КРИТЕРИИ ТРУДНОСТИ ОБРАЗОВАТЕЛЬНОГО СТАНДАРТА

  • Published on
    04-Apr-2017

  • View
    213

  • Download
    1

Embed Size (px)

Transcript

<ul><li><p> 4, 2004 </p><p>39</p><p> *</p><p>.. , </p><p> , , , , . , , . - , .</p><p>The methodology of calculation of difficulty of the educational standard by means of summation ofparameters of difficulty of tasks, tests, the textual fragments representing this or that discipline or its part isdiscussed. The given methodology allows to evaluate the difficulty of the standard to fractions of percent,which allows to estimate with the specified accuracy conformity of knowledge of pupils to this or that chosenby the state or by an educational establishment level of the educational standard and also allows to compareparameters of difficulty and efficiency levels of education in this country and abroad. The methodologyoffered will allow to get appropriate measuring techniques, and is an effective way of quality management ofeducation.</p><p>* , 04-06-00024.</p><p> -, - , - . -, -. - -, - , , , , , . - - . - , - , - . ( , -</p><p> ) - . - , - , , - - , - - , - .</p><p> ( , ) - , , - .</p><p> ,, , , - - . - , - . , , , - , . - - -, - , </p><p> .. , 2004</p></li><li><p>40</p><p> , - . - , - . - , . , .</p><p> , - , , - , , , , . -. -, - , , - (- ) , , - . , - - .</p><p> , - - - , , . - , - - . - - , - , , , -, , - . - - .</p><p> () - - 1. - - , - . - , () - . , - 4 - 2. - 1 , 1 , 1-. , , , - - . - , - - . , 3. - , , -.</p><p> - () - 4, 5. .</p><p> - -, () ,</p></li><li><p> 4, 2004 </p><p>41</p><p> . - - ( -) -, 1 - 1 - . - - - -6. - -, - . - - , - . - .</p><p> . . - (. 1). , 2 (-), , , 1 2. , - = 18. - 218 = 36, 18. , , 54.</p><p> . 1</p><p> , , -</p><p> , - . , , - - .</p><p> - , , - . . - - - . , . (. 2) = n, , - = 3; n . n = 4, -, = 12.</p><p> . 2</p><p> , . - , - . - 1, 2 .. 2 -, . 3, 1 2. - ( 14) - (4) - (2). 8. 6, - 1. 6. = 14. - . -</p><p> k = 2</p><p>k = 1</p><p>1 </p><p>4 </p><p>3 </p><p>2 </p><p>1 2 3 4 </p></li><li><p>42</p><p> , - , - , 1, , -</p><p>, 9. 14, 72+ 54 =126.</p><p> - , - 3 -. - . -, - . , - (. . 2). -, -. (. .3). -, - . . - .</p><p> - . , . - - -</p><p> . 3</p><p>7, , , , - . . 4 - .</p><p> . 4</p><p> - , - , . -, - 1. - 2 , - k = 2, .. -, , , , - k,</p><p>1 32</p><p>2 3 </p><p>4 </p><p>1 </p></li><li><p> 4, 2004 </p><p>43</p><p> m n.</p><p> = kmn. , </p><p> -, k - 1, :</p><p>T1= </p><p>2= </p><p>3= 6.</p><p> , - 18.</p><p> . - - , - . - . - - .</p><p> - -, -</p><p> - . - - , , - - .</p><p>1 .: - ., . - // . -. 1997. 1. . 8298.</p><p>2 .: .. - - // - . ., 1990. . 155.</p><p>3 .: ., . : ( ).., 1974. . 489491.</p><p>4 .: .., .. - // -. , 1999. . 4. . 104117.</p><p>5 .: .. - // . ,2000. . 5. . 264268.</p><p>6 .: .. - - // . 2003. 4..5659.</p><p>7 .: .. . .,1982. 176 .</p><p> 21.06.04.</p><p> - - </p><p>.. , </p><p> - - . - - , , - . , , - , .</p><p>Synthesis possibilities of the intuitively-descriptive and rational-critical methods of cognition in didacticsare investigated in the paper. Introduction of formalized knowledge of the rational-critical thinking style intothe theory of teaching is explained by the fact that it introduces organition, conclusiveness, and prediction intoscientific knowledge. On the basis of some finite conceptions of mathematics generalised basis of systemdescriptions giving an opportunity to single out individual characteristics of investigated objects has beenoffered, this being shown on the example of teachers methodological culture.</p><p> .. , 2004</p></li></ul>