5 classes
While checking on the test performance the criteria-level approach in assessment gives an opportunity to reveal the depth of learning problems of every student. Working out some correction measures for a certain student is based on the level of the programme which the student reached. For example, if a ten-year student received 16 points for the test in English, he gets not only mark '2' but the knowledge level of the 7th class (table 5). His personally oriented programme will involve mastering the learning material unstudied in the 8th, 9th and 10th classes.
Table 5
Criteria-level assessment in 10th class
_(English, example)_
Test - 100 points Mark / Level Points received Mark Level
100 - 90 «5»
89 - 75 «4»
75 - 50 «3»
49 - 40 «2» 9 class
39 - 30 8 class
29 - 20 7 class 26 «2» 7 class
19 - 10 6 class
10 - 9 5 class
If we don't make teachers responsible for unsatisfactory marks, the number of weak students will grow considerably. There is a suggestion to move students up into the next class with bad marks or to teach successful students together with those who are a few classes behind. These opinions are greatly diametrical. We agree with V.D.
Lobashev [18] who thinks that giving a chance is a sign of humanity, moreover this chance costs so little but can stand students in good stead.
Resume
The traditional assessment deals with the current and final marks that don't reflect the personal learning trajectory of the student and don't show his efforts in making, developing and improving his achievements. The formative assessment being personally oriented helps teachers and students assess the process of learning providing them with timely feedback that ensures the solution of educational problems and leads to better learning success achievements.
References
1. Primernye programmy po inostrannym yazykam [Approximate programs in foreign languages]. Inostrannye yazyki v shkole [Foreign languages at school], no. 5 (2005): 23-24.
2. Aleksandrova Е.А. Pedagogicheskoye soprovozhdeniye starsheklassnikov v protsesse razrabotki I realizatsii individual 'nykh obrazovatel 'nykh traektorii [Pedagogical Accompaniment in the Process of Elaboration and Realization of Individual educational Trajectories]: abstract dis. ... candidate of Pedagogical Sciences. Tyumen, 2006. 40 p.
3. Atanov G.A., Pustinnikova I.N. Obucheniye i iskusstvennyi intellekt, ili Osnovy sovremennoy didaktiki vysshey shkoly [Training and Artificial Intellect, or The Basis of Contemporary Didactics of Higher Educational Establishment]. Donetsk, DOU, 2002. 503 p.
4. Barannikov A.V. Ob obespechenii uspeshnoy adaptatsii rebenka pri perekhode so stupeni nachal'nogo obshego obrazovaniya - na osnovnuyu: pis'mo Minobrazovaniya Rossii [About Ensuring Successful Adaptation of a Child in Moving up from the Primary Education Stage to the Secondary one: Russian Ministry of Education letter]. Nachalnaya shkola [Primary School], no. 31 (2004): 6.
5. Blokhina E.V. Obrazovatel'nye tekhnologii kak sredstvo individualizatsii obucheniya uchashikhsya [Educational Technologies as a Means of Individualization of Teaching School Children]: abstract dis. ... candidate of Pedagogical Sciences. M., 2001. 162 p.
6. Kriterii i shkala otsenivaniya pis'mennykh rabot [Criteria and Scales of Written Tasks Assessment]: Moskovskaya vysshaya shkola sotsial'nykh i ekonomicheskikh nauk [Supplement 3, Moscow higher school of social and economic sciences]: student's manual, 2003-2003. http://www/msses/ru/education/faculties/educational_policy/program/ceps/ index.php (accessed 16 March 2010).
7. Fishman I.S., Golub G.B. Formiruyushaya otsenka obrazovatel'nykh rezul'tatov uchashikhsya [Formative Assessment of School Children's Educational Outcomes]. Samara: Publishing house "Learning literature", 2007. 244 p.
8. Glossarii terminov Bolonskogo protsessa [Glossary of Terms of the Bologna Process]. Natsional'nyy ofisprogrammy Tempus v Rossii [National office of Tempus programme, in Russia]. www.tempus-russia.ru (accessed 15 April 2012).
9. Harlamov. I.F. Pedagogika [Pedagogy] : manual. Moscow, Yurist, 1997.
512 p.
10. Hutorskoy A.V. Razvitiye odarennosti shkol'nikov: metodika produktivnogo obucheniya [Development of Students' Giftedness: methods of productive training]: manual for teachers. Moscow: Humanities publishing house Vlados, 2000. 320 p.
11. Hutorskoy A.V. Metodika lichnostno orientirovannogo obucheniya. Kak obuchat' vsekh po-raznomu? [Methods of Personally Oriented Training. How to Teach Everybody Differently?] : manual for teachers. Moscow, Publishing house "Vlados-Press, 2005. 383 p.
12. Ivanov A.V., Stefanova E.B., Zubareva E.Yu. Multiprofil'nost' v starshey shkole i ee realizatsiya [Miltiprofileness in High School and its Realization]. Zavuch [School Manager], no. 1 (1999): 45-60.
13. Ivanov D.A. Ekspertiza v obrazovanii [Expert Examination in Education] : manual for higher education students. Moscow, Publishing house "Academy", 2008. 336 p.
14. Kirina M.Yu. Shkola na puti ot GIA k EGE: liniya bezdeistviya ili vektor progressa? [School on its Way from SFA to USE: a Line of Inactivity or a Vector of Progress?]. Voprosy obrazovaniya [Issues of Education], no. 1 (2012): 229-245.
15. Kolesnikov А.А. Funktsional'naya rol' obratnoy svyazi v structure rechevoi deyatel'nosti [The Function Role of Feedback in the Speech Activity Structure]. Inostrannye yazyki v shkole [Foreign languages at school], no. 1 (2011): 20-28.
16. Kolesnikova L.I. Sovmestnoye proektirovaniye kak factor razvitiya professional 'noy kompetentnosti prepodavatelei pedagogicheskogo kolledzha [Collaborative Projection as a Factor of the Development of Pedagogical College Teachers' Professional Competence]: abstract dis. ... candidate of Pedagogical Sciences. I., 2002. 21 p.
17. Likhachova Е.А. Modelirovaniye individual'nykh obrazovatel'nykh traektorii uchashikhsya na urokakh inostrannogo yazyka [Modeling Students' Individual educational Trajectories at the Foreign Language Lessons]. http://www.it-n.ru/Attachment.aspx?Id=10911 (accessed 14 May 2008).
18. Lobashev V.D. Resursy i elementy obespecheniya protsessa obucheniya [Resources and Elements of Learning Process Ensuring]. Innovatsii v obrazovanii [Innovations in Education], no. 4 (2008): 43-59.
19. Lopatnikov L.I. Ekonomiko-matematicheskiy slovar': Slovar' sovremennoi ekonomicheskoi nauki [Economic Mathematics Dictionary: Dictionary of Contemporary Economic Science]. Moscow, Delo, 2003. 520 p.
20. Lukashenko I.V. Individual Educational Trajectory of Students in Omsk Lyceum № 74 [Individual'naya obrazovatel'naya traektoriya shkol'nikov litseya № 74 goroda Omska]. - URL: http://letopisi.ru/index.php (accessed 20 January 2010).
21. Mikhailova Е.К. Kriterial'no-urovnevoye otsenivaniye kak faktor stimulirovaniya uchebnoy traektorii shkol'nikov [Criteria-level Assessment as a Factor of Stimulating Students' Learning Trajectory]. Sibirskiy pedagogicheskiy zhurnal [Siberian Pedagogical Journal], no. 5 (2010): 179-184.
22. Müller V.K. Anglo-russkiy slovar [English-Russian dictionary]. Russky Yazyk, 1988. 848 p.
23. Orekhova N.V. Pedagogicheskiye usloviya razvitiya lichnostnoi spontannosti starshego shkol'nika [Pedagogical conditions of senior students' development of personal spontaneity]: abstract dis. ... candidate of Pedagogical Sciences. I., 2002. 22 p.
24. Panina T.S. Sovremennye sposoby aktivizatsii obucheniya [Contemporary Means of Learning Activization: manual for higher school students]. Moscow, Publishing House "Academy", 2006. 176 p.
25. Perevoshikova E.N., Golubeva A.I. Reitingovaya sistema otsenivaniya deyatel'nosti studentov kak sredstvo upravleniya kachestvom obrazovatel'nogo protsessa po spetsial'nosti [Rating system of student activity assessment as a means of quality management of educational process of a speciality]. Innovatsii v obrazovanii [Innovations in Education], no. 12 (2007): 65-72.
26. Scriven, Michael. "The methodology of evaluation". In Stake, R. E. Curriculum evaluation. Chicago: Rand McNally. American Educational Research Association, monograph series on evaluation, no. 1 (1967).
27. Shukina G.I. Pedagogicheskiye problem formirovaniya poznavatel'nykh interesov uchashikhsya [Pedagogical Problems of Creating Cognitive Interests of Students]. Moscow, Pedagogy, 1988. 208 p.
28. Vorontsov A.B. Formy organizatsii uchebnoi deyatel'nosti uchashikhsya v podrostkovoi shkole [Organization Forms of School Children's Learning Activity in the Teenage School]. http://physclub.ru/ media/files/2008/02/concentr.doc (accessed 18 December 2008).
29. Yakimanskaya I.S. O razrabotke shkol'noi dokumentatsii, otrazhaushei lichnostnoye razvitiye uchenika [About Elaboration of School Documents Describing Student's Personal Development]. Shk. zdorovya [School Health], no. 1 (1996): 74.
30. Yeltsova V.Yu. Reitingovaya sistema kak sredstvo kontrolya pri differentsirovannom obuchenii [Rating System as a Means of Control in Differentiated Teaching]. Standarty i monitoring v obrazovanii [Standards and Monitoring in Education], no. 3 (2008): 21-25.
31. Znakov V.V., Pavluchenko E.A. Psikhologiya subekta: samopoznaniye subekta [Psychology of the subject: Self cognition of the subject]. Psikhol. zhurn. [Psychological journal] 23, no. 1 (2002): 31-41.
Список литературы
1. Примерные программы по иностранным языкам // Иностранные языки в школе. 2005. № 5. С. 23-24.
2. Александрова Е.А. Педагогическое сопровождение старшеклассников в процессе разработки и реализации индивидуальных образовательных траекторий : автореф. дис. ... д-ра пед. наук. Тюмень, 2006. 40 с.
3. Атанов Г.А., Пустынникова И.Н. Обучение и искусственный интеллект, или Основы современной дидактики высшей школы. Донецк: ДОУ, 2002. 503 с.
4. Баранников А.В. Об обеспечении успешной адаптации ребенка при переходе со ступени начального общего образования - на основную: письмо Минобразования России // Начальная школа. 2004. № 31. С. 6.
5. Блохина Е.В. Образовательные технологии как средство индивидуализации обучения учащихся : дис. ... канд. пед. наук. Магнитогорск, 2001. 162 с.
6. Критерии и шкала оценивания письменных работ. [Электронный ресурс]. - Приложение № 3 // Московская высшая школа социальных и экономических наук: справочник слушателя. 2002-2003. URL:
http://www/msses/ru/education/faculties/educational_policy/program/ceps/index.php (дата обращения: 16.03.2010).
7. Фишман И.С., Голуб Г.Б. Формирующая оценка образовательных результатов учащихся: методическое пособие. Самара: Издательство «Учебная литература», 2007. 244 с.
8. Глоссарий терминов Болонского процесса [Электронный ресурс] / Национальный офис программы Tempus в России . URL: www.tempus-russia.ru (дата обращения: 15.04.2012).
9. Харламов. И.Ф. Педагогика : учеб. пособие. М.: Юристъ, 1997. 512 с.
10. Хуторской А.В. Развитие одаренности школьников: Методика продуктивного обучения: пособие для учителя. М.: Гуманит. изд. центр ВЛАДОС, 2000. 320 с.
11. Хуторской А.В. Методика личностно ориентированного обучения. Как обучать всех по-разному? : пособие для учителя. М.: Изд-во ВЛАДОС-ПРЕСС, 2005. 383 с.
12. Иванов А.В. Мультипрофильность в старшей школе и ее реализация / Иванов А.В., Е.Б. Стефанова, Е.Ю. Зубарева // Завуч. 1999. №1. С. 45-60.
13. Иванов Д.А. Экспертиза в образовании: учеб. пособие для студ. высших учеб. заведений. М.: Издательский центр «Академия», 2008. 336 с.
14. Кирина М.Ю. Школа на пути от ГИА к ЕГЭ: линия бездействия или вектор прогресса? // Вопросы образования. № 1. 2012. С. 229-245.
15. Колесников А.А. Функциональная роль обратной связи в структуре речевой деятельности // Иностранные языки в школе. № 1. 2011. С. 20-28.
16. Колесникова Л.И. Совместное проектирование как фактор развития профессиональной компетентности преподавателей педагогического колледжа : автореф. дис. ... канд. пед. наук. Иркутск, 2002. 21 с.
17. Лихачева Е.А. Моделирование индивидуальных образовательных траекторий учащихся на уроках иностранного языка [Электронный ресурс].
URL: http://www.it-n.ru/Attachment.aspx?Id=10911 (дата обращения:
14.05.2008).
18. Лобашев В.Д. Ресурсы и элементы обеспечения процесса обучения // Инновации в образовании. 2008. № 4. С. 43-59.
19. Лопатников Л. И. Экономико-математический словарь: Словарь современной экономической науки. М.: Дело, 2003. 520 с.
20. Лукашенко И.В. Индивидуальная образовательная траектория школьников лицея № 74 города Омска [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://letopisi.ru/index.php (дата обращения: 20.01.2010).
21. Михайлова Е.К. Критериально-уровневое оценивание как фактор стимулирования учебной траектории школьников // Сибирский педагогический журнал. 2010. №5. С. 179-184.
22. Мюллер В.К. Англо-русский словарь: 53000 слов. М.: Рус. яз., 1988.
848 с.
23. Орехова Н.В. Педагогические условия развития личностной спонтанности старшего школьника : автореф. дис. ... канд. пед. наук. Иркутск, 2002. 22 с.
24. Панина Т.С. Современные способы активизации обучения : учеб. пособие для студ. высш. учеб. заведений / под ред. Т.С. Паниной. М.: Издательский центр «Академия», 2006. 176 с.
25. Перевощикова Е.Н., Голубева А.И. Рейтинговая система оценивания деятельности студентов как средство управления качеством образовательного процесса по специальности // Инновации в образовании. 2007. № 12. С. 65-72.
26. Scriven, Michael. "The methodology of evaluation". In Stake, R. E. Curriculum evaluation. Chicago: Rand McNally. American Educational Research Association, monograph series on evaluation, no. 1 (1967).
27. Щукина Г.И. Педагогические проблемы формирования познавательных интересов учащихся. М.: Педагогика, 1988. 208 с.
28. Воронцов А.Б. Формы организации учебной деятельности учащихся в подростковой школе. URL: http: //physclub. ru/ media/files/2008/02/concentr.doc (дата обращения: 18. 12.2008).
29. Якиманская И.С. О разработке школьной документации, отражающей личностное развитие ученика // Шк. здоровья. 1996. № 1. С. 74.
30. Ельцова В.Ю. Рейтинговая система как средство контроля при дифференцированном обучении // Стандарты и мониторинг в образовании. 2008. № 3. С. 21-25.
31. Знаков В. В., Павлюченко Е. А. Психология субъекта: самопознание субъекта // Психол. журн. 2002. Т. 23. № 1. С. 31-41.
DATA ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Mikhailova Elena Konstantinovna, English teacher
School № 36
5, Engels St., Bratsk, Russia SPIN-code: 5870-2856 E-mail: KK1806@yandex.ru
