AVERAGE SCORE OF THE UNIFIED STATE EXAMINATION
https://doi.org/10.17853/1994-5639-2017-6-33-51
Abstract
Introduction. Summing up the results of the Unified State Exam (USE) is traditionally based on comparing the average scores for institutions or territories, without taking into account what the indicator of the quality of education really represents.
The aim of the article is to clarify the content «average score» on the example of the Mathematics federal testing results.
Methodology and research methods. The methodology of comprehensive analysis is used, including the methods of comparative and statistical data analysis published following the exam results. As well, the parallel analysis of data used in the researches of the National Research University «The Higher School of Economics» (HSE) was conducted.
Results and scientific novelty. It is found out that the average score in the Unified State Exam in mathematics largely depends on peculiarities of testing and assessment materials, a scoring system of leveling nature and results of training students for solving simple problems.
Practical significance. The authors suppose that the study findings will contribute to the improvement of methods and technologies of carrying the Unified State Exam.
About the Authors
L. M. Nurieva
Omsk State Pedagogical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Candidate of Pedagogic Sciences, Associate Professor, Department of Mathematics and Methods of Mathematics Teaching,
Omsk
S. G. Kiselev
Omsk State Pedagogical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Sociologist, Center for the Adaptation and Employment of Graduates and Students,
Omsk
References
1. Golubickij A. V. Regional socio-geographical atlas of the general education system: Is «the power of the territory» overcomable? Voprosy obrazovaniya = Educational Studies. 2017. № 1. P. 188–246. (In Russian)
2. Nurieva L. M., Kiselev S. G. Results of the USE: Experience of analysis. Part 1. Rektor vuza = Rector of the University. 2013. № 5. P. 42–53. (In Russian)
3. Nurieva L. M., Kiselev S. G. Results of the USE: Experience of analysis. Part 2. Rektor vuza = Rector of the University. 2013. № 6. P. 44–52. (In Russian)
4. Yastrebov G. A., Bessudnov A. R., Pinskaya M. A., Kosareckij S. G. The problem of the contextualization of educational outcomes: schools, the social composition of students and the level of deprivation of territories. Voprosy obrazovaniya = Educational Studies. 2013. № 4. P. 188–246. (In Russian)
5. Agranovich M. L. Possibilities of the analysis of educational systems on the basis of results of the Unified State Exam. Voprosy obrazovaniya = Educational Studies. 2004. № 2. P. 272–287. (In Russian)
6. Goryajnova V. A., Akishin I. A. Effectiveness of school activities and socio-economic characteristics of students’ families: Is there a relationship? Voprosy obrazovaniya = Educational Studies. 2010. № 1. P. 151–160. (In Russian)
7. Burdyak A. Ya. Additional lessons on school subjects: Motivation and prevalence. Monitoring obshchestvennogo mneniya = Monitoring of Public Opinion. 2015. № 2 (126). P. 96–112. (In Russian)
8. Malyshev I. G. What forgetfulness about principles brings to. Matematika v shkole = Mathematics in School. 2015. № 10. P. 3–6. Available at: http://www.schoolpress.ru/products/rubria/index.php? ID=72465&SECTION_ID=42 (Accessed 12 May, 2016). (In Russian)
9. Neretin Yu. A. EGE i agoniya matematiki v shkole. [USE and mathematics agony of in school]. Available at: http://4ege.ru/analitika/52473-ege-i-agoniya-matematiki-v-shkole.html (Accessed 20 May, 2017). (In Russian)
10. Makarov A. A., Zvereva D. I., Simonova G. I. Methodology for analyzing the results of the USE on mathematics in 2014, taking into account the socio-demographic indicators of the regions of the Russian Federation. Statisticheskie metody ocenivaniya i proverki gipotez, Permskij gosudarstvennyj universitet = Statistical Methods for Estimating and Testing Hypotheses. Permskij gosudarstvennyj universitet. [Perm State University]. 2015. № 26. P. 205–222. Available at: https://elis.psu.ru/node/337948 (Accessed 2 May, 2017). (In Russian)
11. Dmitrieva M. Simple and complex tasks in the Mathematics USE «cost» equally – one point. Uchitel’skaya gazeta = Teacher’s Newspaper. 12.05.2016. Available at: http://www.ug.ru/article/913 (Accessed 20 May, 2017). (In Russian)
12. Prahov I. A. The impact of investment in additional training on the results of the USE. Voprosy obrazovaniya = Educational Studies. 2014. № 3. P. 74–99. (In Russian)
13. Pishnyak A. I., Halina N. V. Ideas of parents of Moscow schoolchildren about the successful passing of the USE: Opportunities and barriers. Voprosy obrazovaniya = Educational Studies. 2015. № 3. P. 144–170. (In Russian)
14. Makarov A. A., Simonova G. I. Faktory matematicheskoj uspeshnosti uchashchihsya na starte srednej shkoly. [Factors of mathematical success of students at the start of secondary school]. Statisticheskie metody ocenivaniya i proverki gipotez. [Statistical methods of estimation and testing of hypotheses]. Permskij gosudarstvennyj nacional’nyj issledovatel’skij universitet. [Perm State National Research University]. 2016. P. 134–152. (In Russian)
15. Kirina M. Yu. School on the way from GIA to EGE: Line of inaction or vector of progress? Voprosy obrazovaniya = Educational Studies. 2012. № 1. P. 229–245. (In Russian)
16. Panov P. Shkoly perestanut ocenivat’ po EGE. [Schools will not be judged by the USE]. Available at: http://iz.ru/news/622621 (Accessed 5 May, 2017). (In Russian)
17. Informacionno-analiticheskie materialy po rezul’tatam provedeniya monitoringa ehffektivnosti deyatel’nosti obrazovatel’nyh organizacij vysshego obrazovaniya. [Information and analytical materials on the results of monitoring the effectiveness of educational institutions of higher education]. Available at: http://indicators.miccedu.ru/monitoring/_vpo/material.php?type=2&id=10904 (Accessed 10 May, 2017). (In Russian)
Review
For citations:
Nurieva L.M., Kiselev S.G. AVERAGE SCORE OF THE UNIFIED STATE EXAMINATION. The Education and science journal. 2017;19(6):33-51. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17853/1994-5639-2017-6-33-51
Views:
1118
Email this article 