Description: War Thunder is a next generation military MMO game dedicated to...
The manual is intended to diagnose the readiness of 4th grade students to complete the final test work for the primary school course. It includes the main types of tasks for assessing the formation of meta-subject results of mastering by schoolchildren of the main educational program of primary general education.
Examples.
For these nouns, select and underline suitable adjectives, if possible, lesson (practical - practical)
lunch (full - satisfying)
beast (furry - furry)
building (great - majestic)
winter (ice - ice)
Select and indicate with the help of numbers 1, 2, 3 the stages of work in completing this task.
I do everything in order from left to right.
I perform addition (subtraction) operations in order from left to right.
I check if there are parentheses in the expression. If they are, I first perform the actions in brackets.
I perform the operations of multiplication (addition) in order from left to right.
I perform the operations of multiplication (division) in order from left to right.
CONTENT
Section 1. LEARNING ACTIVITIES
1.1. Check if you can accept and maintain the goals and objectives of educational activities 4
1.2. Check if you can perform tasks of a creative and exploratory nature 7
1.3. Check if you can plan your learning activities 11
1.4. Check if you can control and evaluate your learning activities 16
1.5. See if you can identify the most effective ways achievement of result 21
1.6. Check if you understand the reasons for the success/failure of your learning activities 24
Answers and comments to section 1 28
My achievements 41
Section 2. LOGIC ACTIONS
2.1. Check if you own the logical actions of comparison, analysis, synthesis, generalization, classification 45
2.2. Check if you can build reasoning 50
Answers and comments to section 2 52
My achievements 55
Section 3. SPEECH ACTIVITY AND WORK WITH INFORMATION
3.1. Check if you can work with models and diagrams 56
3.2. Check if you can use speech means to solve communicative and cognitive tasks 63
3.3. Check if you know how to search for information 70
3.4. Check if you have the skills of semantic reading of texts 74
3.5. Check if you can build a speech statement 81
Answers and comments to section 3 83
My achievements 90
Pages for the teacher 94.
Free download e-book in a convenient format, watch and read:
Download the book Russian language, Mathematics, Literary reading, Diagnosis of the formation of meta-subject learning outcomes, grade 4, Evdokimova A.O., 2014 - fileskachat.com, fast and free download.
- Final complex work in elementary school, grade 4, Nyankovskaya N.N., Tanko M.A., 2011
- Final testing, Mathematics, Russian language, Grade 4, Golub V.T., 2012
- Practical material for classes with children experiencing difficulties in mastering the primary school curriculum, grade 4, Vekshina T.V., Alimpieva M.N., 2016
Diagnostics of the formation of meta-subject results (regulatory ULD, cognitive UUD, communicative UUD)
Regulatory UUD:
Cognitive UUD:
Methodology "Identification of essential features"
Methodology "Logical patterns"
Methodology "Research of verbal-logical thinking of younger schoolchildren" (E.F. Zambatsyavichene)
Communicative UUD:
Method "Mittens"
Method "Who is right"
Methodology "Pattern under dictation"
Quest "Road to Home"
Method "Drawing by points"
Target: level of orientation to a given system of requirements, can consciously control their actions.
Estimated UUD:
Age: 6.5 -8 years
Form (assessment situation): frontal writing.
The technique includes 6 tasks, each of which is placed on a separate sheet of a special booklet issued to the subject. The samples in problems No. 1 and 5 are irregular triangles, in problem No. 2 - an irregular trapezoid, in problem No. 3 - a rhombus, in problem No. 4 - a square and in problem No. 5 - a four-beam star:
The examination can be carried out both frontally and individually. Children are seated at tables one at a time. Before each child put a book with a task. The experimenter, standing so that he can be clearly seen by all the children, opens the same booklet and shows the sheet with task No. 1. Then he says: "Open your books on the first page. Look: you have drawn the same way as mine" . (If any of the children opened the wrong page, the experimenter corrects him.)
Pointing to the vertices of the sample triangle, the experimenter continues: “You see, there were points here that were connected so that this pattern turned out (there is an indication of the sides of the triangle; the words vertex, sides, “triangle” are not pronounced by the experimenter). Other points are drawn nearby ( pointing to the points shown to the right of the sample.) You yourself will connect these points with lines so that you get exactly the same pattern. There are extra points here. You will leave them, you will not connect.
Now look in your books: are these points the same or not?" Having received the answer "no", the experimenter says: "That's right, they are different. There are red, blue and green. You must remember the rule: you cannot connect identical dots. You cannot draw a line from red to red, from blue to blue, or from green to green. A line can only be drawn between different points. Does everyone remember what to do? It is necessary to connect the dots to get exactly the same pattern as here (there should be an indication of a triangle pattern). Identical points cannot be connected. If you draw a line wrong, tell me, I'll erase it with an elastic band, it won't count. When you have completed this drawing, turn the page. There will be other dots and another pattern, you will draw it."
At the end of the instruction, the children are given simple pencils. During the course of the task, the experimenter erases incorrectly drawn lines at the request of the children, makes sure that no task is missed, and encourages the children if necessary.
Evaluation of the assignment.
The main indicator of task completion is the total score (SB). It is output as follows.
In each task, first of all, the accuracy of the reproduction of the sample is established.
In problems No. 1 and 5, any triangle is considered to reproduce the sample (at least approximately), in problems No. 2, 3 and 4 - any quadrilateral, in problem No. 6 - any star. Unfinished figures that can be completed to the above are also considered to reproduce the pattern.
If the child has reproduced the sample at least approximately, he receives one point for each correctly reproduced element of the figure (in tasks No. 1-5, a separate line acts as an element, in task No. 6 - a ray). An element that does not include violations of the rule (i.e. does not contain connections of identical points) is considered to be correctly reproduced.
In addition, one point is awarded for:
1. compliance with the rule, i.e. if it has never been violated in this task;
2. completely correct reproduction of the sample (as opposed to approximate);
3. Simultaneous compliance with both requirements (which is possible only in the case of a completely correct solution).
The total score is the sum of the scores the child received for all 6 tasks. The score obtained for each of the tasks can vary: in tasks No. 1 and 5 - from 0 to 6, in tasks No. 2, 3, 4 and 6 - from 0 to 7.
Thus, the total score can range from 0 (if there is not a single correctly reproduced element and the rule is not followed in any of the tasks) to 40 (if all tasks are solved without errors).
Erased, i.e. evaluated by the child himself as incorrect, the lines are not taken into account when deriving the assessment.
In a number of cases, a rougher and simpler estimate is sufficient - the number of correctly solved problems (CRZ). The NCR can range from 0 (no problem solved) to 6 (all 6 problems solved).
Interpretation of results:
33-40 points (5-6 tasks) - a high level of orientation to a given system of requirements, can consciously control their actions.
19-32 points (3-4 tasks) - orientation to the system of requirements is not developed enough, due to the low level of development of arbitrariness.
Less than 19 points (2 or less tasks) - an extremely low level of regulation of actions, constantly violates a given system of requirements proposed by an adult.
Method "Correction test" (literal version)
Target: to determine the amount of attention (by the number of letters viewed) and its concentration - by the number of mistakes made.
Estimated UUD: regulatory UUD, the ability to control their activities
Age: 8-10 years
Form (assessment situation): frontal writing work
The technique is used to determine the amount of attention (by the number of letters viewed) and its concentration - by the number of mistakes made.
The norm of the attention span for children aged 6-7 years is 400 characters and more, the concentration is 10 errors or less; for children 8-10 years old - 600 characters and more, concentration - 5 errors or less.
Working time - 5 minutes.
Instruction:
“On the form with letters, cross out the first row of letters. Your task is to look through the rows of letters from left to right and cross out the same letters as the first ones.
You have to work quickly and accurately. Working time - 5 minutes.
Example:
Task "Find a few differences"
Methodology "Study of verbal-logical thinking junior schoolchildren » (E.F. Zambacevichene)
Target: level detection development verbal - logical thinking.
Estimated UUD: logical universal learning activities.
Conduct form: written survey.
Age: junior schoolchildren
1st subtest aimed at awareness. The task of the subject is to complete the sentence with one of the given words, making a logical choice based on inductive thinking and awareness. There are 10 tasks in the full version, 5 in the short version.
Tasks of the 1st subtest
"Finish the sentence. Which of the five words fits the given part of the phrase? »
1. The boot always has ... (lace, buckle, sole, straps, buttons) (80% of first graders with normal development give the correct answer to this question).
If the answer is correct, the question is asked: "Why not a shoelace?" After a correct explanation, the solution is estimated at 1 point, with an incorrect explanation - 0.5 points. If the answer is wrong, the child is asked to think and give the correct answer. For the correct answer after the second attempt, 0.5 points are given. If the answer is incorrect, the understanding of the word "always" is clarified. When solving subsequent samples of the 1st subtest, clarifying questions are not asked.
Lives in warm regions ... (bear, deer, wolf, camel, penguin) (86%).
In a year... (24 months, 3 months, 12 months, 4 months, 7 months) (96%).
Month of winter... (September, October, February, November, March) (93%).
Does not live in our country ... (nightingale, stork, tit, ostrich, starling) (85%).
The father is older than his son... (rarely, always, often, never, sometimes) (85%).
Time of day... (year, month, week, day, Monday) (69%).
A tree always has ... (leaves, flowers, fruits, root, shadow) (94%).
Season ... (August, autumn, Saturday, morning, holidays) (75%).
10. Passenger transport ... (combine, dump truck, bus, excavator, diesel locomotive) (100%).
2nd subtest . Classification, ability to generalize
“One word out of five is superfluous, it should be excluded. What word should be excluded? With a correct explanation, 1 point is put, with an erroneous one - 0.5 points. If the answer is wrong, ask the child to think and answer again. For the correct answer after the second attempt, 0.5 points are given. Upon presentation of the 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th samples clarifying questions are not asked.
Tulip, lily, bean, chamomile, violet (95% of first graders with normal development give the correct answer).
River, lake, sea, bridge, pond (100%).
Doll, jumping rope, sand, ball, spinning top (99%).
Table, carpet, chair, bed, stool (90%).
Poplar, birch, hazel, linden, aspen (85%).
Chicken, rooster, eagle, goose, turkey (93%).
Circle, triangle, quadrilateral, pointer, square (90%).
Sasha, Vitya, Stasik, Petrov, Kolya (91%).
Number, division, addition, subtraction, multiplication (90%).
10. Cheerful, fast, sad, tasty, cautious (87%).
3rd subtest . Inference by analogy
“Choose from the five words written under the line, one word that would fit the word “clove” in the same way that the word “vegetable” fits the word “cucumber”. For the correct answer 1 point, for the answer after the second attempt - 0.5 points. Clarifying questions are not asked.
Cucumber - Vegetable
Carnation - ? (Weed, dew, garden, flower, earth) (87%)
Garden - Carrots
Garden - ? (Fence, mushrooms, apple tree, well, bench) (87%)
Teacher- Student
Doctor - ? (Glasses, hospital, ward, patient, medicine) (67%)
Flower - Vase
Bird - ? (Beak, seagull, nest, feathers, tail) (66%)
Glove - Hand
Boot-? (Stockings, sole, leather, leg, brush) (80%)
Dark - Light
Wet - ? (Sunny, slippery, dry, warm, cold) (55%)
Clock - Time
Thermometer - ? (Glass, sick, bed, temperature, doctor) (95%)
Machine - Motor
Boat- ? (River, lighthouse, sail, wave, shore) (89%)
Table - Tablecloth
Floor - ? (Furniture, carpet, dust, boards, nails) (85%)
10. Chair - Wooden
Needle - ? (Sharp, Fine, Shiny, Short, Steel) (65%)
4th subtest . Generalization
“Find a suitable generalizing concept for these two words. How can it be called together, in one word? If the answer is wrong, you are asked to think again. The scores are similar to the previous subtests. Clarifying questions are not asked.
Perch, crucian... (99% of first-graders give the correct answer)
Broom, shovel... (43%)
Summer, winter... (84%)
Cucumber, tomato... (97%)
Lilac, hazel... (74%)
Wardrobe, sofa... (96%)
June, July... (95%)
Day, night... (45%)
Elephant, ant... (85%)
Tree, flower... (73%)
Results processing
The maximum number of points that can be scored for solving all four subtests is 40 (100% success rate).
The success score is determined by the formula:
OU = X x 100%: 40,
whereX - sum of scores for all tests.
A high level of success - the 4th level - is equal to 32 points or more (80-100% of the OS).
Normal - 3rd level - 31.5-26 points (79-65%).
Below average - 2nd level - 25.5-20.0 points (64.9-50%).
Low - 1st level - 19.5 and below (49.9% and below).
Among normally developing first-graders, there are no children with the 1st and 2nd levels of success. For a child of 7-8 years old, the low success of the 1st and 2nd levels is due to the presence of deviations in mental development, underdevelopment of speech, as well as social neglect.
A short version of the methodology (5 samples in each subtest) for first-graders is analyzed as follows: the highest 4th level of success - 25-20 points; normal level - 19.5-17.5 points; below average (2nd level) - 17.5-15 points; low (1st level) - 12 points and below.
Method "Mittens" (method G.A. Zuckerman)
Target: identification of the level of formation of actions to coordinate efforts in the process of organizing and implementing cooperation (cooperation).
Assessed universal learning activities: communicative actions.
Age: 6.5-7 years old.
Grading method: observation of the interaction of students working in pairs in the classroom, and analysis of the result.
Task description: children sitting in pairs are given one image of mittens to each and asked to decorate them in the same way, that is, so that they make up a pair. Children can come up with a pattern themselves, but first they need to agree among themselves which pattern they will draw. Each pair of students receives an image of mittens in the form of a silhouette (on the right and left hands) and the same sets of colored pencils.
Evaluation criteria:
The productivity of joint activities is assessed by the degree of similarity of patterns on mittens;
Children's ability to negotiate common decision, the ability to convince, argue, etc .;
Mutual control in the course of performing activities: do children notice each other's deviations from the original plan, how they react to them;
Mutual assistance in the course of drawing;
Emotional attitude to joint activities: positive (they work with pleasure and interest), neutral (they interact with each other out of necessity) or negative (ignore each other, quarrel, etc.).
Assessment levels:
1. Low level: the patterns are clearly dominated by differences or there is no similarity at all. Children do not try to agree, everyone insists on his own.
2. Average level: partial similarity - individual features (color or shape of some parts) are the same, but there are noticeable differences.
3. High level: mittens are decorated with the same or very similar pattern. Children are actively discussing a possible pattern; come to an agreement on how to color the mittens; compare methods of action and coordinate them, building a joint action; monitor the implementation of the adopted plan.
Collaborative Sorting Task
Estimated UUDs : communicative actions to coordinate efforts in the process of organizing and implementing cooperation (cooperation)
Age
Form (assessment situation) : work of students in the class in pairs
Grading method : observation of the interaction and analysis of the result
Task description: children sitting in pairs are given a set of chips to sort them (distribute among themselves) according to the given conditions.
Instruction : “Children, in front of you lies a set of different chips. Let one of you own the red and yellow chips, and the other one the round and triangular ones. Acting together, you need to separate the chips according to their ownership, i.e. divide them among themselves, decomposing into separate piles. First, we need to agree on how to do it. At the end, you need to write on a piece of paper how you divided the chips and why.
Material : Each pair of students receives a set of 25 cardboard pieces (5 each of yellow, red, green, blue and white pieces different shapes: round, square, triangular, oval and diamond-shaped) and a sheet of paper for the report.
Evaluation criteria :
the productivity of joint activities is assessed by the correctness of the distribution of received chips;
ability to negotiate in a situation of conflict of interest (the need to separate chips that simultaneously belong to both children), the ability to find a common solution,
the ability to maintain a friendly attitude towards each other in a situation of conflict of interest,
the ability to argue your proposal, convince and yield;
mutual control and mutual assistancein the course of the task,
emotional attitude to joint activities: positive (children work with pleasure and interest), neutral (interact with each other out of necessity) or negative (ignore each other, quarrel, etc.).
:
1) low level - the task was not completed at all or the chips were divided arbitrarily, in violation of the specified rule; children do not try to negotiate or cannot come to an agreement, insist on their own, conflict or ignore each other;
2) average level - the task was partially completed: the chips belonging to each student separately were correctly identified, but the children failed to agree on four common elements and 9 “extra” (draws); in the course of completing the task, the difficulties of children are associated with the inability to argue their position and listen to their partner;
3) high level - as a result, the chips are divided into four piles: 1) common, where the elements that belong simultaneously to both students are combined, i.e. red and yellow circles and triangles (4 chips); 2) a pile with red and yellow ovals, rhombuses and squares of one student (6 chips) and 3) a pile with blue, white and green circles and triangles (6 chips) and, finally, 4) a pile with "extra" elements that are not belong to no one (9 chips - white, blue and green squares, ovals and rhombuses). The solution is reached through active discussion and comparison of different options distribution of chips; agreeing on equal "rights" to own the four chips; childrencontrol each other's actionsduring the course of the task.
Method "Who is right?"
Estimated UUDs : actions aimed at taking into account the position of the interlocutor (partner)
Age : elementary school level (10.5 - 11 years old)
Form (assessment situation) : individual examination of the child
Grading method : conversation
Task description: the child, sitting in front of the adult conducting the examination, is given the text of three tasks in turn and questions are asked.
Material : three cards with the text of tasks.
Instruction : "Read the text of the three short stories in turn and answer the questions."
Exercise 1. “Petya drew the Serpent Gorynych and showed the drawing to his friends. Volodya said: "That's great!". And Sasha exclaimed: “Fu, what a monster!” Which one do you think is right? Why did Sasha say that? And Volodya? What was Peter thinking? What will Petya answer to each of the boys? What would you say if you were Sasha and Volodya? Why?"
Task 2. “After school, three friends decided to cook lessons together. “First, let’s solve math problems,” Natasha said. “No, you need to start with an exercise in the Russian language,” Katya suggested. “But no, you first need to learn a poem,” Ira objected. Which one do you think is right? Why? How did each of the girls explain their choice? What is the best way for them to do it?”
Task 3. “Two sisters went to choose a gift for their little brother for his first birthday. “Let's buy him this loto,” Lena suggested. “No, it’s better to give a scooter,” Anya objected. Which one do you think is right? Why? How did each of the girls explain their choice? How can they do better? What would you like to offer as a gift? Why?"
Evaluation criteria :
understanding the possibility of different positions and points of view (overcoming egocentrism), orientation to the positions of other people, different from one’s own,
understanding the possibility of different grounds for assessing the same subject, understanding the relativity of assessments or approaches to choice,
taking into account different opinions and the ability to justify one's own,
taking into account different needs and interests.
Task completion level indicators:
Low level : the child does not take into account the possibility of different reasons for evaluating the same object (for example, the depicted character and the quality of the drawing itself in the 1st task) or choice (2nd and 3rd tasks); accordingly, it excludes the possibility of different points of view: the child takes the side of one of the characters, considering a different position unambiguously wrong.
Average level : partially correct answer: the child understands the possibility of different approaches to assessing an object or situation and admits that different opinions are fair or wrong in their own way, but cannot substantiate their answers.
High level : the child demonstrates an understanding of the relativity of assessments and approaches to choice, takes into account the difference in the positions of the characters and can express and justify his own opinion.
Methodology "Pattern under dictation"
Estimated UUDs
Age : preschool stage (6.5 - 7 years)
Form (assessment situation) : doing a joint task in the class in pairs
Grading method : observation of the process of joint activities and analysis of the result.
Task description: two children are seated opposite each other at a table partitioned off by a screen (screen), one is given a sample pattern on a card, the other is given chips from which this pattern must be laid out. The first child dictates how to lay out the pattern, the second - acts according to his instructions. He is allowed to ask any questions, but he is not allowed to look at the pattern. After completing the task, the children switch roles, laying out a new pattern of the same level of complexity. For training, at first, children are allowed to familiarize themselves with the materials and fold one or two patterns according to the pattern.
Material : a set of three white and three colored square chips (of the same size), four cards with pattern samples (Fig. 3), a screen (screen).
Rice. 3
Instruction : “Now we will fold the pictures according to the pattern. But we will not do this as usual, but together, under the dictation of each other. To do this, one of you will receive a card with a pattern sample, and the other - chips (squares), from which this pattern must be laid out. One will dictate how to lay out the pattern, the second will follow his instructions. You can ask any questions, but you can not look at the pattern. First one dictates, then the other - you change roles. And first, let's practice how to fold the pattern.
Evaluation criteria :
productivity joint activity is evaluated by the similarity of the laid out patterns with the samples;
ability to buildunderstandable indicate landmarks steps to build a pattern;
skill to ask questions
ways mutual control mutual aid ;
emotional attitude
Job progress indicators :
1) low level
2) average level - there is at least a partial similarity of patterns with samples; instructions reflect part of the necessary guidelines; questions and answers provide missing information; partial understanding;
3) high level – patterns correspond to samples; in the process of active dialogue, children reach mutual understanding and exchange the necessary and sufficient information to build patterns; benevolently monitor the implementation of the adopted plan and compliance with the rules.
Quest "Road to Home"
Estimated UUDs : the ability to highlight and display in speech the essential guidelines for action, as well as to convey (inform) them to a partner, the planning and regulating function of speech
Age : elementary school level (10.5 - 11 years old)
Form (assessment situation) : doing a joint task in the class in pairs.
Grading method : monitoring the process of joint activities and analyzing the result
Task description: two children are seated opposite each other at a table partitioned off by a screen (screen). One is given a card with the image of the way to the house (Fig. 4), the other is given a card with landmarks-points (Fig. 5). The first child dictates how to go in order to reach the house, the second - acts according to his instructions. He is allowed to ask any questions, but he is not allowed to look at the road card. After completing the task, the children switch roles, outlining a new path to the house (Fig. 6).
Material : a set of two cards showing the way to the house (Fig. 5 and 6) and two cards with landmarks-dots (Fig. 4), a pencil or pen, a screen (screen).
Instruction : “Now we will fold the pictures according to the pattern. But we will not do this as usual, but together, under the dictation of each other. To do this, one of you will receive a card with the image of the road to the house, and the other - a card on which this road must be drawn. One will dictate how the road goes, the second will follow his instructions. You can ask any questions, but you can’t look at the map with the road. First one dictates, then the other - you change roles. And for starters, let's decide who will dictate and who will draw?
Evaluation criteria :
productivity joint activity is evaluated by the degree of similarity of the drawn tracks with the samples;
ability to buildunderstandable for the partner, statements that take into account what he knows and sees and what he does not; in this case accurate, consistent and completeindicate landmarks road trajectories;
skill to ask questions to use them to obtain the necessary information from the business partner;
ways mutual control in the course of activities andmutual aid ;
emotional attitude to joint activities: positive (they work with pleasure and interest), neutral (they interact with each other out of necessity), negative.
Job progress indicators :
1) low level - patterns are not built or do not look like patterns; instructions do not contain the necessary guidelines or are formulated incomprehensibly; questions are not on the merits or are formulated incomprehensibly for the partner;
2) average level - there is at least a partial similarity of patterns with samples; instructions reflect part of the necessary guidelines; questions and answers are formulated vaguely and allow to obtain the missing information only in part; a partial understanding is achieved;
3) high level – patterns correspond to samples; in the process of active dialogue, children reach mutual understanding and exchange the necessary and sufficient information to build patterns, in particular, indicate the numbers of rows and columns of points through which the road runs; at the end, on their own initiative, they compare the result (the drawn road) with the sample.
Holding
diagnostic work
to identify the development by students of meta-subject learning outcomes.
Prepared by:
geography teacher
MKOU "Stanovskaya secondary school"
Barkova E. Lena Nikolaevna
In the conditions of modern Russia, where profound changes in social relations are accompanied by social problems, the ideological function of geographical education is of particular importance. Worldview is a generalized system of world views that are not tied to certain phenomena, but serve as the basis for understanding the general trends of humanitarian development.
The new Federal State Educational Standard in our country is focused, first of all, on the formation of the personal characteristics of the graduate. Their criteria consider the readiness and ability of students for self-development and personal self-determination, motivation for learning and purposeful cognitive activity, systems of significant social and interpersonal relations, value-semantic attitudes that reflect personal and civic positions in activities, social competencies, legal awareness, the ability to set goals and build life plans, the ability to realize Russian identity in a multicultural society. The target functions of general education are also the spiritual and moral development and socialization of students, professional orientation and the formation of ecological culture.
The unique character of geography lies in the fact that it synthesizes the natural sciences and the humanities. Therefore, geography has colossal educational resources that play an important ideological and educational role. Their significance is also updated in connection with the integration of Russian geographical education into the global geo-educational system.
Thus, the theoretical basis for designing the process of teaching geography in modern conditions should be the relevance to life. At the forefront of the entire learning process must be value attitude towards the environment and man. The value and personal orientation of educational geography requires a deep interaction of all participants in the pedagogical process. Therefore, special
the experience of creative activity of students, as well as the organization of educational and extracurricular activities with all categories of students, acquires importance.
Studying geography in basic school
The study of geography at school allows you to form a comprehensive, systemic and socially oriented idea of the Earth as a planet of people, which is one of the foundations of practical Everyday life. In addition, geography the only science that introduces students to the territorial (regional) approach as a special method of scientific knowledge and an important tool for influencing natural and socio-economic processes.
The global goals of geographic education are common to the core and high school and are determined by social requirements, including a change in the social situation of development - the growth of information flows, a change in the nature and methods of communication and social interactions.
In addition, global goals are formulated taking into account the consideration of geographical education as a component of the education system as a whole, therefore they are the most general and socially significant.
Federal state educational standards, namely the program for the development of UUD and the planned results of mastering the main educational program by students of LLC "Strategies for semantic reading and working with text" presented in the PEP educational institution, emphasize leading role this direction in the formation of reading literacy, which is the basis of education at school, as well as in improving the quality of education in Russia. The school is faced with the task of uniting the efforts of teachers teaching various subjects in the development of reading literacy of students in the main school, and showing teachers that the lack of purposeful activity in this direction leads to the loss of reading skills and cognitive independence.
Everyone who is familiar with the results of international comparative studies of the quality of general education is concerned about the following questions: What happens to children in basic school? Why primary school graduates, who demonstrate the highest results in the world in reading and understanding of texts, once in primary school, after five years of study, lose their advantages and become uncompetitive compared to their peers from developed countries in the field of learning skills, the ability to work with information , reading literacy?
The reasons for the low results of Russian students are seen by domestic experts in the fact that in the process of learning, Russian students almost never encounter tasks of an interdisciplinary nature; they do not develop general educational skills in a targeted manner; in the course of studying individual subjects, they practically do not encounter life situations in which reading is necessary for them to solve public and private problems, with the exception of reading fiction; the learning tasks that schoolchildren solve are far from the vital interests and social experience of students. Thus, the learning process in the national school is not sufficiently practice-oriented, as if fenced off from the real world. surrounding life.
APPROACHES TO ASSESSING THE FORMATION OF META-SUBJECT RESULTS OF CONSCIOUS READING
In a broad sense, the term "universal learning activities" means the ability to learn, that is, the ability of the subject to self-development and self-improvement through the conscious and active appropriation of new social experience. In a narrower sense, the term is understood as a set of student's ways of action that ensure his ability to independently identify new knowledge and skills, including the organization of this process. The ability to learn is ensured by the fact that universal learning activities (as generalized activities) open up the possibility of a broad orientation of students both in various
subject areas and in the structure of the educational activity itself, including the awareness by students of its target orientation, value-semantic and operational characteristics 1 .
As part of the main types of universal educational activities, four blocks can be distinguished - personal, regulatory, cognitive and communicative, where the last three are metasubject actions.
Establishing requirements for the results of students mastering the basic educational program of basic general education, the standard highlights meta-subject results, including
expecting universal learning activities mastered by students and the ability to use them in educational, cognitive
social practice 2 .
Under the meta-subject results, the developers of new educational standards understand the methods of action mastered by students on the basis of one, several or all academic subjects, applicable both within the framework of the educational process and in solving problems in real life situations)
1 How to design universal learning activities in primary school: from --tviya to thought: a guide for the teacher / ed. A. G. Asmolova. M.: Prosvesche-: 2010; Formation of universal educational actions in basic school: from g * ~ viy to thought: a system of tasks: a guide for a teacher / ed. A. G. Asmolo- M .: Education, 2010.
Federal State Educational Standard of Basic General Education (Approved by order of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation on December 17, 2010 No. 1897). S. 5.
In the blocks of cognitive and communicative universal actions, general educational actions are distinguished that are related to reading and understanding texts, converting texts, as well as using information from texts for various purposes. The main elements in these blocks are semantic reading and logical actions aimed at analysis, generalization, establishing an analogy, classification, establishing cause-and-effect relationships, reasoning, inference and formulating conclusions based on the text read. In the transition from elementary school to primary school, as G. A. Tsukerman writes about it, learning to read ends and reading for learning begins - using written texts as the main resource for self-education, obtaining new knowledge and new ideas with the help of information texts. It is in connection with the special importance of mastering conscious reading in the system of "learning skills" in the period of study under consideration, among all the metasubject results, conscious reading and working with information were singled out as the main objects of assessment.
General approaches to assessing the formation of conscious reading and working with text, taking into account the tasks assigned to the developers, were determined in accordance with the requirements of the Federal State Educational Standard, approaches to reading literacy adopted] by Russian and international experts, taking into account the age characteristics of primary school students, assessment practices meta-subject results in primary school in accordance with the Federal State Educational Standard of Primary Education, as well as with the requirements of the theory of practice of pedagogical measurements.
FEATURES OF INTEGRATED WORK TO ASSESS FORMATION META-SUBJECT RESULTS (SENSITIVE READING AND SKILLS TO WORK WITH INFORMATION) FOR 6th grade students
In accordance with the approaches outlined above, the main characteristics of measuring materials were determined to assess the formation of meta-subject results (semantic reading and work with texts) among 6th grade students.
1. Purpose of work
Comprehensive work is aimed at identifying one of the main meta-subject results of teaching in students about the class - the formation of the ability to read and understand various texts, including educational ones; work with information presented in various forms; use the information received to solve various educational and cognitive, educational and practical tasks.
The main approaches to the creation of complex work are determined by the following documents:
Structure and content of the work
Each version of the measuring materials should include situations and texts from different subjects in order to create a common field for assessing the ability to work with a text, regardless of the subject, therefore, each version of the work structurally consists of four content areas: mathematics, Russian language - natural science 1 and history / social science. These content areas as a whole cover the possibilities of forming meta-subject results created by various school subjects.
It should be emphasized the need to use tasks on the subject content or related to the subject content. The formation of meta-subject skills is carried out in the process of studying various items.
Toolkit for tracking meta-subject results of students
Federal educational standards of the second generation set a qualitatively new idea of what the content of primary education and its educational result should be.
Now the effectiveness is made up of a complex set of indicators that describe the knowledge, meta-subject and even personal achievements of the child. To study the process of development of universal learning activities, you need your own tools.
The toolkit is a set of tools used to assess the achievement of planned results. The toolkit includes a description of the methods used, the features of the diagnosis, a system for evaluating the answers of children, handouts for the performance of work by children, tables for fixing the results of the examination.
To achieve a better final result, a clear diagnostic system for studying the intermediate results of the formation of meta-subject planned results is necessary.
“Meta-subject results of educational activities
sti are universal methods of activity applicable
both within the framework of the educational process and in solving problems in real life situations, mastered by students on the basis of one, several or all subjects"
– How to assess and track whether meta-subject results have been achieved?
The main object of evaluation of meta-subject results
serves the formation of students
universal learning activities (cognitive, regulatory and communicative.
Regulatory universal learning activities provide
students to organize their learning activities.
Cognitive universal learning activities include:
general educational activities
Communicative universal learning activities provide
chivayte social competence and consideration of the position of others
day, partners in communication or activities .
I assessed the achievement of meta-subject results in the course of various procedures.
The system of internal evaluation of meta-subject results
observation;
monitoring the formation of basic learning skills;
specially designed diagnostic tasks;
meta-subject diagnostic work;
complex work on an interdisciplinary basis;
project activity.
To assess the progress of students in achieving meta-subject results, I used purposeful observation.
Observations were made fairly regularly. Observed the entire class, any one child, or any particular activity. The observation was carried out both from the standpoint of an external observer and from the standpoint of a direct participant in the activity.
The most accurate measuring tool for tracking and evaluating the development of universal learning activities (UCA) is monitoring.
Monitoring is a tool that helps the teacher himself "tune" the educational process to the individual capabilities of each student, create optimal conditions for him to achieve a high-quality educational result.
The information received in the course of pedagogical monitoring was for me the basis for identifying individual dynamics the quality of the student's development, to predict my pedagogical activity, to carry out the necessary correction.
In order for monitoring to fulfill its task, it was carried out regularly, based on the list of ELAs to be formed and evaluated.
Monitoring of the formation of regulatory, cognitive, communicative educational activities I carried out on the materials of textbooks and workbooks of teaching materials.
The system of tasks of the TMC includes: creative tasks, tasks of a search nature, tasks of an advanced level.
Depending on the success of the test tasks in the subjects and taking into account the nature of the mistakes made by the child, I made a conclusion about the formation of a number of cognitive and regulatory actions of students.
The processing of monitoring results is aimed at obtaining diagnostic information about each student and the class as a whole, and identifying progress.
To track the level of UUD formation among students, I used tasks and diagnostic tasks specially designed by the authors, which are presented in the meta-subject results assessment sheet for each class. They include evaluation criteria; exemplary tasks, quite simple, not requiring special conditions; student self-assessment and teacher assessment.
LITERATURE
1. Federal State Educational Standard for Basic General Education / Ministry of Education and the Russian Federation. M.: Education, 2011.
2. Exemplary basic educational program of an educational institution: basic school / [comp. E. S. Savinov]. W Enlightenment, 2011.
Approximate programs for academic subjects: 5-9 grade- * VI.: Education, 2010, 2011.- (Second generation standards)
3. “Metasubject results. Standardized results for intermediate certification "M. "Enlightenment" 2014
4. Concepts of modernization of the content and technologies of teaching the subject "Geography"
Toolkit for tracking meta-subject results of students
Federal educational standards of the second generation set a qualitatively new idea of what the content of primary education and its educational result should be.
Now the effectiveness is made up of a complex set of indicators that describe the knowledge, meta-subject and even personal achievements of the child. To study the process of development of universal learning activities, you need your own tools.
The toolkit is a set of tools used to assess the achievement of planned results. The toolkit includes a description of the methods used, the features of the diagnosis, a system for evaluating the answers of children, handouts for the performance of work by children, tables for fixing the results of the examination.
To achieve a better final result, a clear diagnostic system for studying the intermediate results of the formation of meta-subject planned results is necessary.
“Meta-subject results of educational activities
sti are universal methods of activity applicable
both within the framework of the educational process and in solving problems in real life situations, mastered by students on the basis of one, several or all subjects"
– How to assess and track whether meta-subject results have been achieved?
The main object of evaluation of meta-subject results
serves the formation of students
universal learning activities (cognitive, regulatory and communicative.
Regulatory universal learning activities provide
students to organize their learning activities.
Cognitive universal learning activities include:
general educational activities
Communicative universal learning activities provide
chivayte social competence and consideration of the position of others
day, partners in communication or activities .
I assessed the achievement of meta-subject results in the course of various procedures.
The system of internal evaluation of meta-subject results
observation;
monitoring the formation of basic learning skills;
specially designed diagnostic tasks;
meta-subject diagnostic work;
complex work on an interdisciplinary basis;
project activity.
To assess the progress of students in achieving meta-subject results, I used purposeful observation.
The results of the observation were recorded in special forms ( observation sheets), in which, in the process of observation, she put a conventional sign (for example, “ V "). Depending on the pedagogical task, the observation sheets were registered(when observing the activities of a particular student) or aspect(when assessing the formation of this aspect of activity in the whole class).
Observations were made fairly regularly. Observed the entire class, any one child, or any particular activity. The observation was carried out both from the standpoint of an external observer and from the standpoint of a direct participant in the activity.
The most accurate measuring tool for tracking and evaluating the development of universal learning activities (UCA) is monitoring.
Monitoring is a tool that helps the teacher himself "tune" the educational process to the individual capabilities of each student, create optimal conditions for him to achieve a high-quality educational result.
The information received in the course of pedagogical monitoring was for me the basis for identifying individual dynamics the quality of the student's development, to predict my pedagogical activity, to carry out the necessary correction.
In order for monitoring to fulfill its task, it was carried out regularly, based on the list of ELAs to be formed and evaluated.
Monitoring of the formation of regulatory, cognitive, communicative educational activities I carried out on the materials of textbooks and workbooks of teaching materials.
The system of tasks of the TMC includes: creative tasks, tasks of a search nature, tasks of an advanced level.
For example, when planning mathematics lessons, I relied on lesson developments in the course "Mathematics" by S.V. Savinova, in which training sessions are designed from the position of activity pedagogy: meta-subject UUD are also predicted.
The slide presents tasks of an advanced level, during which I could track the process of forming meta-subject results.
Working on the teaching materials “School of Russia”, I used the “Checking Works” by the author S.I. Volkova, aimed both at testing subject knowledge, skills, and at testing meta-subject learning outcomes.
The slide shows examples of tasks from the test papers.
When evaluating the work, she also recorded the success of performing just such tasks.
The test papers in the subjects included tasks that helped me to check the level of development of UUD at each stage of training.
Depending on the success of the test tasks in the subjects and taking into account the nature of the mistakes made by the child, I made a conclusion about the formation of a number of cognitive and regulatory actions of students.
I assessed the level of formation of communicative and such cognitive UUD as goal-setting, planning, based on the oral and written answers of students, as well as on the observation of student participation in group work.
Test tasks, requiring joint (team) work of students for a common result, allowed me to assess the formation of communicative and regulatory educational actions.
I recorded the results in the observation form for the work of the group.
I was interested in the teaching materials “Learning to learn and act Monitoring of meta-subject UUD” authors T.V. Merkulov. I plan to use this teaching material in my future work, which consists of workbooks and methodological recommendations for each class. To increase the motivation of students and a holistic perception of the material, all monitoring tasks of the 1st grade are united by a game story about a forest school. In the RT for the 2nd grade, the diagnostic program is presented as a story about second-graders and their teacher. The processing of monitoring results is aimed at obtaining diagnostic information about each student and the class as a whole, and identifying progress.
To track the level of UUD formation among students, I used tasks and diagnostic tasks specially designed by the authors, which are presented in the meta-subject results assessment sheet for each class. They include evaluation criteria; exemplary tasks, quite simple, not requiring special conditions; student self-assessment and teacher assessment.
In my work, I was helped by the methodological manual for the teacher “How to design universal educational activities in elementary school. From action to thought” by A.G. Asmolov. The manual reveals the types and age-related features of the development of UUD among students in the early grades. Recommendations are given for the development of UUD, aimed at developing in children the ability to learn, detailed description diagnostic procedures, evaluation and analysis of results.
To assess the formation of meta-subject UUD, I used these diagnostic tasks to test certain types of UUD.
On the slide you see a diagnostic task for evaluating the regulatory action of control.
The teacher can also use the control and measuring materials "Diagnostics of meta-subject and personal results of primary education" by R.N. Buneev, which contain diagnostic materials that make it possible to determine how successfully a child develops a metasubject result.
I carry out complex integrated works. I consider this important, because they allow you to determine the formation of the ability to transfer knowledge and methods of learning actions obtained in one subject to other learning situations and tasks.
The proposed work gives me the opportunity to collect additional data for the assessment of such important universal ways actions, as reflection, the ability to self-regulation, self-control, self-correction.
I use the "Final Complex Works My Achievements" by O.B. Loginova, S.G. Yakovlev. The kit includes 4 options for working with tasks of various levels of complexity and guidelines.
I am in the process of studying "Comprehensive works on texts" series "To young clever men and clever women" authors O.A. Kholodova, L.V. Mishchenkov. The notebooks contain training and testing complex work in two versions (1st option - basic level, 2nd option - advanced level). The work has a text and 16 tasks, 4 tasks for each subject, based on various situations from life, as well as an evaluation table.
The use of the project as a tool for assessing younger students is quite limited, even by the end of elementary school, students cannot have all the necessary project skills.
The use of the project method is also limited by the age and intellectual characteristics of younger students.
But nevertheless, in the classroom in the lessons we work on projects individually, in pairs, in groups.
The slides present individual projects, group work on projects, as well as a sheet for the promotion of a project participant and project evaluation ( individual card).
I bring the results of all monitoring, diagnostics to the attention of students and their parents at a parent meeting or in a personal conversation.
With the right definition of goals to achieve and ways to check them Sheets of individual achievements and Sheets of accounting and control give me all the information I need about how the learning process is going, what the difficulties are for individual children, whether I, as a teacher, and the class have achieved my goals, which should be corrected in the process of subsequent education.
Based on the available methodological support, each teacher can develop his own control system for tracking meta-subject UUD, create tools, and develop criteria for assessing achievements.
Bibliography:
How to design universal learning activities in elementary school. From action to thought: a guide for the teacher / A.G. Asmolov, G.V. Burmenskaya, I.A. Volodarskaya and others; ed. A.G. Asmolov. - M .: Education, 2010. (Standards of the second generation).
Formation of universal educational activities in basic school: from action to thought. Job system. A guide for the teacher. / Asmolov A. G., Burmenskaya G. V., Volodarskaya I. A. and others / Ed.
Asmolova A. G. - M: Enlightenment, 2012 (Standards of the second generation
Gerasimova T.V., Dobrynina N.L., Egorova T.V., Komkova N.S., Kostina O.V., Orlyonok I.N., Petrichenko E.F., Plotnikova O.B. “Methodological recommendations “Organization of psychological monitoring of the formation of universal educational actions of students in elementary school” (within the framework of the Federal State Educational Standard of the IEO), Angarsk, 2011
Buneeva E. et al. "Diagnostics of meta-subject and personal results of primary education." Checking work» Workbooks. M., 2012
Buneev R.N., Buneeva E., Vakhrushev A., Goryachev A., Danilov D., Kozlova S., Petrova L., Pronina O., Rubin A., Chindilova O.. “Diagnosis
meta-subject and personal results of primary education"
Testing work grades 3-4. M., 2011
5. Vergeles G.I., Matveeva L.A., Raev A.I. "Junior student: help him learn", S-P, RSPU Publishing House, 2008
Potseluiko T. A., Dyachkova E. V. Gardabudskikh N. S., Fomicheva I. N.,
Stalnova E. A., Medvedeva L. V., Egorova T. V., Kolchina O. A.
workbook"School start. Monitoring of meta-subject UUD” and methodological recommendations for the teacher. The authors of the set: T.V. Beglova, M.R. Bityanova, T.V. Merkulova, A.G. Teplitskaya, edited by Ph.D. M.R. Bityanova (Center for Psychological Support of Education "POINT PSI", Moscow), Ph.D. S.G. Yakovleva
workbook “Learning to learn and act. Monitoring of meta-subject UUD” and methodological recommendations for the teacher. The authors of the set: T.V. Beglova, M.R. Bityanova, T.V. Merkulova, A.G. Teplitskaya, edited by Ph.D. M.R. Bityanova (Center for Psychological Support of Education "POINT PSI", Moscow), Ph.D. S.G. Yakovleva(Federal Scientific and Methodological Center named after L.V. Zankov).
