Technology of multilevel interuniversity indicators as a factor for increasing academic mobility. Experience based on Russian federal educational standards

Автор: Snegurenko Alexander P., Zaydullin Sergey S., Novikova Svetlana V., Valitova Natalia L., Kremleva Elmira S.

Журнал: Интеграция образования @edumag-mrsu

Рубрика: Академическая интеграция

Статья в выпуске: 1 (106), 2022 года.

Бесплатный доступ

Introduction. At the present time, more and more students are changing either their field of study or the university in the process of studying. This raises the problem of how to determine whether a student's level of knowledge meets the host institution's criteria. A simple comparison of competencies is not enough. Therefore, the authors propose a new system of comparing existing and required knowledge (competencies) at the new place of study. The purpose of this article is to present the results of research on the development and practical application of specific “competency trees” that allow for the automatic comparison and re-crediting of disciplines. Materials and Methods. The research is based on the methods of system analysis for weakly formalized problems: the method of expert evaluations and the method of the goal tree. For direct development the method of construction of binary decision trees was used. To evaluate the effectiveness of the developed method, methods of observation and comparison were used. Results. This article describes the specific steps for creating checklists based on multilevel competency indicator trees. The tables describe the four levels of competency acquisition. Based on the experiments carried out on the use of such tables for retake disciplines when transferring a student from one specialty to another, the following recommendations are made: if it is necessary to obtain a mark of the “Test” type in the Host University, the comparison is made according to the second level indicators; if it is necessary to obtain a mark of the type “Graded test/Test with a grade” in the Host University, the comparison is made according to the third level indicators; if it is necessary to obtain a mark of the “Exam” type in the Host University, the comparison is made according to the indicators of the deepest level for this indicator of the first level. The technique has been successfully tested for moving of a student within Kazan National Research Technical University named after A. N. Tupolev-KAI between the academic programs Aircraft Engineering and Applied Mathematics and Informatics. Discussion and Conclusion. The proposed multilevel system of interuniversity indicators will significantly simplify the procedure for transferring subjects for students who are moved from one study program to another at any level - whether within one university, or between different universities of the Russian Federation. The use of an automated system for comparing the level of knowledge of a student when moving from one university to another will not only reduce the time of a student and teachers, but also eliminate the human factor, bias and subjectivity in the process of making decisions about transferring, and increase the transparency of this process. All this together will contribute to the development of academic mobility of students, increasing their competitiveness in the labor market and strengthening academic interuniversity relationships both in Russia and abroad.

Еще

Interuniversity indicators, multilevel competences, competence tree, academic mobility, professional competences, educational standards

Короткий адрес: https://sciup.org/147237277

IDR: 147237277

Текст научной статьи Technology of multilevel interuniversity indicators as a factor for increasing academic mobility. Experience based on Russian federal educational standards

Academic mobility has become a characteristic feature of modern higher education. The mobility of students from one university to another, both nationally and internationally, is becoming commonplace. This trend, of course, carries many positive aspects, increasing the competitiveness of the students themselves, and providing the dynamically changing needs of the modern labor mar-ket1 [1]. However, this sets new goals and objectives for higher education institutions, which were not relevant before Russia joined the Bologna process [2; 3].

Specialists of higher education know that the same educational programs in different universities are provided at times with a completely different set of studied modules [4; 5]. When moving from one university to another, even at the level of one region and within one study program, a student must, as it is commonly called, “cover the difference in plans” – what means that the student retakes at the host university those disciplines that he/she “has not studied” earlier. At the same time, the content of the module does not make a difference. If the name of the module is not included in the home university curriculum, this automatically requires that the mobile students have to retake this subject at the host university. Also, a student may find himself/herself in a similar situation if he/she substantially changes his/ her study area moving to the next cycle of higher education, e.g. the postgraduate program , but some specific competencies have already been mastered by him/her during the undergraduate program [6; 7].

Even within the one university, the process of transition between related subject areas is associated with the need to retake a number of modules, often essentially identical. Let us give a typical example. KNRTU-KAI is a technical university that educates engineers for high-tech industries and the IT industry. In particular, education is underway in such undergraduate programs as Aircraft Engineering (subject area code 24.03.04), and Applied Mathematics and Informatics (subject area code 01.03.02), whose curricula are available on the university website2. According to the ideology of intra-university mobility implemented over the past 5 years, the curricula are built in such a way that during the first two years of study (Semesters 1-4), students have the opportunity to change the study program to another one, if budget places are available. Both of these subject areas require a strong mathematical background at the initial stage of training.

On the first program (24.03.04), within the framework of professional activity, specialists will build aircraft (Aviation Engineering), on the second (01.03.02), specialists will develop software (Software Engineering).

So, for the subject area 24.03.04, this is a three-semester course of Higher Mathematics, which includes such branches as Linear Algebra and Analytical Geometry, Mathematical Analysis, Differential Equations, Probability Theory and Mathematical Statistics, Equations of Mathematical Physics (Semester No. 1-3, Total Workload is 18 Credit Points)3. Within the framework of the subject area 01.03.02, students receive the same competencies from a wider set of disciplines. Some courses are studied separately, e.g. Linear Algebra and Analytical Geometry (Semester No. 1, 4 Cr. Points), Mathematical Analysis I-II-III (Semester No. 1-3, 16 Cr. Points), Differential Equations added with elements of equations of mathematical physics (Semester No. 4, 5 Cr. Points), Probability Theory and Mathematical Statistics (Semester No. 3-4, 7 Cr. Points)4.

Even with a superficial comparison of the mathematical blocks of these two directions, a number of logical conclusions that are understandable to any teacher can be drawn:

– Despite the different names, the modules cover the same branches of Mathematics, and form essentially the same general professional competences called OPK-1 in the corresponding Federal State Educational Standard of Higher Education, which is also confirmed by the similarity of indicators for achieving these competencies. For example, for the disciplines of the theoretical mathematical block5, and for the block of computational mathematical disciplines6;

– Depth of mastering the branches in this two programs, however, is different, which is easy to see from the almost two-fold difference in the number of credits allocated for mastering the module7;

– Students wishing to change the area of future professional activity from Software Engineering to Aviation Engineering, almost completely cover the mathematical block of the receiving subject area, and they do not need to retake the module “Higher Mathematics”. This is explained by the complete alignment of the studied list of modules of the mathematical block for 01.03.02 subject area with the list of mathematical block for 24.03.04 subject area, while the workload of the mathematical block in the first program significantly exceeds the workload of the similar block in the second program;

– At first glance, students who change their activity from Aviation Engineering to Software Engineering also do not need to retake a number of modules of the receiving subject area, as they studied them as part of the generalized course of Higher Mathematics. However, due to the smaller number of hours allocated for each branch of Mathematics, the full mastery by the student of the competencies in accordance with the academic program of 01.03.02 subject area is not obvious and requires an in-depth study of this issue.

According to current practice, students of both directions, when changing their programs of study, are required to retake a full list of modules with clearly distinct names. This approach requires a lot of additional time from both the students and the teachers of the receiving subject area, which complicates the already difficult period of adaptation of the student to the new requirements and learning conditions on the one hand, and takes a lot of the teacherʼs time on the other.

The solution to the problem can be the creation of a system of multilevel indicators reflecting the mastering of certain clearly defined professional competencies. The indicators of the upper level will reflect the mastery of some sections of knowledge in general, with a decrease in the levels, the more precise details will be made. Thus, a tree of indicators, or competencies, will be built for each subject area. Each course studied within the framework of the academic program should be equipped with a similar tree, which will allow, when moving a student, to compare the levels of mastering competencies at a given level, and to reevaluate as a whole according to the mastered part of the curriculum without reference to the name of a specific module. This will significantly simplify the process of students’ mobility between subject areas within one university, as well as from one university to another.

Список литературы Technology of multilevel interuniversity indicators as a factor for increasing academic mobility. Experience based on Russian federal educational standards

  • Lauder H., Mayhew K. Higher Education and the Labour Market: An Introduction. Oxford Review of Education. 2020; 46(1):1-9. (In Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2019.1699714
  • Romashov R.A., Lipinsky D.A., Musatkina A.A., Rakova E.G., Revina S.N. Bologna Process as a Factor of Integration of Educational Systems of Russia and the West. Laplage em Revista (International). 2021; 7(3D):35-42. (In Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.24115/S2446-6220202173D1688p.35-42
  • Kwiek M. The Emergent European Educational Policies under Scrutiny: the Bologna Process from a Central European Perspective. European Educational Research Journal. 2004; 3(4):759-776. (In Eng.) doi: http:// dx.doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2004.3.4.3
  • Krücken G., Mishra S., Seidenschnur T. Theories and Methods in Higher Education Research - a Space of Opportunities. European Journal of Higher Education. 2021; 11(1):461-467. (In Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10. 1080/21568235.2021.2004905
  • Grebnev L. The Quality of Teaching in Different Higher Educations. Higher Education in Russia and Beyond. 2021; (4):8-10. Available at: https://herb.hse.ru/data/2021/11/30/1451210582/1HERB_29_print%20(1). pdf#page=8 (accessed 01.08.2021). (In Eng.)
  • Löpez-Duarte C., Maley J., Vidal-Suarez M. Main Challenges to International Student Mobility in the European Arena. Scientometrics. 2021; 126:8957-8980. (In Eng.) doi: http://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04155-y
  • Dekhnich O.V., Lyutova O.V., Trubitsyn M.A., Danilova E.S. More International Students Coming to Russia: Pros and Cons. Integratsiya obrazovaniya = Integration of Education. 2021; 25(2):244-256. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.15507/1991-9468.103.025.202102.244-256
  • Prakhova M.U., Svetlakova S.V., Zaichenko N. V., Khoroshavina E. A., Krasnov A.N. The Conception of Point-Rating System for Assessment of Students' Educational Results. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. 2016; (3):17-25. https://vovr.elpub.ru/jour/article/view/486/436 (accessed 01.08.2021). (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)
  • Dvulichanskaya N., Ermolaeva V. The Role of Point-Rating System of Learning Outcomes Assessment in Implementing the Federal State Educational Standard of Higher Professional Education. Standarty i monitoring v obrazovanii = Standards and Monitoring in Education. 2015; 3(4):3-7. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.) doi: https:// doi.org/10.12737/12923
  • Syromyasov A.O. Application of the System of Assessment based on Points at a Institution of Higher Education. Integratsiya obrazovaniya = Integration of Education. 2013; (2):15-21. Available at: http://edumag. mrsu.ru/content/pdf/13-2.pdf (accessed 01.08.2021). (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)
  • Gugina E., Kuzenkov O. Educational Standards of the Lobachevsky State University of Nizhni Novgorod. Vestnik Nizhegorodskogo universiteta im. N.I. Lobachevskogo = Vestnik of Lobachevsky University of Nizhni Novgorod. 2014; (3):39-44. Available at: http://www.unn.ru/pages/e-library/vestnik/19931778_2014_-_3-4_ unicode/7.pdf (accessed 01.08.2021). (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)
  • Velichová D., Gustafsson T. Special issue: Contributions from the SEFI Working Group on Mathematics Conference 2016. Teaching Mathematics and its Applications: An International Journal of the IMA. 2017; 36(2):65-66. (In Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/teamat/hrx010
  • Kuzenkov O.A., Zakharova I.V. Mathematical Programs Modernization Based on Russian and International Standards. Modern Information Technologies and IT-Education. 2018; 14(1):233-244. (In Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.25559/SITIT0.14.201801.233-244
  • Guerrero D., De los Ríos I. Professional Competences: a Classification of International Models. Procedia -Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2012; 46:1290-1296. (In Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.290
  • Dall'alba G., Sandberg J. Educating for Competence in Professional Practice. Instructional Science. 1996; 24:411-437. (In Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00125578
  • Lebedeva T., Okhotnikova N., Potapova E. Electronic Educational Environment of High School: The Requirements, Capabilities, Experience and Perspectives of Application. Mir nauki. Pedagogika i psikhologiya = World of Science. Pedagogy and Psychology. 2016; 4(2). Available at: https://mir-nauki.com/PDF/57PDMN216.pdf (accessed 01.08.2021). (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)
  • Medvedeva O.N., Suponev N.P., Soldatenko I.S., Zakharova I.V., Yazenin A.V. [On the Electronic Educational Environment and the System for Assessing the Quality of Educational Activities at Tver State University]. Obrazovatelnye tekhnologii i obshchestvo = Educational Technology & Society. 2014; 17(4):610-624. Available at: https://readera.org/ob-jelektronnoj-obrazovatelnoj-srede-i-sisteme-ocenki-kachestva-obrazovatelnoj-14062576 (accessed 01.08.2021). (In Russ.)
  • Kraleva R.S., Kralev V.S., Sinyagina N., Koprinkova-Hristova P., Bocheva N. Design and Analysis of a Relational Database for Behavioral Experiments Data Processing. International Journal of Online and Biomedical Engineering. 2018; 14(02):117-132. (In Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.3991/ijoe.v14i02.7988
  • Dangerfield B.J., Morris J.S. Relational Database Management Systems: A New Tool for Coding and Classification. International Journal of Operations & Production Management. 1991; 11(5):47-56. (In Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/01443579110143449
  • Oka H., Yoshizawa A., Shindo H., Matsumoto Y., Ishii M. Machine Extraction of Polymer Data from Tables Using XML Versions of Scientific Articles. Science and Technology of Advanced Materials: Methods. 2021; 1(1):12-23. (In Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/27660400.2021.1899456
  • Murray-Rust P., Rzepa H.S. Scientific Publications in XML - Towards a Global Knowledge Base. Data Science Journal. 2006; 1(1):84-98. Available at: https://datascience.codata.org/articles/abstract/182 (accessed 01.08.2021). (In Eng.)
  • Grune D., Jacobs C.J.H. Parsing as Intersection. In: Grune D., Jacobs C.J.H. (eds.) Monographs in Computer Science. New York: Springer; 2008. p. 425-442 (In Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-68954-8_13
  • Sun Z., Wang R., Luo Z. Polynomial Approximation Based Spectral Dual Graph Convolution for Scene Parsing and Segmentation. Neurocomputing. 2021; 438:133-144. (In Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2021.01.002
  • Leroy G., Chen H., Martinez J.D. A Shallow Parser Based on Closed-Class Words to Capture Relations in Biomedical Text. Journal of Biomedical Informatics. 2003; 36(3):145-158. (In Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/ S1532-0464(03)00039-X
  • Bedny A., Erushkina L., Kuzenkov O., Modernising Educational Programmes in ICT Based on the Tuning Methodology. Tuning Journal for Higher Education. 2014; 1(2):387-404. (In Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.18543/ tjhe-1(2)-2014pp387-404
  • Haas C., Hadjar A. Students' Trajectories Through Higher Education: A Review of Quantitative Research. Higher Education. 2020; 79:1099-1118. (In Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-019-00458-5
  • Shulruf B., Tumen S., Hattie J. Student Pathways in a New Zealand Polytechnic: Key Factors for Completion. International Journal of Vocational and Technical Education. 2010; 1(4):67-74. Available at: https://citeseerx. ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.1008.4433&rep=rep1&type=pdf (accessed 01.08.2021). (In Eng.)
Еще
Статья научная