CC BY
61
The problem of identification of educational achievements of bachelors: competence approach
age group (25 years and older) [2, с. 57]. Equal (pair) burial adolescents and adult women, as well as single children known to the Sarmatians (III-II centuries BC) in the Lower Volga region [7, с. 58-59, 96; 8, с. 283-284, 318].
Adolescents (12-15 years), apparently already passed the rite of initiation and representing the third age group had the appropriate equipment, there is little to distinguish them from those of adults. Known paired burials girls (women?) carcass culture together with their peers and older men on the territory of the Lower Volga region [7, с. 191]. For burials girls Carcass culture of the bronze age of the Middle Volga and Lower Volga region, in addition to ceramics, characteristic only of rare j ewelry, usually bronze bracelets or other j ewelry [6, с. 62; 7, с. 69, 86]. Similarly, did the Sauromatians and Sarmatians of the Lower Volga region and southern Urals, however, part of the «teenagers» were buried separately [7, с. 80; 9, с. 64]. Obviously, this age group can no longer be regarded as a teen, and should be part of any adult members of society.
Based on the foregoing, we can conclude that the children of the first age group were still very closely associated with their mothers. Apparently, therefore, the population of
these cultures of the bronze age they were buried in the same graves with women (mothers?), or at least, near their graves. There are facts that did the same in the Eneolithic tribes of Pit archaeological culture of the Lower Volga region [7, с. 80; 9, с. 64]. However, the situation of children findings emphasize and mutton bones, clearly served as toys.
As an exception, not the rule, should consider those facts when the boys were supplied with weapons. Apparently, it was stressed that they belong to a special military stratum of society, followers of traditions which they were to become in the afterlife. It should be especially noted and paired Carcass burial and Alakul archaeological cultures of this group, reflecting emerged in the second quarter of the second Millennium BC in the border areas the tradition of early marriage conspiracy, obviously, had important political significance [3, с. 94-95].
Judging from the available facts, children of the second age group also were associated with women, but burial (transition to adult) inventory suggests that this relationship is significantly weakened. Time children’s games goes by «children» prepared by the society for the transition to adulthood, «playing» in adult life.
References:
1. Gorbunov V. S., Denisov I. V., Ismagilov R. B. New materials on the bronze age of the southern Urals. - Ufa: Bashkir state pedagogical Institute, 1990. (in Russian).
2. Grach A. D. Ancient nomads in Central Asia. - M.: Nauka, 1980. (in Russian).
3. Denisov I. V. Ancient history of the southern Urals. - Sterlitamak: Sterlitamak state pedagogical Institute, 2000. (in Russian).
4. Denisov I. V. Burial grounds of the bronze age Obilking meadows near Sol-Iletsk//Archaeological monuments of Orenburg region. - Orenburg, 2001. - Vol. V. (in Russian).
5. Zdanovich G. B. Zdanovich S. Y. Burial of bronze age near the village Petrovka//Soviet archaeology. - 1980. - No. 3. (in Russian).
6. Merpert N. I. Materials on archeology of the Middle Volga region//Materials and researches on archeology of the USSR. -M., 1954. - No. 42. (in Russian).
7. Sinitsyn I. V. Archaeological survey of Zavolzhsky squad (1951-1953.)//Materials and researches on archeology of the USSR. Moscow, 1959. - No. 60. - T. I. (in Russian).
8. Smirnov K. F. Barrows in the villages Ilovatka and Politicalissue Stalingrad region//Materials and researches on archeology of the USSR. Moscow, 1959. - No. 60. - T. I. (in Russian).
9. Smirnov K. F. Sarmatians on the Ilek river. - M.: Nauka, 1975. (in Russian).
10. Khazanov A. M. The Social history of the Scythians. - M.: Nauka, 1975. (in Russian).
Nabiev Valery Sharifyanovich, Ulyanovsk state pedagogical university named after I. N. Ulyanov, Candidate of Pedagogic sciences, assistant professor of Pedagogical Department
E-mail: paradoks.nabiev@mail.ru
The problem of identification of educational achievements of bachelors: competence approach
The study was funded by the Russian Foundation for Humanities and the Ulyanovsk region in the framework of a research project № 15-16-73003/15
Abstract: The article considers the approaches to solving the problem of identification of the results and educational achievements of university students. In the article there were set and analyzed some inner meanings of the term “educational potential” in the context of the objectives of competence formation and personal qualities and competence diagnosing.
115
Section 9. Pedagogy
Keywords: competence approach, competence (“kompetentsiya”), diagnosing, identification, educational potential, competence (“kompetentnost”).
Introduction
Education in Russia has always been the object of close attention of the state, since the general and professional culture, professionalism and upbringing of a citizen in many ways determine the quality of life and the level of development the society in a civilized world.
The positive experience of the successful construction of the educational space in the European countries has inspired many other countries, including Russia. Therefore, competence approach to learning at the turn of the XX century may indeed be regarded as a kind of technological breakthrough. Unfortunately so far in the scientific community it is represented rather ambiguously, usually as a conceptual phenomenon. The overall impression of uncertainty is strengthened by the fact that in education there is no universal “winning formula”. Every time we begin to organize the learning process, we have to re-build “competence approach” in order to achieve specific goals and objectives of the educational activities in the optimal conditions under which the fullest subjective educational potentials are revealed and better educational outcomes are provided. That is why for all its attractiveness and innovation the competence approach in education has been and remains an inexhaustible source of “unanswered questions”, a motivational factor and also a personal scientific research motivator for many beginners and venerable scholars.
Main part
The development of higher education in Russia in the context of competence approach identifies new objectives of basic and applied pedagogical researches, which include:
• correction of traditional methodological principles and methodical settings, comparison of scientific views and positions; determination of the importance of upbringing/teach-ing as process and outcome;
• differentiation of the conceptual field of competence (“kompetentsiya”), categorical definition of the basic concepts of correlation and structuring;
• theoretical and methodological substantiation of didactic conditions of the goals and objectives implementation of a holistic educational process;
• meaningful and semantic content of subjective competence (“kompetentnost”) formation activity in the context of the Federal State Educational Standard (FSES) requirements, correlated with student-centered, activity, axiological approach to training etc.
The studies of foreign authors show the deepest development of common competence (“kompetentnost”) problems (J. Raven, J. Coleman, R. Collins, E. de Bono, S. Schneider, L. Spencer etc). In Russian psychological and pedagogical literature there were considered the competence (“kompetentnost”) formation processes in the subject areas of activity, in communication, also knowledge competences and so
on (V. S. Bibler, V. V. Davydov, S. Yu. Kurganov, A. M. Ma-tyushkin, N. F. Talyzina, M. A. Kholodnaya, D. B. El’konin, P. M. Erdniev etc.) [1]. Special attention should be paid to the point of view of I. A. Zimnaya who shares the ideas of many well-known Russian scholars (A. V. Khutorskoi, D. A. Mak-hotin, Yu. G. Tatur etc). They agree about the idea that “competence” as an entity has two related but phenomenologically different shades of meaning (two different words in the Russian language: “kompetentsiya” vs “kompetentnost”). On the one hand competence (“kompetentnost”) is the integrative generalizing result formed in the educational process. On the other hand competence (“kompetentsiya”) is based on the requirements of “kompetentnost” and includes them [2, 18].
The research results prove the point of view of I. A. Zimnaya who giving the reference to the primary source materials pays attention to three main interpretations of the concept competence (“kompetentsia”): pedagogical one: learning content that should be mastered; “expropriated, given in advance social requirements (norms) to the educational preparation of the student, required for his high-quality productive activities” (A. V. Khutorskoi); psychological one: intellectual, subjective, psychological characteristics of a person that contribute to the mastering of learning content and his further activities (H. Heckhausen, R. Whaite, D. C. McClelland etc.); linguo-psychological one: inner psychic formation as a kind of a programme (N. Khomskiy, I. A. Zimnaya) [2, 20].
Delimitation of conceptual fields of competence (“kom petentsiya”/“kompetentnost”), definition of the basic categorical concepts, their correlation and structuring allows us to follow the logic of scientific research in the context of the previously identified patterns of special military competence (“kompetentnost”) formation of university students [1].
The choice of methodological bases and methodical facilities is of fundamental importance for us because it forms the basis of the educational potential theory, and it also defines a longitudinal practice of professional competence (“kompetentnost”) formation of teachers and future educational achievements of bachelors.
Setting goals, defining objectives and filling the content of educational activities with meaningful predicates is directly related to the problem of identifying the educational achievements of students throughout the set of didactic conditions of competence (“kompetentnost”) formation. The latter is based on the selection of educational competence (“kompe-tentsiya”) evaluation criteria/indicators; and also on given structural components and components of subjective professional competence (“kompetentnost”) included in educational technology [3].
The adequacy in choosing the diagnostic tools for professional competence (“kompetentnost”) formation and the successful identification of university students’ educational achievements on condition of their fulfillment of the re-
116
The problem of identification of educational achievements of bachelors: competence approach
quirements within the limits of normative result formation parameters suggests: level indicators; diagnostic procedures for assessing the dynamics of changes in the personal characteristics and parameters of activity and communication; evaluative comparison techniques, ranging, classification etc. Proprietary technological solutions are related to the diagnosing and educational achievement evaluation algorithms. They are defined according to the competence (“kompetentnost”) formation objectives within the practice oriented mechanisms of substitution, transformation and adaptation of the professional activity knowledge and skills represented by descriptors and competencies (“kompetentsiya”).
Informative and meaningful content of subjective activity in the context of the federal state educational standard requirements and basic bachelor educational programmes (050100 Teacher training education) is usually related to student-centered, activity and axiological approaches to learning in the holistic educational process [4].
The idea of the process integrity is connected to the relevant requirements for a substantial increase of the academic level of vocational training, for the organization of effective in-class work and independent work of university students. Among the priority personality formation objectives we should mention student upbringing in keeping with the spirit of respect for human dignity, national traditions, religious feelings and preferences, international cultural heritage forming the infinite human values and the source of vitality.
Unused system resources of the innovative component of the education reform are the main opportunities of the basic bachelor educational programmes. That’s why it is really important to discover some new consistent patterns of upbringing and education matching the aims and objectives of a holistic educational process, and using the existing evaluation criteria and indicators of quality of the basic bachelor educational programmes.
Educational opportunity as a phenomenon and characteristic of the holistic educational process manifests itself on the levels of organization and implementation of basic bachelor educational programmes. But the structure
of federal state educational standard and basic bachelor educational programmes includes the resources to form the professionally significant qualities and competences (“kompetentsiya”).
For example, the unit of fundamental and natural science disciplines provides intellectual skills of scientific thinking, creativity etc. The unit of engineering and professional subjects provides the students with the opportunity to use intellectual skills. The unit of humanitarian disciplines creates their views, outlook, system of value orientations etc [4].
Summing up, it should be mentioned that the educational potential of the individual is better revealed within the objective-oriented, meaningful, motivational and notional filling of the activity of the subject of the educational process, and according to the optimal set of didactic conditions and adequate choice of result diagnosing means.
Conclusion
The problem of identifying the educational process results is determined by the meaningful ambiguity of the competence concept (“kompetentsiya”/“kompetentnost”) and the following contradictions:
• insufficient development of the theoretical foundations of competence approach in relation to the goals, objectives and content of the educational activities of the subjects;
• absence of practice-oriented mechanisms of substitution, transformation and adaptation of the knowledge and skills presented in the educational content of the new competence framework;
• necessity to select criteria and indicators for evaluation of educational competencies (“kompetentsiya”), components and constituents of professional competence (“kompetentnost”) of the individual;
• implicit, indifferent nature of the federal state educational standard requirements imposed on the learning outcomes of students.
The solution of this problem opens up various opportunities for further improvement of the educational process in the university, and also for further improvement of the quality of higher education in Russia and abroad.
References:
1. Valery Sh. Nabiev. Military special competence: didactic conditions of formation of the personality: Monograph. Saarbrücken: «LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing GmbH & Co. KG, Germany». 2011.
2. Irina A. Zimnaya. Competence within the competence approach in education / Scientific notes of the national applied linguistics society. 2013. № 4(4).
3. Michail A. Petukhov, Valery Sh. Nabiev. Technological problems of forming the fundamental characteristics of a student / Higher education today. 2010. № 6.
4. Federal state educational standard of higher professional education, training direction 050100 Teacher training education (qualification (bachelor) degree). URL.: http://www.edu.ru/db-mon/mo/Data/d_11/prm46-1.pdf
117
