MONITORING THE QUALITY OF EDUCATION AS AN IMPORTANT FACTOR OF PREPARATION OF BACHELORS IN THE FIELD OF APPLIED INFORMATICS
https://doi.org/10.26795/2307-1281-2020-8-1-4
Abstract
Introduction. An important issue of modern education is the development, testing and further implementation of a system for monitoring the quality of educational services in Universities. The peculiarity of modern education is the orientation to meet the educational needs of a person. The inclusion in the monitoring system of such an indicator as the satisfaction of participants in the educational process with its various aspects characterizes the personality-oriented orientation of the educational institution. The processed results of the ongoing monitoring can serve as a basis for recommendations for the modernization of the University's educational program and / or the conditions for its implementation.
The object of the study is the degree of development of competencies and the level of satisfaction of participants in the educational process. The subject of the research is the development of a system of control of knowledge, skills and abilities in specialized disciplines for students who continue their studies in FSES HE 3+; research of the degree of satisfaction of teachers and students of a modern University in the conditions of transition to FSES HE 3++. The scientific novelty of the results of the survey to determine the degree of satisfaction of teachers and students of Minin University can be used by specialists of the personnel Department and quality services of Universities.
Materials and methods. Analysis of domestic and foreign literature, pedagogical experiment, testing and questioning of subjects of the educational process.
Results. The practical significance of the work lies in the presentation of materials on the results of the development and application of tasks that allow determining the level of competence in specialized subjects for students , as well as the presentation of materials on conducting a survey of teachers and students in order to establish the level of satisfaction with the conditions of the educational process and the quality of educational services .
Discussions and Conclusions. As a result of the conducted testing on profile subjects, students found that the level of their knowledge, skills, and abilities corresponds to the classic five- point scale rating "good". The results of the survey to establish the level of satisfaction with employees and students with the conditions of the educational process showed a degree corresponding to "complete satisfaction".
The object of the study is the degree of development of competencies and the level of satisfaction of participants in the educational process. The subject of the research is the development of a system of control of knowledge, skills and abilities in specialized disciplines for students who continue their studies in FSES HE 3+; research of the degree of satisfaction of teachers and students of a modern University in the conditions of transition to FSES HE 3++. The scientific novelty of the results of the survey to determine the degree of satisfaction of teachers and students of Minin University can be used by specialists of the personnel Department and quality services of Universities.
Materials and methods. Analysis of domestic and foreign literature, pedagogical experiment, testing and questioning of subjects of the educational process.
Results. The practical significance of the work lies in the presentation of materials on the results of the development and application of tasks that allow determining the level of competence in specialized subjects for students , as well as the presentation of materials on conducting a survey of teachers and students in order to establish the level of satisfaction with the conditions of the educational process and the quality of educational services .
Discussions and Conclusions. As a result of the conducted testing on profile subjects, students found that the level of their knowledge, skills, and abilities corresponds to the classic five- point scale rating "good". The results of the survey to establish the level of satisfaction with employees and students with the conditions of the educational process showed a degree corresponding to "complete satisfaction".
About the Author
A. V. Ponachugin
Minin Nizhny Novgorod State Pedagogical University (Minin University)
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
candidate of economic sciences, assistant professor
Nizhny Novgorod
References
1. Alimemaj Z., Ahmetaj L. Portfolio assessment, a valid tool to evaluate students’ achievements. 1st ed. Albania, AngloHigher The Magazine of Global English Speaking Higher Education, 2010. Pp. 9-11.
2. Abdallah K.M. Actual problems of assessing the quality of education at a university. Molodoj uchenyj, 2019, no. 17, pp. 203-204. Available at: https://moluch.ru/archive/255/58365/ (accessed: 22.10.2019). (In Russ.)
3. Altman B.W., Schwegler A.F., Bunkowski L.M. Beliefs Regarding Faculty Participation in Peer Reviews of Online Courses. Internet Learning Journal, 2014, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 95-116.
4. Alimushkina O.I., Tersakova A.A. The main directions of monitoring as a way of managing the quality of education. Aktual'nye problemy vzaimodejstviya nauki i biznesa: materialy mezhdunarodnoj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferencii / pod red. A.A. Zarajskogo. Saratov, 2019. Pp. 3-5. (In Russ.)
5. Armstrong J.S. Natural Learning in Higher Education. Available at: https://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1151&context=marketing_papers (accessed: 22.10.2019).
6. Anan'ev B.G. On the problems of modern human science. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1977. 380 p. (In Russ.)
7. Asif M., Raouf A. Setting the course for quality assurance in higher education. Quality & Quantity, 2011, vol. 47, no. 4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-011-9639-2.
8. Arhangel'skij S.I., Miheev V.I., Perel'cvajg YU.M. Issues of measurement, analysis and evaluation of results in the practice of pedagogical research. Moscow, Znanie Publ., 1975. 42 p. (In Russ.)
9. Asif M., Raouf A., Searcy C. Developing measures for performance excellence: Is the Baldrige criteria sufficient for performance excellence in higher education? Quality & Quantity, 2012, vol. 47, no. 6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-012-9706-3.
10. Bahodurova S.A., Hasanov B.B. Monitoring the quality of education as an element of stimulating teaching. Alleya nauki, 2019, vol. 1, no. 6(33), pp. 882-885. (In Russ.)
11. Beath J., Poyago-Theotoky J., Ulph D. University funding systems: impact on research and teaching. Economics – The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal, 2011, vol. 6, no. 2012-2. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2012-2.
12. Batyrova I.YU. Monitoring the quality of education is the main tool for implementing managerial functions of the head of an educational organization. Kul'tura, nauka, obrazovanie: problemy i perspektivy: materialy VII vserossijskoj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferencii s mezhdunarodnym uchastiem / pod red. D.A. Pogonysheva. Nizhnevartovsk, 2019. Pp. 301-305. (In Russ.)
13. Beath J., Poyago-Theotoky J., Ulph D. University funding systems: impact on research and teaching. Economics – The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal, 2011, no. 2011-1.
14. Belash O.YU., CHirkova A.A. Indices of internal monitoring of the quality of education: differences in the assessment by students and teachers of the importance of indicators. Inzhenernoe obrazovanie, 2018, no. 24, pp. 166-173. (In Russ.)
15. Benneworth P.S., de Boer H.F., Cremonini L., Jongbloed B.W.A., Leisyte L., Vossensteyn J.J., de Weert E. Quality-related funding, performance agreements and profiling in higher education. An international comparative study. Enschede, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS), 2011.
16. Vaganova O.I., Smirnova ZH.V., Abramova N.S. Designing the educational process in the discipline using online courses. Baltiĭskiĭ gumanitarnyĭ zhurnal, 2019, vol. 8, no. 1(26), pp. 277-280. (In Russ.)
17. The maturing of the MOOC: literature review of massive open online courses and other forms of online distance learning. Available at: https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/18325/7/13-1173-maturing-ofthe-mooc_Redacted.pdf (accessed: 22.10.2019).
18. Gil'manov R.A. Problems of constructive didactometry. Kazan, Kazan University Press, 1994. 147 p. (In Russ.)
19. Blackstock D., et al. Internal quality assurance: benchmarking. Available at: https://enqa.eu/indirme/papers-and-reports/workshop-and-seminar/ENQA_wr_20.pdf (accessed: 22.10.2019).
20. Gorban' O.N. Monitoring in the education quality management system. Ekonomika i upravlenie: aktual'nye problemy i perspektivy: materialy vserossijskoj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferencii / pod red. S.A. Guseva. Moscow, 2018. Pp. 43-49. (In Russ.)
21. Structural Indicators for Monitoring Education and Training Systems in Europe – 2018. Available at: https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/nationalpolicies/eurydice/sites/eurydice/files/structural_indicators_2018.pdf (accessed: 22.10.2019).
22. Egorova P.A., Muhina T.G., Sorokoumova S.N., Muhina D.D. Monitoring analysis of the effectiveness of professional computers and system requirements for organizing the electronic educational environment of a university under educational inclusion. Vestnik Mininskogo universiteta, 2018, vol. 6, no. 3(24), pp. 12. (In Russ.)
23. Haryono, Heri Triluqman Budisantoso, Edi Subkhan, Yuli Utanto. Implementation of learning quality assurance based on applied education technology. MATEC Web of Conferences. International Conference on Innovation in Engineering and Vocational Education (ICIEVE 2018), 2018, vol. 205. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201820500010.
24. Egorshin A.P., Pryanichkov S.B. Methodology for assessing the quality and effectiveness of education. SHkol'nye tekhnologii, 2002, no. 5, pp. 6887. (In Russ.)
25. Hodson P.J., Thomas H.G. Higher education as an international commodity: Ensuring quality in partnerships. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 2010, vol. 26(2), pp. 101-112.
26. Zimnyaya I.A. Educational Psychology: a textbook for universities. Moscow, Logos Publishing Corporation, 1999. 384 p. (In Russ.)
27. Marope P.T.M., Wells P.J., Hazelkorn E. (eds.) Rankings and Accountability in Higher Education Uses and Misuses. Paris, 2018.
28. Kal'nej V.A., SHishov S.E. Technology for monitoring the quality of education in the teacherstudent system: a methodological manual for the teacher. Moscow, Pedagogicheskoe obshchestvo Rossii Publ., 1999. 86 p. (In Russ.)
29. Myalkina E.V. Diagnostics of the quality of education at the university. Vestnik Mininskogo universiteta, 2019, vol. 7, no. 3, p. 4. (In Russ.)
30. Panasyuk V.P. The pedagogical system of intraschool quality management of the educational process: the dissertation of the doctor of pedagogical sciences. St. Petersburg, 1998. 460 p. (In Russ.)
31. Polyakova V. The quality of higher education. Moscow, LAP Lambert Academic Publishing, 2018. 188 p. (In Russ.)
32. Potashnik M.M. Education quality: problems and management technology, (in questions and answers). Moscow, Pedagogicheskoe obshchestvo Rossii Publ., 2002. 352 p. (In Russ.)
33. Potashnik M.M. Management of the quality of education at the municipal level. Narodnoe obrazovanie, 2000, no. 8, pp. 56-59. (In Russ.)
34. Order of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia dated March 12, 2015 No. 207 “On approval of the federal state educational standard of higher education in the field of training 09.03.03 Applied Informatics (undergraduate level)”. Available at: http://base.garant.ru/70929524/ (accessed: 22.10.2019). (In Russ.)
35. Order of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia dated September 19, 2017 No. 922 “On approval of the federal state educational standard of higher education in the field of training 09.03.03 Applied Informatics (undergraduate level)”. Available at: http://base.garant.ru/71787548/ (accessed: 22.10.2019). (In Russ.)
36. Samerhanova E.K. The formation of competencies in the field of mathematical modeling for teachers of vocational training in the information and educational environment of the university. Vestnik Mininskogo universiteta, 2019, vol. 7, no. 2, p. 4. (In Russ.)
37. Seleznyova N.A. Quality management of higher education. Ekonomika i upravleniya vysshej shkoloj. Moscow, Moscow State University Publ., 1992. (In Russ.)
38. Sergeeva S.YU., Obrevko E.D. Modern approaches and methods for assessing the quality of education. Molodoj uchenyj, 2019, no. 37, pp. 162-165. Available at: https://moluch.ru/archive/275/62424/ (accessed: 22.10.2019). (In Russ.)
39. Smirnova ZH.V., Vaganova O.I., Trutanova A.V. Final state certification as a way of a comprehensive assessment of competencies. Karel'skiĭ nauchnyĭ zhurnal, 2017, vol. 6, no. 3(20), pp. 74-77. (In Russ.)
40. Smirnova ZH.V., Krasikova O.G. Modern tools and technologies for assessing learning outcomes. Vestnik Mininskogo universiteta, 2018, vol. 6, no. 3, p. 9. DOI: 10.26795/2307-1281-2018-6-3-9. (In Russ.)
41. Smirnova ZH.V., CHaĭkina ZH.V., Sokolov V.A. Rating system as an assessment of the quality of university students. Mir nauki, 2018, vol. 6, no. 1, p. 37. (In Russ.)
42. Solov'eva T.V. A multilevel system for assessing the quality of education (ISICA) as a component of monitoring the quality of education in an educational organization. Upravlenie kachestvom obrazovaniya: teoriya i praktika effektivnogo administrirovaniya, 2019, no. 2, pp. 47-50. (In Russ.)
43. Subetto A.I. Qualitology of education. Kvalitologiya obrazovaniya. St. Petersburg, Moscow, Issledovatel'skij centr problem podgotovki specialistov Publ., 2000. 220 p. (In Russ.)
44. Tihonova N.V. Pedagogical monitoring of the quality of education in French universities. Pedagogika, 2019, vol. 83, no. 10, pp. 114-123. (In Russ.)
45. Cyplakova S.A. Management of the pedagogical process in the system of vocational education. Vestnik Severo-Osetinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta imeni Kosta Levanovicha Hetagurova, 2018, no. 2, pp. 102-104. (In Russ.)
46. CHoshanov M.A. To the question of problem-modular training. Srednee special'noe obrazovanie, 1991, no. 7, pp. 10-13. (In Russ.)
47. SHishov S.E., Kal'nej V.A. Monitoring the quality of education at school. Moscow, Rossijskoe pedagogicheskoe agentstvo Publ., 1988. 354 p. (In Russ.)
48. YAmburg E.A. School for all. Narodnoe obrazovanie, 1998, no. 3, pp. 98-103. (In Russ.)
49. Adamson L., Becerro M., Cullen P., González-Vega L., Sobrino J.J., Ryan N. Quality assurance and learning outcomes. Helsinki, 2010. Available at: https://enqa.eu/indirme/papersand-reports/workshop-and-seminar/WSR%2017%20-%20Final.pdf (accessed: 22.10.2019).
50. Alimemaj Z., Ahmetaj L. Portfolio assessment, a valid tool to evaluate students’ achievements. 1st ed. Albania, AngloHigher The Magazine of Global English Speaking Higher Education, 2010. Pp. 9-11.
51. Altman B.W., Schwegler A.F., Bunkowski L.M. Beliefs Regarding Faculty Participation in Peer Reviews of Online Courses. Internet Learning Journal, 2014, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 95-116.
52. Armstrong J.S. Natural Learning in Higher Education. Available at: https://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1151&context=marketing_papers (accessed: 22.10.2019).
53. Asif M., Raouf A. Setting the course for quality assurance in higher education. Quality & Quantity, 2011, vol. 47, no. 4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-011-9639-2.
54. Asif M., Raouf A., Searcy C. Developing measures for performance excellence: Is the Baldrige criteria sufficient for performance excellence in higher education? Quality & Quantity, 2012, vol. 47, no. 6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-012-9706-3.
55. Beath J., Poyago-Theotoky J., Ulph D. University funding systems: impact on research and teaching. Economics – The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal, 2011, vol. 6, no. 2012-2. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2012-2.
56. Beath J., Poyago-Theotoky J., Ulph D. University funding systems: impact on research and teaching. Economics – The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal, 2011, no. 2011-1.
57. Benneworth P.S., de Boer H.F., Cremonini L., Jongbloed B.W.A., Leisyte L., Vossensteyn J.J., de Weert E. Quality-related funding, performance agreements and profiling in higher education. An international comparative study. Enschede, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS), 2011.
58. The maturing of the MOOC: literature review of massive open online courses and other forms of online distance learning. Available at: https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/18325/7/13-1173-maturing-ofthe-mooc_Redacted.pdf (accessed: 22.10.2019).
59. Blackstock D., et al. Internal quality assurance: benchmarking. Available at: https://enqa.eu/indirme/papers-and-reports/workshop-and-seminar/ENQA_wr_20.pdf (accessed: 22.10.2019).
60. Structural Indicators for Monitoring Education and Training Systems in Europe – 2018. Available at: https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/nationalpolicies/eurydice/sites/eurydice/files/structural_indicators_2018.pdf (accessed: 22.10.2019).
61. Haryono, Heri Triluqman Budisantoso, Edi Subkhan, Yuli Utanto. Implementation of learning quality assurance based on applied education technology. MATEC Web of Conferences. International Conference on Innovation in Engineering and Vocational Education (ICIEVE 2018), 2018, vol. 205. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201820500010.
62. Hodson P.J., Thomas H.G. Higher education as an international commodity: Ensuring quality in partnerships. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 2010, vol. 26(2), pp. 101-112.
63. Marope P.T.M., Wells P.J., Hazelkorn E. (eds.) Rankings and Accountability in Higher Education Uses and Misuses. Paris, 2018.
Review
Views:
887
Email this article 