MODERN TOOLS AND TECHNOLOGIES FOR ASSESSING LEARNING OUTCOMES

Abstract

Introduction:the article is devoted to modern methods of learning outcomes assessment. As the authors of the article show, recently the evaluation of learning outcomes is inextricably linked with the quality of education provided by an educational institution. It is noted that today there is no single interpretation of the concept “quality of education”. Due to the introduction of a competence-based approach, graduates now form not just a certain amount of knowledge and skills, but the ability to use it, to apply the experience gained in practice, so modern assessment should be fundamentally new and different from traditional methods. Materials and methods:the article identifies the features of the competency assessment system. The basic provisions of the assessment methodology were established and on their basis we identified the components of the model model of the automated assessment of professional competencies. Identified principles for constructing a competency assessment model Results:the article analyzes the existing modern assessment tools. Among them, the methods characteristic of the authentic approach were singled out, as well as the advantages of using the electronic platform Moodle for the evaluation procedure. A new system for assessing the quality of the educational process, a point-rating system for evaluating the results of the work of the trainer, is being considered. Discussion and Conclusions: The article discusses existing tools and technologies for assessing learning outcomes, which have many advantages and their combined use makes it possible to simplify the assessment process as much as possible, to make it more convenient and intensive. The proposed recommendations for the evaluation of educational results favor not only the correct assessment of the results of the educational process, but also the ongoing monitoring of the development of professional competencies.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 61 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.