Problems of assessing the quality of education at school. Education Quality Assessment System

Methodological problems of determining the quality of education

In recent years, a lot has been said and written about quality of education -- both average and higher - in a variety of aspects; Various models and technologies for assessing the quality of specialist training are being developed. At the same time, in scientific research on this topic there is not only a lack of unity in the understanding of basic terms, but also the ambiguity of a number of starting points.

Thus, the main category of pedagogy—“education”—is still interpreted differently. One of the scientific pedagogical conferences specifically dealt with this issue; it was recommended to use the definition given in the Law of the Russian Federation “On Education”: education is a purposeful process of education and training in the interests of the individual, society and the state. At the same time, for many leaders of the educational system, only one side turned out to be much closer - education, which they also understood one-sidedly, as “educational services”. The reduction of education to training has already reached such an extent that very often you can find the phrase: “education and upbringing.”

For this reason, indicators of good manners (for example, honesty, patriotism, responsiveness) are not among those by which the result of the teaching staff’s activities, expressed in measurements of the characteristics of graduates of an educational institution, is assessed. Subtracting upbringing from education, we get the training of individuals (and individual ones), and it is this that becomes the content of the State educational standard, prescribed by the Constitution, but not described in detail therein. It is precisely this standard, emasculated in terms of education, that in our country becomes the basis of “per capita financing” of “educational services” [1].

Now let's look at the concept of "quality". This is a philosophical category that expresses its essential certainty, inseparable from the existence of an object, due to which it is precisely this and not another object (TSB, vol. 11. M, 1973). For the first time this concept in this status was analyzed by Aristotle. He attributed four possible contexts to quality (answering the question “what?”): the presence or absence of innate, original abilities and characteristics; the presence of both transient and stable properties; properties and states inherent in things and phenomena in the process of their existence; the external appearance of a thing or phenomenon.

Hegel interpreted quality as a certainty, identical with being, and quantity as an external certainty, indifferent to being, and understood them as certain stages of the definition and self-determination of being. Expliciting the content of the category “quality,” he introduces the concept of “certainty” as an empirical presentation of quality, “property” as a manifestation of quality in a specific system of interactions or relationships, and “borders” as a phenomenon of differentiation of quality from other qualities. Hegel's synthesis of quality and quantity was measure.

The quality of an object is revealed in the totality of its properties. Moreover, it does not consist of properties, but possesses them. Since each object is in a very large, almost infinite number of connections with other things, it has an equally large number of properties. The quality category of an object is not reduced to its individual properties. It expresses a holistic characteristic of the functional unity of the essential properties of an object, its internal and external certainty, relative stability, its difference from other objects or similarity with them. Quality is associated with the object as a whole, covers it completely and is inseparable from it. An object cannot, while remaining itself, lose its quality.

In relation to education, this means that quality is its integral feature, its essence, i.e. if there is education, then there is quality; if there is no quality, there is actually no education itself. Therefore, in order to improve the quality of education, it is necessary to improve education itself. This has always been done, and the term “quality of education” itself is just a fashionable phrase that has appeared in recent years, although this term reflects an essential feature of education. Three decades ago, employees of the Research Institute of General Pedagogy of the Academy of Pedagogics published a monograph devoted to ways to improve the quality of students’ knowledge and ways to test it. It is quite obvious that the quality of education is based on the quality of students’ knowledge. Unfortunately, most researchers rejected the philosophical definition of quality. So, according to A.I. Subetto, this definition contains contradictions between internal and external, static and dynamic aspects of quality, between the quality of the result object and the quality of the process (although in the same definition one could see their unity). According to other authors, the philosophical definition of quality does not have any significant significance, since in philosophy this category is not evaluative in nature, and with such an interpretation of quality, the question of its measurement or other assessment is meaningless.

On this basis, the mentioned and a number of other authors adopted as a basis a completely different definition used for objects and processes formed and implemented in production practice. According to this definition, product quality is the totality of its essential properties that are significant to the consumer; in other words, it is the utility, value of a product, its suitability or adaptability to satisfy certain needs. With this interpretation, the properties of an object are considered from the position of the consumer, not the producer.

The choice of such a definition radically changes the level of consideration of the concept of quality and makes the methodological basis for further research very shaky. Several significant shortcomings can be noted.

In such a version of the quality of education, the research position underlying it is immediately apparent - this is a certain external approach (in the philosophy of science it is called “external methodologism”). Instead of the essential, internal determination of an object, its purely external, utilitarian side is considered - its adaptability to satisfying certain needs. “External methodologism” gives rise to a descriptive-explanatory, rather than constructive, nature of assessing the quality of education, which does not allow for real management of it. Still, in education, quality is primary, and its assessment, despite all its importance, is secondary. This is what happened with the introduction of the Unified State Exam: its usefulness for assessing quality outweighed, in the eyes of administrators, its harm to the quality of education itself.

This approach focuses on what various external “stakeholders”—individuals, employers, universities, society, the state, etc.—need from education.

In the various education quality management systems proposed by the authors, the place and role of the teacher are least defined. But it is quite obvious that in this process he is a central figure. Numerous publications devoted to the quality of education, its management and its assessment examine various aspects of this problem, but they are dominated by a certain macro-pedagogical and managerial-institutional approach, which does not allow determining the directions of the work of the teacher as the main actor in the complex chain of ensuring the expected effect.

A person, especially an immature one, cannot fully realize his interests, and his expectations from education may suffer from either primitivism or illusions. Awareness of one's real needs often comes later, when the main stage of education has already been completed. In addition, the requests of an individual may not coincide and even be contrary to the interests of the state. What should education correspond to in this case?

Further, the understanding of the values and goals of education among different social groups and society as a whole can also vary greatly. Thus, one and the same formation from the point of view of one group or structure may correspond to its purpose, but from the point of view of another - not. For example, universities are primarily interested in the learning ability of high school graduates and their ability to solve cognitive problems in educational situations. Employers are more affected by the level of training, the ability to solve communication and other practical problems in real life situations. All this makes the criterion of quality as compliance of education with the interests of the individual, society, and state very unreliable.

Another significant drawback of this position is the reduction of education to one of the spheres of the market economy. This approach arose in an era when the emerging market relations in Russia gave rise to the desire to bring their specificity and main mechanism - the act of purchase and sale - into the sphere of education, placing this at the forefront even when defining goals and objectives, basic parameters and aspects quality of modern education. But it is difficult to agree with such vulgar economism, since it does not correspond to the internal nature of education itself, and its main essence - cultural, civilizational and spiritual - falls out of consideration. Education is always not so much the transfer of information about the world around a person, but rather the answer to the question of how to live correctly in it.

Market mechanisms, by their very nature, are selfish and have limited applicability in the field of education. This position is one of the central ones for understanding the essence, the nature of education: after all, its deep meaning lies precisely in the fact that it is a social institution for overcoming people’s egoism, an anti-egoistic social construct. In fact, if you think about the philosophical essence of education, it appears as a set of attempts by some people to help others with their experience and knowledge, primarily the next generation. Education is a humane instrument of high ethics, nobility, mutual assistance, and beliefs of a selfish nature cannot take root here.

The results of education, especially fundamental ones, do not appear immediately. The education system follows not so much the market conditions as the traditions of the development of the culture of society. Of course, there is a definite and very significant connection between success in professional activity and education, but the possibility of success in an individual career and life in general is influenced by other factors that are very far from the quality of the training received (character, personal connections and even a person’s appearance).

The market path in Russia works even more superficially than the traditional administrative one. The thing is that market competition makes us not so much claims about the quality of the product, but rather demands for its payback. If in the exemplary version of the author's schools the costs of time and effort were maximum, and in the traditional administrative one they were at least strictly defined, then the modern market puts forward another principle: the faster and cheaper you can teach a person something (while charging him more) , all the better.

The quality assessment models and technologies developed on this basis display a well-known technocratic approach. There is no understanding or desire to understand that the results are different: not only those that are measured quantitatively during control, but also others that are difficult to analyze analytically, associated primarily with the educational and developmental functions of education. This led to a clear removal of the responsibility of educational institutions for educating new generations of Russian citizens in the spirit of high patriotism, morality, spirituality, and hard work. These provisions have practically disappeared from discussions about the quality of education.

One of the indicators of the quality of education is the potential of the scientific and teaching staff involved in the field of education. But in modern methods, this indicator is primitively simple - you just need to calculate the percentage of specialists with a scientific degree in a university, and in a school - the number of teachers with a high category. These figures only to some extent reflect the level of teachers’ knowledge of their subject and their ability to conduct research work. A true specialist must have certain qualities that set his personal basis, but they are almost impossible to measure.

The role of the teacher in the modern world has not only not decreased with the development of information technology, but, on the contrary, has increased. Interest in the personality of a teacher and his professional competence has increased in connection with the emergence of a personality-oriented paradigm of education. This is confirmed by the laws of genetic psychology, according to which a person acquires his humanity only from another person. “Only personality can influence personality, only character can one develop character,” wrote K.D. Ushinsky

Existing methods assess the potential of students in an equally superficial way. First of all, the level of training is checked - it all comes down to the Unified State Exam and Internet exams, i.e. to the assessment of knowledge, skills, abilities. Ideally, the level of education and learning ability should be compared both at the entrance to the educational institution and at the exit. One can speak of the good work of an educational institution only if the cultural, moral and intellectual potential of students increases. The first task of modern education is to establish moral and civic values in an unadulterated form in our schools. And not just approve it, but put it at the center of education, because the future of the Fatherland primarily depends not on investments or new technologies, but on the spiritual and moral potential of the younger generation.

Education is not a subject of “purchase and sale”; it is an object of more complex and subtle economic and sociocultural relations. It is possible to overcome “confusion and vacillation” in assessing true quality only when its internal nature is fully taken into account. T. Eliseeva and V. Baturin proposed to call this approach internal methodologism. In their opinion, only it has the right to reasonable use, since it eliminates subjectivism, voluntarism, opportunism and similar content of the content of the quality of education, which in our time is demonstrated very clearly at all levels, even to the point of following some fashions, imitations, extrapolations of various ideas and provisions in the field of education. According to this approach, both the teacher and the learner are equally responsible for the effectiveness of education, i.e. the quality of education, its “value” are created by both, and the “production” and “consumption” of education are here in inextricable unity.

Some authors propose to consider it as a true indicator of the quality of education spirituality. Spirituality is difficult to measure, but it is precisely in it that the degree, the measure of the correspondence of education as the production and reproduction of human essence lies, it is in spirituality that its main quality. However, despite the importance of this indicator, it still does not cover all education.

In our opinion, the broadest philosophical understanding of the quality of an object or phenomenon should be taken as a basis, according to which these are its essential, stable properties, thanks to which it is this object.

Content The quality of education aspect was comprehensively analyzed by V.V. Kraevsky, I.Ya. Lerner, M.N. Skatkin. Based on the goals of comprehensive personal development and the task of mastering the basics of culture by the younger generation, they identified four elements in the content of education. Firstly, it is knowledge about nature, society, technology and man as a social being. Without knowledge, no purposeful human activity is possible. They serve as the basis for ideas about reality, a guideline for a person to determine the direction of his activity - practical or spiritual, and serve as the basis for the formation of attitudes towards the objects of reality.

But knowledge alone is not enough to master social experience. You can know and not be able to. The second element of the content of education is the experience accumulated by mankind in implementing methods of activity known to people, i.e. skills and abilities. These may be skills and abilities to perform specific operations. All these actions are preceded by knowledge about the purpose, order and results. Therefore, every skill performed is the application of knowledge in practice. The third element of educational content is the experience of creative activity. It performs the most important function - it ensures man's creative transformation of reality, its further development, which depends on human activity.

And finally, the fourth element - emotional and sensory experience - determines a person’s attitude towards the world, including knowledge, its acquisition and search.

Technological the component of the quality of education presupposes mastery of methods of teaching the subject, which requires special training of the teacher. He must have not only a broad outlook in his subject, a certain level of culture, but also be familiar with various methods of presenting the school course of the subject. Based on known technologies, methods and methods of teaching, as well as his own experience, the teacher develops his own elements of technology, repeating elements containing automatisms, which ensures the process of his creativity.

According to some authors, the teacher must only strictly follow the developed sequence of actions and be the operator of standardized didactic materials and technical teaching aids. At the same time, he is considered as a passive performer of a “branded” didactic project, and his personality, culture and qualifications do not play a special role. Meanwhile, it must be taken into account that the teacher is a subject of the educational process: he contributes to the content side of learning, gives his own value-semantic interpretation of the material, studies and takes into account the individual psychological characteristics of the student in the pedagogical process, varies the content elements of the material and focuses attention on certain aspects of their significance, solves the problem of continuity, organizes repetition and propaedeutics, optimizes feedback with students.

The teacher must use every opportunity to teach students to see aesthetic aspects, internal harmony in the content of the discipline being studied, and to understand the unity of truth and beauty. Without this, spiritual improvement of the student’s personality is impossible. Many sections of both school and university courses have great aesthetic potential, but another aesthetics is no less important - procedural, associated with the presentation of material, its recording, depiction, its perception and understanding. The importance of this subjective side of the educational process can be very large, although it is not taken into account by any quality indicators.

Essential for the productive professional activity of a teacher is personal component. It includes intellectual (formation of the most important types of thinking), moral (behavior, respect for the student, his personality), emotional (love for his subject, his profession), volitional (ability to self-govern), organizational (mechanism of activity, mental skills). labor) quality. At the same time, it is not so much the level of expression of these individual personality traits that is of particular importance, but their close and positive relationships, thanks to which the process of their mutual reinforcement arises. As a result, the teacher develops communicative and organizational competencies, but for each they take specific forms, and their combination makes it possible to judge the individual teaching style. Without such competencies, it is simply impossible to solve a number of pedagogical problems.

To summarize, we note that the quality of education is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon, subject to both internal laws of development and external needs. All attempts to ignore the first are fraught with negative consequences, but it is no less important to take into account the second. To the greatest extent, in our opinion, these circumstances are taken into account in the definition of Perm scientists: “By quality of education at the student level we understand a certain level of mastery of the content of education (knowledge, methods of activity, experience of creative activity, emotional-value relations), physical, mental, moral and civic development, which he achieves at various stages of the educational process in accordance with individual capabilities, aspirations and goals of education and training."

Of course, this definition is not clear enough for qualimetric purposes, but many qualities in education (for example, spirituality) are practically impossible to measure. And from the point of view of modern post-non-classical methodology, the transition from clear, defined concepts to less clear ones is one of the means to make them more consistent with a complex, dynamic, uncertain reality. The need to consider such fuzzy concepts with a “blurred” set of features that have more degrees of freedom in their use is rooted not so much in the insufficient insight of the human mind, but in the complexity of the world itself, in the absence of rigid boundaries and clearly defined classes in it, in general variability, " fluidity" of things. Such concepts, no less than strict ones, are an effective tool for understanding complex dynamic systems. The concept of quality of education should serve the main task - improving Russian education based on the combination, fusion of the best pedagogical traditions and innovation, innovative approaches in pedagogy, unity of teaching, upbringing and development.

1. Grebnev L.S. Education: a bear market? // Higher education today. 2005. No. 3.

2. The quality of students’ knowledge and ways to improve it / Ed. M.N. Skatkin and V.V. Kraevsky. M., 1978.

3. New quality of higher education in modern Russia: Conceptual and program approach. M., 1995.

4. Education quality management. M., 2000.

5. Mozgarev L.V., Panasyun V.P. Teacher and quality of education // Pedagogy. 2007. No. 1.

6. Eliseeva T., Baturin V. Quality of education: methodological grounds for discussion // Higher education in Russia. 2005. No. 11.

7. Bolotov V.A., Serikov V.V. Reflections on pedagogical education // Pedagogy. 2007. No. 9.

The phrase “quality of education” in the early nineties of the last century in Russia was more often used by managers than by scientists. This was most likely caused by the fact that in the Law of the Russian Federation “On Education” (1992 and 1996) an article appeared on state control over the quality of education, which gave rise to a large number of different practices of such control.

The practice of organizing quality control in education, initiated by government decisions, gave impetus to the development of relevant theoretical concepts and was the main factor in the steady increase in the interest of scientists in this problem. It should be noted that assessing the quality of education is associated with a number of contradictions.

1. Lack of a thesaurus.

2. Stability and variability of education.

3. Highlighting the quality of vocational education.

4. Theoretical and practical training.

5. Teacher assessment standards and qualification requirements for a specialist.

6. Training in professional disciplines and practice in solving standard professional problems.

7. Declared humanistic and actual technological approaches to assessing the quality of a student’s education.

8. The graduate's possession of fundamental knowledge and poor readiness to perform professional duties.

The effectiveness of studies to assess the quality of education mainly depends on what is meant by the quality of education. This concept is interpreted rather ambiguously by various researchers.

In the current situation, three main approaches to assessing the quality of education can be distinguished. The first is theoretical, within which the study of the problem follows the path of theoretical and methodological research. At the same time, sometimes the paths of transition from the theoretical level to practical development of quality assessment methods and its implementation in the educational process are not clearly visible.

The second, practical approach, implies that its representatives follow the path of creating means (for example, control) for assessing the training of students, without thinking about the conceptual components of the study.

Representatives of the third direction combine theoretical, methodological and practical components in their research. They follow the most difficult path, but this is the approach to this problem that is most acceptable.

However, to date, a unified scientifically based system of indicators of the quality of training of students has not been developed and approved, just as there is no single generally accepted and approved system for assessing the quality of education.

The relevance of the problem of assessing and managing the quality of education is explained by the fact that over the past decades, higher education has become widespread, which has begun to cause growing concern for the quality and effectiveness of the educational process.

Managing the development of education as an essential component requires the creation of systems for monitoring the quality of education both on a national scale and in the context of regions of the country.

Thus, at present, there is a need for a methodology for assessing the quality of education that would not be based only on grades in a student’s diploma, but would objectively evaluate the actual knowledge of students, their ability to put into practice the acquired knowledge. The student’s propensity for innovation and the desire for further personal improvement should also be introduced into the methodology for assessing the quality of education.

The conceptual and methodological basis for assessing the quality of education of graduates should include the following main directions (blocks):

1) fundamental nature of education, allowing graduates to have a broad outlook in relevant fields of knowledge;

2) targeted specialization of education, allowing you to quickly adapt and successfully carry out specific responsibilities;

3) the presence of creative skills and the ability to generate innovations;

4) the ability and ability to implement knowledge and innovation and investment projects in the production and social spheres;

5) social and moral qualities of graduates and level of education in the socio-political and humanitarian sphere.

Assessing the quality of education in accordance with the presented directions should further imply the justification of a system of criteria, methods for calculating a comprehensive, integral assessment, organization and informatization of assessments, which are integral elements of monitoring the quality of education.

1. Lack of a thesaurus.
2. Stability and variability of education.
3. Highlighting the quality of vocational education.
4. Theoretical and practical training.
5. Teacher assessment standards and qualification requirements for a specialist.
6. Training in professional disciplines and practice in solving standard professional problems.
7. Declared humanistic and actual technological approaches to assessing the quality of a student’s education.
8. The graduate's possession of fundamental knowledge and poor readiness to perform professional duties.

The effectiveness of studies to assess the quality of education mainly depends on what is meant by the quality of education. This concept is interpreted rather ambiguously by various researchers.

In the current situation, three main approaches to assessing the quality of education can be distinguished. The first is theoretical, within the framework of which the study of the problem follows the path of theoretical and methodological research. At the same time, sometimes the paths of transition from the theoretical level to practical development of quality assessment methods and its implementation in the educational process are not clearly visible.

The conceptual and methodological basis for assessing the quality of education of graduates should include the following main directions (blocks):

1) fundamental nature of education, allowing graduates to have a broad outlook in relevant fields of knowledge;
2) targeted specialization of education, allowing you to quickly adapt and successfully carry out specific responsibilities;
3) the presence of creative skills and the ability to generate innovations;
4) the ability and ability to implement knowledge and innovation and investment projects in the production and social spheres;
5) social and moral qualities of graduates and level of education in the socio-political and humanitarian sphere.

Today, most countries of Central and Eastern Europe, including Russia, have developed a policy framework for monitoring and evaluating educational activities as part of the global reform of their countries' education systems. These countries have begun to define norms (standards) when developing training programs, which is an important stage in national policies in the field of education and quality control as an integral part. These norms (standards) are a necessary basis for determining the goals of education, creating a unified pedagogical space in the country, thanks to which a uniform level of general education will be ensured for young people in different types of educational institutions.

However, in general, Russia has not yet taken the necessary measures to create a regular system for assessing the performance of educational institutions and the education system as a whole. It should be noted that in this area there is a fundamental contradiction: on the one hand, the autonomy of educational institutions and teaching staff from the state in determining training programs is significantly expanding; and on the other hand, the autonomy of educational institutions and teachers may conflict with the systematic process of assessing the results of their activities by the state.

The successes of the new education policy are related to the socio-economic processes occurring in society. Indeed, openness, sharing of responsibilities, the right to diversity and the matching of supply to needs are principles that must first be introduced and implemented in the political and economic sectors in order to then be applied in the field of education.

· At assessing the quality of education The following provisions should be highlighted:

o Quality assessment is not limited to testing students’ knowledge (although this remains one of the indicators of the quality of education).

o Assessment of the quality of education is carried out comprehensively, considering the educational institution in all areas of its activities.

Quality assurance or quality management, addressed primarily through the use of quality monitoring, means the step-by-step monitoring of the process of obtaining a product to ensure that each of the production stages is carried out optimally, which in turn, in turn, theoretically prevents the output of low-quality products.

· Taking into account the above concepts, the following elements can be said to be part of an education quality monitoring system:

o standard setting and operationalization: defining standards;

o operationalization of standards in indicators (measurable values);

o establishing a criterion by which it is possible to judge the achievement of standards,

o data collection and evaluation: data collection; evaluation of results,

o actions: taking appropriate measures, assessing the results of measures taken in accordance with standards.

Monitoring the quality of education can be carried out directly in an educational institution (self-certification, internal monitoring) or through a service external to the educational institution, approved, as a rule, by government bodies (external monitoring).

When forming educational standards, it is advisable to be guided by a pluralistic vision of the content and purpose of the standards (both standards for the content of education and standards for the final result achieved by students). Standards related to the conditions ensuring the successful implementation of standards are defined as standards for ensuring the “process” of education. An example of such standards is the availability of the required number of textbooks and qualified teachers, appropriate material and technical support for the educational process, etc.

Thus, education is supposed to be assessed as the result and process of the activities of each educational institution from the side of monitoring the level of knowledge and skills of students (at the same time by the teaching staff and external, state agencies), and from the side of control and evaluation of the activities of teachers.

We will talk specifically about quality control of education as control of knowledge acquisition on the part of teachers. Let's just say a few words about assessment of teaching staff performance.

There is no doubt that there is a connection between the educational level of the teacher and the results achieved by his students; Moreover, this is the easiest, most simplified and at the same time dangerous way to determine the suitability of a teacher for a position. It is necessary to take into account that teachers and educational institutions are just an element of the educational system, and quite possibly not the most influential among many others on which a student’s educational achievements depend. Therefore, when understanding the need to evaluate a teacher’s performance to control the quality of education, it is important to remember that this element has less influence on academic and educational achievements than the family environment or individual characteristics of the student (inclinations, motivation, etc.).

Quality does not appear suddenly. It needs to be planned. Education quality planning associated with the development of a long-term direction for the activities of an educational institution. Strong strategic planning is one of the most important factors for the success of any institution in the educational system.

The leading goals of strategic planning are determined not only by the development of a general development plan for an educational institution for a certain time period, but also by understanding and reviewing the main directions of educational services provided by a given educational institution, and their compliance with consumer needs and forecasting the development of society in the near and distant future.

Issues to discuss:

1. Absolute and relative concepts of quality.

2. Features of assessing the quality of education.

Relevance

The increasing role of education in social progress and the resulting increase in requirements for its quality determine the relevance of implementing a set of measures related to the creation of education quality management systems. The creation of education quality management systems, built primarily on the basis of monitoring the achievements of students and standardizing the content of education, does not produce visible results in improving the quality of education and the efficiency of educational institutions. As a consequence of this, not only among educational leaders and academic researchers, but also among the general public, an opinion began to form that without improving the quality of teaching, it is impossible to achieve high quality educational results. In this regard, one of the promising areas of educational management is the introduction of a rational system for assessing the performance of personnel in the field of education.

Analysis of a number of domestic and foreign publications makes it possible to identify the most typical shortcomings of methods for assessing teaching activity. The most characteristic drawback of the methods we studied is the predominant qualitative nature of the indicators proposed for evaluation. Undoubtedly, complete formalization of indicators characterizing the quality of teaching is impossible; in creative activity, which includes the activity of a teacher, non-formalizable aspects are too strong. However, in any case, it is necessary to strive for the possibility of presenting the assessed indicators in the form of objective quantitative data, using substitution procedures, group expert assessment, etc. Otherwise, we will inevitably encounter justified criticism of the subjectivity of the assessment given to the teacher by the evaluator based on personal preferences, with the vagueness of the formulation of assessment criteria such as “actively introduces into the educational process...”, “shows high qualities when conducting classes...”, etc., which is sometimes the problem with certain methods.

In contrast to the disadvantage noted above, a number of methods are overly “formalized”. Their authors try to represent any act of activity of a teacher as a mathematical formula, and the more creativity is manifested in it, the more complex, in their opinion, the formula should be. One of the weaknesses of this approach is generated by the assumption that the overall assessment of a teacher’s activity is determined only by the quantitative characteristics of its components. This assumption is quite strict and does not quite adequately reflect reality. Such important points as lecture skills, the value of scientific and methodological publications, individual style of activity, etc. are excluded from consideration. True, these methods provide for the possibility of some compensation for this shortcoming by granting evaluators the right to award “incentive points” for the high professional quality of the teacher’s work. However, this only mitigates and does not eliminate this disadvantage. In some cases, it is proposed to evaluate only those elements of activity that can clearly be measured quantitatively, and the final result is determined only on the basis of these partial indicators, which do not cover the entire range of the teacher’s activities. This also does not allow us to obtain an objective, comprehensive assessment of the teacher’s activities. Therefore, the practical use of mathematical models should not cancel, but, on the contrary, presuppose the use of traditional methods of assessment, and the developed methods should be based on a rational combination of quantitative and qualitative indicators.

Another significant drawback of the methods is that the assessment does not take into account the value (axiological) aspect of the assessment. In them, all types of teacher activities and individual indicators within types are assumed to be equivalent, and generalized assessments and the final assessment of the teacher’s activity are calculated as the arithmetic mean of assessments of individual indicators.

The presence of such a significant number of different methods indicates, on the one hand, the unconditional recognition by the management of educational authorities and educational institutions, the pedagogical community of the need to introduce into practice a system for assessing the performance of teachers, and, on the other hand, indicates the absence of uniform approaches to its content and organization .

An analysis of the sociocultural situation, the state and prospects for the development of the educational services market in the country, the requests of parents and students led to the conclusion that the problem of developing theoretical foundations and methodological recommendations for diagnosing professional teaching activities of personnel has acquired particular relevance and significance due to the following circumstances.

Firstly, this is due to the reform of the education system. Introduction of a new remuneration system (per capita financing and incentive remuneration), which entails the development of uniform criteria for assessing teaching activities.

Secondly, the processes of democratization of society have led, in particular in the field of education, to the abandonment of rigid dogmatic schemes, the emergence of textbooks and teaching aids that reflect the diverse opinions of authors, sometimes diametrically opposed scientific positions. Professional competence of personnel in the context of the existence of pluralism of opinions is an urgent requirement of modern management in education.

Thirdly, the elimination of the ideological monopoly in society actually destroyed the previously existing system of ideals and social values that occupied an important place in the process of educating the younger generation. Filling the resulting gap is impossible without proper, often unconventional, pedagogical innovations.

Fourthly, the process of active introduction of modern information technologies into education has begun, which is in demand by society. In this regard, the problem of mastering computer technologies and their application in practice by middle- and older-generation personnel has arisen.

Fifthly, the realities of the world around us have changed, society itself is changing. This must be taken into account in the psychological process aimed at adapting personnel to modern social conditions. And here there is the problem of reorienting previous goals, objectives, methods of education and upbringing, which, in turn, is associated with changing the criteria for assessing teaching activity.

In connection with the above, it is necessary to solve the problem of adequately assessing the level of professional activity of a teacher. It seems necessary to develop an assessment model and tools that will make it comprehensive, as objective as possible, covering all stages of a teacher’s work. This model, on the one hand, will give school administrations an effective tool for making management decisions, and on the other, will provide social protection for teachers.

Analysis of the initial situation

...Quality management in a school begins with working with a person and, above all, with a teacher, and ends with working with personnel and improving their professional level. There are no other ways... (Yu.A. Konarzhevsky)

This academic year, the pedagogical process at MBOU “Secondary School No. 20” was carried out by 62 teachers.

One of the main factors in ensuring the quality of the educational process is both the effective activity of the teacher and the teaching staff as a whole. Therefore, the school creates conditions for the implementation of the personal functions of a teacher, to increase the level of his professional self-development and readiness for innovation. In order to effectively manage the system for improving the professional growth of teachers, the following types of monitoring are carried out:

monitoring of professional competence;
teachers' readiness to use modern educational technologies;
readiness of the teaching staff for innovative activities;
monitoring the influence of factors that stimulate and hinder teacher development, etc.

However, the current practice is far from perfect, since it does not have clear criteria and there is no unified system for assessing the activities of teachers. Therefore, the goal of our work in this area is to create a mechanism for assessing the professional skills of a teacher as a means of improving the quality of school education.

Object of study: assessment of the quality of a teacher’s work.

Subject of study: indicators, criteria, indicators for assessing the quality of teaching work in accordance with the Federal State Educational Standard and NSET.

Target: development of a model for assessing the activities of a teacher in accordance with the second generation Federal State Educational Standard and NSET.

Tasks:

conduct an analysis of the theoretical and methodological conceptual provisions of the system for assessing professional teaching activities;
determine the structure of the system and process of diagnosing professional pedagogical activity;
theoretically and experimentally substantiate the indicators and criteria for assessing the professionalism of personnel, develop recommendations for their implementation in practice;
introduce the results of the experiment into the educational practice of the school;
conduct an examination of the effectiveness of the developed model for assessing professional teaching activities.

Resource support.

Good material and technical base of the school.
Qualified teaching staff of the educational institution.
Sufficient educational and methodological support for the educational process.

Restrictions:

Inertia of the teaching staff.
Manifestations of “emotional burnout” syndrome.
Psychophysiological changes and deterioration in the health status of teachers.
Development of professionally undesirable qualities that negatively affect productive professional activity.
An insufficiently thought-out system for motivating school teaching staff.

Planned results:

Improving the quality of educational services, and as a result, the quality of education at school.
Increasing the positional and value component of the teacher’s general professional competence in relation to the psychological and pedagogical knowledge and skills that underlie the individualization of education.
The system for assessing the quality of teachers' activities reaches the level of stable effective functioning.

Implementation stages

I. Organizational

Studying the state of the problem in the theory and practice of school.
Analysis of psychological and pedagogical literature and literature on organizational management.

II. Practical

Selection of evaluation criteria and their justification.
Development of diagnostic tools for assessing teaching activities.
Approbation of the model.
Creating recommendations for implementing the model.
The results of the implementation of an innovative project are monitored through a monitoring system, diagnostic sections, and testing.

III. Generalizing

Verification, processing and evaluation of research results.
Implementation of the experiment results into school educational practice.
Generalization, systematization, description of the results obtained

Event plan

No.		date	Responsible
	Organization of the work of the creative group.	September
	Familiarization with regulatory documents on NSOT	September
	Studying the state of the problem in the theory and practice of school. Analysis of psychological and pedagogical literature and literature on organizational management.	September
	Development of the conceptual apparatus of the research program.	September
	Development of the content of a model for assessing teaching activities.	September
	Development of a regulatory framework accompanying the project’s activities.
	Development and testing of a mechanism for distributing incentive payroll funds for teachers	September-November
	Selection of evaluation criteria and their justification. Development of diagnostic tools for assessing teaching activities
	Monitoring the composition of the teaching staff.	September, November
	Monitoring the influence of factors that stimulate and hinder the development of a teacher, etc.
	Monitoring the pedagogical activity of the teacher according to selected criteria and indicators.	January February March April May
	Conducting an examination of the effectiveness of the developed model for assessing professional teaching activities.	January, May