IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/scn/voprob/2021i4p8-34.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Что Может Предложить Новая Методология Оценки Мышления Школьников Современному Образованию

Author

Listed:

Abstract

Угланова Ирина Львовна - младший научный сотрудник Центра психометрики и измерений в образовании Института образования, Национальный исследовательский университет "Высшая школа экономики". Адрес: 101000, Москва, Потаповский пер., 16, стр. 10. E-mail: iuglanova@hse.ru (контактное лицо для переписки) Погожина Ирина Николаевна - доктор психологических наук, доцент кафедры психологии образования и педагогики факультета психологии МГУ им. М. В. Ломоносова. Адрес: 125009, Москва, ул. Моховая, 11, стр. 9. E-mail: pogozhina@mail.ru Для реализации педагогического принципа доступности и посильности обучения и воспитания необходимо учитывать индивидуальные особенности развития логического мышления учеников. Для его объективной и быстрой оценки необходимы инструменты диагностики. Сегодня наиболее полную оценку содержания логического мышления по Пиаже можно получить, используя метод клинической беседы. Однако данный способ диагностики крайне ресурсозатратен и не подходит для масштабного тестирования. Обзор литературы показал, что существующие стандартизированные методы диагностики требуют привлечения большого числа квалифицированных экспертов для проверки результатов и подготовки обратной связи для учителей, методистов, психологов-практиков и исследователей. В статье описаны методологические принципы разработки инструмента, предназначенного для оценки уровней развития логического мышления. Такой инструмент позволит автоматически обрабатывать получаемые результаты без потери специфики их содержания, что в итоге упростит и ускорит процедуру диагностики. Реализация этих принципов рассматривается на примере компьютеризированных заданий сценарного типа с фокусом на решении и на процессе работы (computerized performance-based assessment) в формате скрытого оценивания (stealth assessment) для учеников 5‑го и 7‑го класса.

Suggested Citation

  • Угланова И. Л. & Погожина И. Н., 2021. "Что Может Предложить Новая Методология Оценки Мышления Школьников Современному Образованию," Вопросы образования // Educational Studies Moscow, National Research University Higher School of Economics, issue 4, pages 8-34.
    • Handle: RePEc:scn:voprob:2021:i:4:p:8-34
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://vo.hse.ru/data/2022/01/21/1754236568/Uglanova.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jeffrey Mo, 2017. "Collaborative problem solving," PISA in Focus 78, OECD Publishing.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sebastian Brumann & Ulrike Ohl & Johannes Schulz, 2022. "Inquiry-Based Learning on Climate Change in Upper Secondary Education: A Design-Based Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-29, March.
    2. Janka Medová & Kristína Ovary Bulková & Soňa Čeretková, 2020. "Relations between Generalization, Reasoning and Combinatorial Thinking in Solving Mathematical Open-Ended Problems within Mathematical Contest," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-20, December.
    3. Campbell, Throy Alexander, 2018. "A phenomenological study of business graduates' employment experiences in the changing economy," Journal for Labour Market Research, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 52(1), pages 1-4.
    4. Marit Kristine List & Fabian T. C. Schmidt & Daria Mundt & Dennis Föste-Eggers, 2020. "Still Green at Fifteen? Investigating Environmental Awareness of the PISA 2015 Population: Cross-National Differences and Correlates," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-20, April.
    5. Mohammed Abdullatif Almulla, 2020. "The Effectiveness of the Project-Based Learning (PBL) Approach as a Way to Engage Students in Learning," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(3), pages 21582440209, July.
    6. Christiani, Charis, 2021. "The Education Process Viewed from the Standard-Based Education Paradigm in Public Schools: A Case From Central Java, Indonesia," OSF Preprints n9gez, Center for Open Science.
    7. Irina Uglanova & Irina Pogozhina, 2021. "What the New Measure of Thinking in School Students Has to Offer to Contemporary Education," Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, National Research University Higher School of Economics, issue 4, pages 8-34.
    8. Diego Bellini & Alberto Crescentini & Giovanna Zanolla & Serena Cubico & Giuseppe Favretto & Lorenzo Faccincani & Piermatteo Ardolino & Giovanna Gianesini, 2019. "Mathematical Competence Scale (MCS) for Primary School: The Psychometric Properties and the Validation of an Instrument to Enhance the Sustainability of Talents Development through the Numeracy Skills," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-13, May.
    9. Raelin, Joseph A., 2019. "Toward a methodology for studying leadership-as-practice," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 16(4), pages 480-508.
    10. Cheng-Hsuan Li & Pei-Ling Tsai & Zhi-Yong Liu & Wen-Chieh Huang & Pei-Jyun Hsieh, 2021. "Exploring Collaborative Problem Solving Behavioral Transition Patterns in Science of Taiwanese Students at Age 15 According to Mastering Levels," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-15, July.
    11. Anghel, Brindusa & Rodríguez-Planas, Núria & Sanz-de-Galdeano, Anna, 2020. "Is the math gender gap associated with gender equality? Only in low-income countries," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    12. Vlastimil Chytrý & Janka Medová & Jaroslav Říčan & Jiří Škoda, 2020. "Relation between Pupils’ Mathematical Self-Efficacy and Mathematical Problem Solving in the Context of the Teachers’ Preferred Pedagogies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-22, December.
    13. repec:iab:iabjlr:v:52:i:1:p:art.4 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Campbell, Throy Alexander, 2018. "A phenomenological study of business graduates' employment experiences in the changing economy," Journal for Labour Market Research, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 52(1), pages .4(1-10).
    15. Yoav Bergner & Alina A. von Davier, 2019. "Process Data in NAEP: Past, Present, and Future," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 44(6), pages 706-732, December.
    16. Asma Afzal & Martin Thomas, 2019. "Effect of the Technology-Supported Learning on the Academic Performance of Secondary School Students," Global Regional Review, Humanity Only, vol. 4(2), pages 280-289, June.
    17. Yafeng Zheng & Haogang Bao & Jun Shen & Xuesong Zhai, 2020. "Investigating Sequence Patterns of Collaborative Problem-Solving Behavior in Online Collaborative Discussion Activity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-17, October.
    18. Francesca Borgonovi & Alessandro Ferrara & Mario Piacentini, 2020. "From asking to observing. Behavioural measures of socio-emotional and motivational skills in large-scale assessments," DoQSS Working Papers 20-19, Quantitative Social Science - UCL Social Research Institute, University College London.
    19. Wilhelm, Oliver & Kyllonen, Patrick, 2021. "To predict the future, consider the past: Revisiting Carroll (1993) as a guide to the future of intelligence research," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    20. Yaroslav Kuzminov & Pavel Sorokin & Isak Froumin, 2019. "Generic and Specific Skills as Components of Human Capital: New Challenges for Education Theory and Practice," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 13(2), pages 19-41.
    21. Haeza Haron & Noor Hanim Rahmat, 2020. "Exploring the Theory of Activity in English Language Writing: The Case for WhatsApp," International Journal of Asian Social Science, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 10(11), pages 671-684, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:scn:voprob:2021:i:4:p:8-34. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Marta Morozova (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://vo.hse.ru/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.