Ranija R. Khamatvalieva1* and Venera G. Zakirova2
1Institute of Psychology and Education, Kazan (Volga region) Federal University,
Kazan, Russia. E-mail: [email protected]
2Institute of Psychology and Education, Kazan (Volga region) Federal University,
Kazan, Russia. E-mail: [email protected] *corresponding author email: [email protected]
Abstract. With the dynamic development of the Russian and global education an issue of evaluation and valuation activities is being updated. Being a part of universal educational tactics, evaluation and control-evaluation activity in general, appear as an independent element of the content of education, which is necessary to be formed and developed. However, in practice, we continue to meet with the subjectivity of the school mark, the absence of clear criteria in its selection; the non-effective ranking of the results with the 5-score scale; the lack of functional information about the mark that is the cause of low or high scores. In its connection, this article is directed to identify the advantages of using methods of criterial self-evaluation and inter-evaluation at primary school. While researching this problem we used method of testing and monitoring of learners performance that give a possibility to reveal advantages and disadvantages of self-evaluation and inter-evaluation. In this article the peculiarities of the educational process organization with the usage of non-standard methods of criterial self- evaluation and inter-evaluation were disclosed. The motivation rising to the studying and the performance of primary school learners appears as a key proof of effectiveness of these evaluation methods respectively. Article content can be used by teachers of primary school and teachers of institution of higher education.
Keywords: estimate, control and estimated activity, self-estimation, mutual estimation.
Introduction
The estimation is necessary for any successful and effective activity. Estimation is one of the major components practically of any model of training, the main goal of which is a pupil capable to be the subject of educational activity. However, for the accountability, the estimation purpose in its true value is reduced to measurement by the principle "one size will descend for all" (Boyl& Charles, 2012).Traditional 5-point system of measurement of educational activity results is not the best basis for formation of cooperative relationships between pupils and the teacher (Malova, 2009).According to E.N. Syromolotov (1999) school mark is "casual" and "relative". The teacher at discretion can overestimate and underestimate an assessment, thus, it loses the objectivity, turning into the point of view of one person. This approach to the estimation of knowledge is a source of constant clashes and mutual mistrust. In addition, the ranking of pupils by achievement level orients them not to get knowledge, but a positive mark. V. I. Glukhova (2012) and M. V. Ienzhewskaya (2010) proved the necessity of switching no points at all system of education in their researches. Scientists V. P. Bespalko (1989) and S. I. Goreslavsky (1990) suggest not to be limited to a five-point scale of estimation and to increase it to 8-12 points, having developed criteria for each level of assessment.
The younger school age is the most favorable period for formation of bases of estimated activity of the child. And in the first two weeks of stay in school pupils learn the main principles of assessment (Zuckerman, 1999). In modern conditions it is impossible the formation of students' learning interest, improving school motivation without implementation in educational process of school self-estimation techniques and mutual estimation. That is why there is a need to create and put into practice a universal system of estimation, in which the pupils could participate by themselves. At the same time, according to K. Topping (2000), mutual estimation can not be separable from the self-estimation. So, analyzing work of the schoolmates, pupils gain skills of critical thinking that allows them to estimate the work objectively.
Non-standard methods of estimation will help to develop pupils' ability to check and control themselves, critically estimate their activity, set mistakes and find the ways of their elimination. And that the most important, will play a big role in creation of psychologically comfortable educational environment for pupil’ motivation to successful educational activity.
Methodological Framework
The basis of this article is the experimental work on introduction of self-estimation and mutual estimation techniques in educational process. The study was conducted in gymnasium 125 of Kazan city from 2011 to 2015.
To identify the level of school motivation at the end of each academic year the
questionnaire were conducted in the control and experimental groups of pupils according to N. G. Lusknova method (1999). The questionnaire consists of 10 questions which are best reflecting the relation of children to school, teachers, educational process, the emotional relation to school situations. The questions were read aloud to younger pupils or offered in writing, where they chose the answer. Then we counted the percentage of pupils with different levels of school motivation. 100% payment is the total number of pupils of each class. Questionnaire according to method N. G. Lusknova (1999) does not require large expenditures of time and effort. The repeated questioning over several months allows to estimate the dynamics of school motivation.
At the end of each school year the motivation to study and monitoring pupils’ progress were conducted simultaneously. To determine the extent of progress there were calculated the final grades earned by pupils for one academic year on all subjects. Then the proportion where 100% is a total amount of marks, and x % is a total quantity of the five, four and three marks were formed. Solving a proportion, we got a percentage of class progress. To determine the percent of progress quality there was hold the same operation, but only with positive marks.
Results
Due to the fact that pupils of the first grade could have difficulties with reading and perception of the questionnaire, questions were read aloud. Then there were variants of answers, and they wrote down the answers they came up. Analyzing the questionnaire results, it should be noted that in both of these classes
during the year, there is a high level of school motivation — 84% of pupils observed, the remaining 16 % there is a good level of motivation. In experimental and control classes there are observed comparatively high quality of progress (Table 1).
Table 1. Progress in 2011-2012 academic year
Experimental class Control class
Progress 100% 100%
Progress quality 80% 85%
High level of motivation to learn in the 1st grade is due to the willing of the pupils to attend school and get positive emotions from the first results of their new training activities.
In the 2nd, 3rd and 4th grades pupils answered the questions in writing.
At the end of the second grade the results of school motivation questioning of
experimental and control classes showed insignificant distinctions. The level of motivation of an experimental class remains on high (70%) and good (30%) level. The indicators of motivation level of a control class are follows: 45% of pupils have high level of motivation, 35% have good level of motivation, 15% have positive attitude to school, but the school attracts such children with extracurricular activities, 5% of pupils have low motivation to training.
According to the results of monitoring the progress quality is higher in the experimental class (Table 2).
Table 2. Progress in 2012-2013 academic year
Experimental class Control class
Progress 100% 100%
Progress quality 82% 76%
In the third grade the performance level of the school motivation of the experimental group increased: 78 % of pupils have a high level of motivation, 22% have a good level of motivation. In the control group there is an increase in the number of students with low school motivation (18 %). The progress quality also decreases in the control class (Table 3).
Table 3. Progress in 2013-2014 academic year
Experimental class Control class
Progress 100% 100%
Progress quality 79% 63%
The fourth grade indicators of school motivation of experimental class remain at a high (80%) and good (20%) levels. In the control class the following is observed: high school motivation have 25% of pupils, good school motivation - 55% and a low school motivation - 20%. In Table 4 one can see how the progress quality of the experimental group differs from the progress quality of the control group.
Table 4. Progress in 2013-2014 academic year
Experimental class Control class
Progress 100% 100%
Progress quality 85% 68%
It should be noted that in addition to academic activities, pupils of the experimental group showed high results at competitions of school and district rounds.
Discussions
In the presence of all visible positive aspects of criteria-based methods self- estimation and mutual estimation, the modern system of education can not refuse of the traditional five-point system of learning outcomes. According to N. In. Malova (2009) this is due to the historically selective nature of modern education. Whatever methods of estimation the teacher wouldn't adhere to the teacher, the final control result of knowledge should be fixed in order of accountability. And again we turn to-point system of knowledge estimation. But do not forget that the purpose of education is not a rating success, the goal of education is the education of the individual, the development of his personal qualities that will be useful to him and society. This means that the purpose of education and estimation system should not contradict each other.
Modern education system has an acute need of creating a universal system of estimation answering to inquiries of the state, society and the needs of the pupil. It is not necessary to take a 5-point system of knowledge estimation as a framework in which it is tired out modern education. On this base of the estimation system, monitoring and estimation activities it can and should be upgraded.
Conclusions
According to the results of the conducted research we can draw the following conclusions:
1. The pupils of the 1st class remain passive in the results estimation of their activities and the activities of their schoolmates, mainly guided by the estimation of teachers and parents
2. In the 2nd grade the pupils are already able to analyze the results of their training activities and the results of their classmates under the guidance of teachers. 3. In the 3rd and 4th grades the pupils are able to analyze and summarize the results
of their training activities with greater autonomy in compared with the pupils of the second grade, to develop ways to adjust results under the guidance of a teacher.
4. Estimation on explicit criteria is the most effective and objective. So, clearly
formulated estimation criteria identify knowledge gaps of pupils for their further elimination.
5. Due to “transparency” of estimation criterias the learner begins to understand what aspects of their activities should be given more attention.
6. In a joint estimation the problem of objectivity exhibited mark is solved.
7. The skills of adequate self-estimation become important in without estimating terms of younger pupils training.
8. The skills of self-estimation are formed in the course of mutual estimation.
9. Self-estimation and mutual estimation promotes formation of pupils’ of communicative skills in elementary school, the ability to prove the decision, to argue the point of view. It develops critical thinking, leads to increase of motivation of educational activity and progress.
By implementing self-estimation methods and mutual estimation criteria in the educational process, it is advisable to consider the following recommendations:
1. The teacher needs to remember that the estimated position of the younger schoolboy changes throughout the entire period of primary education. 2. It is necessary to treat results of estimation with care in the first grade, as the child
badly owns of mechanisms of self-control and self-estimation at this stage. 3. The teacher should develop estimation criteria, together with the class.
4. The estimation criteria should be built on the basis of the content of the discipline. 5. Self-estimation of the pupil should be preceded to the teacher estimation. So the
teacher can see how adequately pupil is able to estimate its activities.
References
Bespalko, V.P. (1989). Composed pedagogical technology. Moscow: Pedagogics. Boyle B., Charles M. (2012). Estimation reconsideration. Internet magazine: Problems of
modern education, 6, 139-150
Enzhevskaya M. V. (2010). Formation of control and estimated activity of younger school students in the conditions of without marks system. Person and Education, 2 (23), 112-118.
Glukhova I. V. (2012).Without marks estimation of knowledge of pupils. Concept, 12, URL:http://e-koncept.ru/2012/12176.htm
Goreslavsky, S. (1990). 5 Points Are Not Enough for School. National Education, 7, 126 – 127.
Luskanova N. G. (1999). Methods of research of children with difficulties in training. Moscow: Folium.
Malova, H.B. (2009). The criteria focused approach to an assessment of knowledge as a training individualization factor. Samara: News, 4 (4), 873-876.
Syromolotov, E. (1999). Seven Laws of Knowledge Assessment, School Technologies, 1, 207-213.
Topping, K.J., Smith, E.F., Swanson, I., Elliot, A. (2000). Formative Peer Assessment of Academic Writing Between Postgraduate Students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 25 (2), 149-169.
Zuckerman G. A. (1999). An assessment without mark, Moscow - Riga: Pedagogical center "Eksperiment".