Brs spbgeu current rating full-time 4g. Point-rating system. The point-rating system can provoke conflict situations, create an unhealthy atmosphere in the student group, and do not stimulate the individualization of learning, but encourage individualization

Question: Hello, Ekaterina Gennadievna!

My appeal is related to the introduction at the Faculty of Economics of the University of a system for recording academic progress based on compiling a ranking of points. On this moment We have a grading system in accordance with the scoring set by each teacher, and this has a number of disadvantages:

1. Firstly, this leads to the teacher’s subjectivity in assessing the student’s knowledge. Everyone knows about the massive expulsions of students from the Faculty of Economics due to failure to pass the “Enterprise Economics” discipline, because the established thresholds for passing the exam, if they are not lowered, allow only some to receive “excellent” and “good” grades, because Only a few get the corresponding points. Moreover, appealing to this specific example, I want to say that such a system, in my opinion, does not reflect the student’s true knowledge of the discipline: for example, very little time is given, and the volume (theoretical and calculation parts) is considerable, and therefore many simply There is not enough time to complete tasks. EP is, of course, far from the only example.

2. Secondly, this does not stimulate competition between students and motivation to learn, because everyone, knowing the existing thresholds and points, simply strives to get into the area that corresponds to a certain assessment.

The introduction of a point-rating system for recording academic performance, as far as I know, was successfully carried out at GSOM. There, a rating is compiled based on the results of passing the exam, the first 25% receive “excellent”, the second 50% “good”, the third 25% - “ud”, and the same principle applies to the ECTS “letters”: the first 10% - A, the second 20-V and so on.

This system, in my opinion, would find EXCELLENT application at the Faculty of Economics, because:
1. Firstly, our bachelor’s programs are very similar in structure, hours, and, in principle, similar in organization;
2. Secondly, this will deprive teachers of subjectivity, and the assessment of knowledge will be based on the existing performance rating. After all, it is more objective to judge what someone has " excellent knowledge", and for some - "Good" in comparison with the existing "background", that is, in comparison, in which, as we know, everything is learned, rather than being based on the existing subjective criteria of each teacher;
3. Thirdly, it motivates students to compete, to want to be the best and leaders. We must not forget that an economist is not just a person with a “crust” who will then go to work at MaxiDom as an accountant, but a highly qualified and versatile specialist who has mastered an entire field of knowledge, systematized it and is able to apply it to solve a number of problems, including leadership and governance issues.
I would really like your help in introducing such a system, it would be appropriate, and I think most students will support it, because... she is reasonable and logical.
Sincerely,
Vsevolod Kotenev
MEOiMB-31, Faculty of Economics.

Answer from the First Vice-Rector for Academic, Extracurricular and Educational-Methodological Work of St. Petersburg State University Ekaterina Gennadievna Babelyuk: Dear Vsevolod Sergeevich!

The point-rating assessment system is used for a large number of students when the rule of uniform distribution works. Implemented in St. Petersburg state university(hereinafter referred to as St. Petersburg State University) assessment system, it is clarified that the rating scale is used if the number of students who received a positive final grade (i.e. more than 50 points, which is also predetermined) is more than 30 people.

Education at St. Petersburg State University is carried out not at faculties, but according to basic and additional educational programs. The methodology for conducting ongoing monitoring and intermediate certification in the disciplines of the curriculum is contained in work programs, the developers of which are scientific and pedagogical workers. These methods are approved after appropriate educational and methodological examinations in the manner established by St. Petersburg State University annually. At the moment, all work programs for the current academic year have been approved; St. Petersburg State University does not see any objective reasons for making changes to them.

For information, we inform you that according to the results of a survey of students conducted in April-May 2015, on the question “A teacher objectively evaluates students’ knowledge,” the average value for St. Petersburg State University as a whole is 3.663, according to Faculty of Economics- 3.618, at the Higher School of Management - 3.514.

The selection of tools and methods for assessing the achievements of students at St. Petersburg State University is constantly being improved. You can get involved in working on this, and, like any university student, (see clause 1.6 of the Fundamentals of the Organization of Educational and Methodological Commissions, approved by Order No. 75/1 of January 17, 2014) take part in meetings of the educational and methodological commission. Your suggestions will certainly be considered and, taking into account the opinions of experts, used in the development educational materials. St. Petersburg State University thanks you for your active participation and initiative.

Today, the main task facing the country's universities is to improve the quality of education. One of the key areas in solving this problem is the need to switch to new standards. In accordance with them, a clear ratio of the number of hours for independent and classroom work is established. This, in turn, required the revision and creation of new forms of control. One of the innovations was a point-rating system for assessing students' knowledge. Let's take a closer look at it.

Purpose

The essence of the point-rating system is to determine the success and quality of mastering a discipline through certain indicators. The complexity of a specific subject and the entire program as a whole is measured in credit units. The rating is a certain numerical value, which is expressed in a multi-point system. It integrally characterizes students’ performance and their participation in research work within a particular discipline. The point-rating system is considered as an essential part of quality control activities educational work Institute.

Advantages

Implications for Educators

1. Plan the educational process in a specific discipline in detail and stimulate the constant activity of students.
2. Timely adjust the program in accordance with the results of control measures.
3. Objectively determine final grades in disciplines, taking into account systematic activities.
4. Provide gradation of indicators in comparison with traditional forms of control.

Implications for students

Selection of criteria

1. Implementation of the program in terms of practical, lecture, and laboratory classes.
2. Execution of extracurricular and classroom written and other works.

The timing and number of control events, as well as the number of points allocated for each of them, are established by the leading teacher. The teacher responsible for monitoring must inform students about the criteria for their certification at the first lesson.

Structure

The point-rating system involves calculating the results obtained by the student for all types of educational activities. In particular, attendance at lectures, writing tests, performing standard calculations, etc. So, for example, the overall result at the Department of Chemistry can consist of the following indicators:

Additional items

The point-rating system provides for the introduction of fines and incentives for students. Teachers will inform you about these additional elements during the first lesson. Fines are provided for violations of the requirements for the preparation and execution of abstracts, untimely submission of standard calculations, laboratory works etc. At the end of the course, the teacher can reward students by adding additional points to the number of points scored.

Conversion to academic grades

It is carried out according to a special scale. It may include the following limits:

Another variant

The total number of points also depends on the level of labor intensity of the discipline (on the size of the loan). The point-rating system can be presented as follows:

Point-rating system: pros and cons

The positive aspects of this form of control are obvious. First of all, active presence at seminars and participation in conferences will not go unnoticed. The student will be awarded points for this activity. In addition, a student who scores a certain number of points will be able to receive automatic credit in the discipline. Attendance at the lectures themselves will also count. The disadvantages of the point-rating system are as follows:

Conclusion

Control occupies a key place in the point-rating system. It provides for end-to-end certification in all disciplines within the curriculum. As a result, the student is assigned a rating score, which, in turn, depends on the degree of preparedness. The advantage of using this form of control is to ensure its information transparency and openness. This allows students to compare their results with those of their peers. Control and assessment of educational achievements acts as the most important element educational process. They must be carried out systematically throughout the semester and throughout the year. For this purpose, ratings of students in the group and on the course in specific disciplines are formed, and intra-semester and final indicators for a certain period are displayed.

The introduction of a point-rating system is part of the “Bolonization” of Russian education - the artificial imposition of Western standards under the auspices of the Bologna process, a manifestation of bureaucratization and commercialization of higher education, a clear example of the destruction of the Soviet model of education, which has proven its high efficiency

This very common belief is vulnerable for at least three reasons.

Firstly, a strict contrast between the traditions of Soviet pedagogy and the emerging last years educational model is completely incorrect. The essence of the competency-based approach is to give the learning process a pronounced activity-based character with a personality-oriented and practice-oriented orientation. In this capacity, the competency-based model represents the most consistent embodiment of the idea of ​​developmental education, which was also significant for Soviet pedagogy (suffice it to recall the famous school of D.B. Elkonin - V.V. Davydov, which began to take shape precisely during the period when in the USA research by N. Chomsky and the concept of competency-based training was first introduced). Another thing is that within the framework of the Soviet school such developments remained at the level of “ experimental work", and in modern conditions The transition to developmental education requires breaking the professional stereotypes of many teachers.

Secondly, one should take into account the fact that the Soviet model of education experienced the peak of its development in the 1960s and 1970s. and was absolutely adequate to the social, intellectual and psychological state of the society of that time, technological conditions and tasks economic development that time. Is it correct to compare it with the problems of the education system that emerged half a century later in a society that is experiencing complex social metamorphoses and deep psychological stress, has a vague idea of ​​the ways and prospects of its development, but at the same time is faced with the need for a new breakthrough in “catch-up modernization” under the slogan of innovation? Nostalgia for conceptual harmony, methodological orderliness, meaningful consistency, psychological comfort Soviet education easily explainable from the point of view of the sentiments of the teaching community, but it is unproductive in dialogue with the generation born in the conditions of the information revolution and globalization. It is important to understand that modern pedagogical innovations, including the transition to a point-rating system, do not destroy the Soviet model of education - it has become a thing of the past along with Soviet society, although it has still retained many external attributes. Russian higher school it is necessary to create a new educational model, open to the demands of not even today, but tomorrow, capable of mobilizing the creative potential of students and teachers to the maximum extent, ensuring their successful integration into the rapidly changing social reality.

The third aspect of this problem is related to the fact that despite Russia’s participation in the Bologna process, the introduction of a point-rating system in Russian and European universities has completely different priorities. In Europe, the Bologna process is aimed, first of all, at ensuring the openness of the educational space and academic mobility of all its participants. It does not change the fundamentals of the European educational model and is therefore carried out primarily through administrative measures. Of key importance is the implementation of ECTS (European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System) and ECVET (The European Credit system for Vocational Education and Training) - systems for transferring and accumulating credits (credit units), thanks to which the student’s learning results are formalized and can be taken into account when transferring from one university to another, when changing educational programs. Student performance is determined by the national grading scale, but in addition to it, the “ECTS grading scale” is recommended: students studying a particular discipline are statistically divided into seven rating categories (categories from A to E in the proportion of 10%, 25%, 30 %, 25%, 10% are received by students who passed the exam, and categories FX and F are received by students who failed it), so that in the end the student accumulates not only credits, but also rating categories. IN Russian universities such a model is meaningless due to their completely insignificant integration into the European educational space, as well as the absence of any noticeable academic mobility within the country. Therefore, the introduction of a point-rating system in Russia can be expedient and effective only if it is associated not with purely administrative reforms, but with a change in the teaching model itself, and the introduction of competency-based pedagogy technologies.

The use of a point-rating system violates the integrity and logic of the educational process, absurdly changes the ratio of the importance of lectures and practical classes (from the point of view of gaining rating points, lectures turn out to be the most “useless” form academic work), piles up the procedures of “current” and “terminal” control, although at the same time it destroys the classical model of the examination session - a high rating can allow a student not to appear for the exam at all, and his preparation is deprived of systemic control.

Such fears have some basis, but only if we are talking about incorrectly designed rating models, or the inability of the teacher to work under the conditions of the point-rating system. So, for example, if a university, for reasons of “preserving the contingent,” sets a generally mandatory minimum threshold for a satisfactory grade of 30 points out of 100 and the same insignificant point level for “passing,” then losses in the quality of education will be inevitable. But the same negative role can be played by overestimation of rating requirements, when, for example, for an “excellent” grade, at least 90-95 points are required (which means a disproportionate gap with the “good” grade) or mandatory confirmation of an “excellent” grade in the exam, regardless of the number of points accumulated (which is generally absurd from the point of view of the very logic of rating control). Such problems arise, first of all, in cases where the teacher does not see the connection between the design of the rating system and the actual organization of students’ educational activities, or at the department or university level attempts are made to overly formalize the point-rating system, to impose a certain model on it, regardless of the specifics discipline and original teaching methods. If a teacher gets the opportunity to creatively design a rating system within the framework of a university-wide model, but taking into account the characteristics of his discipline, then he is able to maintain the “integrity and logic” of the educational process, and ensure the significance of lecture classes, and achieve a reasonable balance between all forms of control. Moreover, as will be shown below, within the framework of the point-rating system, it is possible to preserve the main parameters of the classical training model, if it does not clearly conflict with the requirements of the Federal State Educational Standard.

The point-rating system formalizes the work of the teacher, including his relationship with students, replaces live communication with essays and tests, forces not only to record every step of the student, but to abandon the ongoing improvement of the teaching system during the semester, involves filling out a huge amount of reporting documentation and permanent mathematical calculations.

Indeed, a significant formalization educational process and control systems are an integral feature of the point-rating system. However, two circumstances must be taken into account. Firstly, formalization should not be an end in itself, but only a tool to ensure the quality of education. Therefore the volume written works, and the intensity of control must be correlated with the didactic and content specifics of the discipline. In addition, the teacher has a very wide choice of forms of control, and correctly used technology for designing a point-rating system may well ensure the priority of oral forms over written ones, creative ones over routine ones, and complex ones over local ones. For example, many teachers express dissatisfaction with the use of written tests, essays, and testing, which do not allow the student to be “heard.” However, this position only indicates that the teacher’s professional tools are very poor or overly traditional - that, for example, students are offered assignments to write essays, rather than creative essays or complex problem-analytic tasks, that “in the old fashioned way” the teacher uses simplified forms of testing instead of multi-level tests with “open-ended” questions and assignments aimed at various forms of intellectual action, that the teacher is not ready to use interactive educational technologies (cases, project presentations, debates, role-playing and business games). In the same way, the situation when some students do not manage to accumulate a sufficient number of points during seminars during the semester does not indicate the “risks” of the rating system, but that the teacher himself does not sufficiently use technologies of group educational and research work in the classroom (allowing them to control the entire composition of students present).

The second circumstance that must be taken into account when discussing the “formalism of the point-rating system” is associated with modern requirements to educational and methodological support. The format of the Work Programs of Academic Disciplines (RPUD), in contrast to the previous Educational and Methodological Complexes (EMC), is not limited to setting common tasks course and detailed description content of the discipline with an attached list of references. The development of the Federal State Educational Standard is a comprehensive design of the educational process, as close as possible to teaching practice. Within the framework of the RPUD, the objectives of the discipline must be linked to the competencies being formed, the competencies are disclosed in the requirements for the level of training of students “at the entrance” and “at the exit” of studying the discipline, knowledge, skills and methods of activity included in the requirements for the level of training must be verifiable using the proposed educational technologies and forms of control, and the fund valuation means The software accompanying the program must provide all of these intended forms of control. If such a system of educational and methodological support is developed with high quality, then integrating a rating plan into it will not be difficult.
As for the inability to promptly make changes to the curriculum of a discipline under the conditions of a point-rating system, this requirement, of course, creates obvious inconvenience for teachers. But it is significant from the point of view of guaranteeing the quality of education. The work program of the academic discipline, the fund of assessment tools and the rating plan must be approved by the department for each academic year before the start of the academic year or at least the semester. All necessary changes must be made based on the results of the implementation of this educational model in the previous year. And during the current academic year, neither working programm, nor the rating plan can be changed - students must receive information about all educational requirements at the beginning of the semester and the teacher does not have the right to change the “rules of the game” until the end of the course. However, within the framework of an already approved rating plan, a teacher can provide himself with a certain “freedom of maneuver” - by introducing options such as “rating bonus” and “rating penalty”, as well as assigning duplicate forms of control (when the rating plan provides for the possibility of transfer certain topics of seminar classes into the format of assignments for independent work, or a certain control event from those planned for the semester is duplicated by a compensating control task from the additional part of the rating plan - this approach is useful when planning forms of educational work that complete the semester and may remain in the event of force majeure not implemented during classroom training).

The point-rating system can provoke conflict situations, create an unhealthy atmosphere in the student group, do not stimulate the individualization of learning, but encourage individualism, the desire to “put a spoke in the wheels” of one’s colleagues.

Such pedagogical situations are possible, but they usually arise due to erroneous actions on the part of the teacher. The competitiveness of the educational process itself is a powerful stimulating factor, especially if it is reinforced with the help of game forms, is implemented openly and is stimulated not only by ratings, but also by an emotional background and moral incentives. Excesses of “individualism” can be easily prevented by making personal rating achievements dependent on the results of team actions. The main condition for students’ adaptation to the point-rating system is its consistency, balance and information openness. All information about the structure of the rating system, the number and timing of control events must be communicated to students during the first week of the semester. In the future, the rating plan of the discipline and the methodological and control-measuring materials necessary for its implementation should be available to students in a convenient form, and information about the current rating should be communicated to students at least once a month or at their request. In addition, it is important that students know the procedure for resolving controversial situations that arise during the rating assessment: if a student does not agree with the assigned score for a discipline, he can submit an application to the dean to review the results with subsequent consideration of this issue by an appeal commission. If the implementation of the point-rating system is organized in this way, then the possibility of conflict situations will be minimal.

The point-rating system improves the quality of education through the integrated use of all forms of classroom and independent work of students and, as a result, ensures a noticeable increase in the level of academic performance, strengthens the reputation of the faculty and the status of specific teachers.

Full-scale and correct implementation of the point-rating system in combination with the use of modern educational technologies and forms of control can really significantly improve the quality of the educational process. However, as it is implemented, a paradoxical trend is observed: with an increase in the quality of education, there is a decrease in the level of student achievement.

There are many reasons for this. The cumulative grade reflects not only the student’s level of learning, but also the total amount of educational work done. Therefore, many students, faced with the need to complete additional tasks to improve their rating, tend to choose a lower final grade. The psychological unpreparedness of many students for the implementation of the point-rating system also has an impact. First of all, this applies to the categories of “excellent” and “C” students. Students who are accustomed to receiving “machines” through regular attendance and active behavior at seminars, in a point-rating system, are faced with the need to confirm the high level of their preparation at each midterm control procedure, and often to complete additional rating tasks to obtain a final grade “ Great". “C” students are deprived of the opportunity to receive an exam grade by convincing the teacher of the “complexity of life circumstances” and promising to “learn everything later.” Students with academic debt find themselves in a particularly difficult situation. Having an "unclosed session" they are forced to spend big time to prepare additional rating tasks (as opposed to the previous practice of “retaking” the exam), which means that they initially find themselves in the role of outsiders in the ranking of disciplines of the new semester that has already begun. Another reason for a decrease in the level of academic performance when introducing a point-rating system may be the teacher’s errors in its design. Typical examples are overestimation of point values ​​for “excellent” and “good” assessments, excessive saturation of control forms (when the established curriculum the complexity of students’ independent work), the lack of methodological explanations regarding the rating tasks being performed and the requirements for their quality. The inconsistency of rating plans of various disciplines can also have a negative impact. For example, if during the session classical exams were planned with a distance of at least three days, then this rule does not apply to midterm rating control events, and the end of each month may turn out to be a time of peak load for students. All such risks are virtually inevitable during the transition phase. Their minimization depends on systematic actions aimed at introducing a new assessment model, conducting regular monitoring of the educational process, and improving the qualifications of teaching staff.

The point-rating system ensures increased motivation of students to master fundamental and professional knowledge, stimulates daily systematic educational work, improves academic discipline, including class attendance, and allows students to move on to building individual educational trajectories.

Such theses are quite fair in their essence and can often be seen as part of university regulations on the point-rating system. However, practical results, as a rule, turn out to be much more modest than expected. And here it is not only the specifics of the transition stage that are affected. The rating system has a deep contradiction. On the one hand, it is one of the elements of the competency-based training model, the implementation of which is associated not only with the conditions of innovative social development and requirements modern market labor, but also the sociocultural consequences of the information revolution - the formation of a generation with developed lateral (“clip”) thinking. Lateral thinking is based on a positive attitude towards the fragmentation and inconsistency of the surrounding reality, the situational logic of decision-making, flexible perception of new information with the reluctance and inability to build it into “big texts” and a “hierarchy of meanings”, increased level infantilism combined with readiness for spontaneous creative activity. A clear example of a “clip” sign culture is the interface of any Internet portal with its fragmentation, plurality, incompleteness, openness to manifestations of spontaneous interest, followed by non-linear movement through a system of hyperlinks. Such virtual “architecture” reflects the characteristics of behavioral reactions, thinking systems, communicative culture generation that grew up in the conditions of the information revolution. It is no coincidence that school textbooks have long lost the aesthetics of “long texts,” and the requirement for a “high level of interactivity” has become key for any educational publications. Meanwhile, pedagogical concept rating is based on the idea of ​​a student who, thanks to the cumulative assessment system, is focused on long-term planning of his actions, rational construction of an “individual educational trajectory”, timely and conscientious completion educational assignments. A small category of students (“excellent students” of the classical type) can quite comfortably adapt to such requirements. But from the point of view of the interests of the “typical” modern student What comes first is the opportunity to “get involved” in the learning process at “different speeds,” to intensify one’s efforts at one time or another, to experience periods of decline in learning activity relatively painlessly, and to choose the most interesting and comfortable learning situations for oneself. Hence the most important qualities The points and rating system are characterized by its flexibility and variability, modular structure rather than academic integrity, maximizing students' learning activity and increasing the formal level of academic performance. The teacher must build an information support system for the discipline in such a way that each student has the opportunity to begin work with a detailed study of the rating plan, familiarization with the full scope of accompanying methodological recommendations, advanced planning of their actions and building “individual educational trajectories" But the teacher must understand that most students will not actually build any “individual educational trajectories” and rating system They will only become seriously interested towards the end of the semester. Therefore, when designing a rating plan, focusing on the algorithm of actions of the “ideal student” (and this is how the maximum 100-point scale is constructed), the teacher must initially include “non-ideal” models of educational behavior in the rating model, including isolating those few units of content and educational situations, which, by increasing their ratings, will become basic and strictly mandatory for all students to master, duplicate them with the help of compensating rating tasks. The complex of compensating rating tasks itself should be excessively broad - it is intended not only to ensure that successful students “gain” a small number of points before the start of the session, but also to organize individual work students who have completely fallen out of the rhythm of the educational process.

The point-rating system will help ensure a more comfortable state for students during the learning process, relieve stress from formalized control procedures, and create a more flexible and convenient schedule for the educational process.

Relieving “examination stress” and providing comfortable conditions for students’ academic work are important tasks of the point-rating system. However, in an effort to ensure flexibility and variability in the educational process, one should not neglect the requirements of the academic discipline. The rating assessment model should not be positioned as a “automatic” system, when “even a C can be obtained without an exam.” And the fact that the teacher is obliged to provide lagging students with the opportunity to compensate for the lack of points additional tasks, cannot be perceived as a reason not to attend classes for two or three months, and then “quickly” catch up during the session. An effective balance between variability and flexibility of rating requirements, on the one hand, and academic discipline, on the other, can be achieved by several tools: firstly, it is important to apply an incentive distribution of points between different types teaching load (those that the teacher considers the most important - be it lectures or control procedures, creative tasks or seminars, must be attractive in terms of points; additional rating tasks should either be inferior in number of points to the tasks of the basic part, or exceed them in labor intensity); secondly, in the basic part of the rating plan, the teacher can record those forms of educational work and control that are mandatory regardless of the number of points scored; thirdly, when checking rating tasks, the teacher must be consistent, including avoiding situations when assignments are checked during the semester high degree demandingness, and during the session and especially after its end - in a “simplified manner”; fourthly, students must be comprehensively informed about the structure of the rating plan and the requirements, and it must be taken into account that it is not enough to convey the relevant information during the first week of the semester - many students are included in the educational process very imposingly and late, and some at this time are still busy with their academic debts for the previous semester, so it is important for the teacher to keep students’ awareness under control and “stimulate” potential outsiders in advance, without waiting for the end of the semester; fifthly, midterm control procedures and regular calculation of the accumulated number of points have a disciplinary effect - it is advisable to structure the work in such a way that the end of each month is perceived by students as a “mini-session” (this is also facilitated by the format of intra-semester reports with four “slices” of accumulated points) .

The point-rating system significantly increases the objectivity of assessment and ensures impartiality on the part of the teacher; the rating does not depend on the nature of the interpersonal relationship between the teacher and the student, which reduces the “corruption risks” of the educational process.

Such settings play an important role in the normal functioning of the point-rating system, but in practice a completely different development of events is possible. The most obvious example is the comparison of the classic exam and the testing of rating tasks. The exam has a strong reputation as a highly subjective testing procedure. Student folklore is full of examples of how a teacher is capable of sophisticatedly “failing” an exam, and recommendations on how to overcome the vigilance of the examiner, with the help of what tricks to bypass the strictness of examination control. But, in reality, the exam format includes a number of mechanisms that increase its objectivity - from the direct relationship between the content of the course and the exam (the exam comprehensively tests knowledge of the main content of the program) to the public nature of the examination procedure (the dialogue between the examiner and the student, as a rule, becomes “ public domain"). The rating system, on the contrary, increases the number of situations when the assessment process is “closed” and highly subjective. The definition of a rating in a wide range of rating points in itself is more subjective than the usual “threes”, “fours” and “fives”. During a classic exam, a student may well find out the criteria for the grade received, but when assigning rating points for a specific task or participation in a specific seminar, teachers in most cases do not explain the reasons for their decision. Thus, the subjectivity of the point-rating system is initially very high. The main way to minimize it is to increase the requirements for educational and methodological support. The teacher must prepare a collection of assessment tools that includes a complete set of educational and test assignments, exactly corresponding to the rating plan indicating their score. It is necessary that the approval of these materials at a department meeting should not be formal, but preceded by an examination - this procedure will help ensure the proper level of requirements. In addition, it is very important that rating tasks are accompanied by methodological comments for students, and in the case of creative and training tasks - examples of their successful implementation. Another effective tool for increasing the objectivity of rating assessment is the development of level scoring criteria for each task. The most effective and comfortable for the teacher is a three-level detailing of the requirements for each task (a kind of analogue of “three”, “four” and “five” with “pros” and “cons”). For example, if an assignment is graded in the range from 1 to 8 points, then the methodological recommendations for students may contain three sets of evaluation criteria, according to which the student can receive for this assignment either from 1 to 2, or from 3 to 5, or from 6 to 8 points. This approach formalizes the assessment procedure, but at the same time sufficiently preserves its flexibility.

The point-rating system simplifies the teacher’s work, since he gets the opportunity not to conduct “full-fledged exams and tests,” and rating tasks can be used from year to year.

Such a judgment cannot be heard from teachers who have at least minimal experience in implementing a point-rating system. It is quite obvious that with the introduction of such a model for organizing the educational process, the load on the teacher increases sharply. Moreover, we are talking not only about the intensity of control procedures. First of all, it is necessary to carry out a huge amount of educational and methodological work related to the design of the rating system, the development of appropriate didactic materials and evaluation tools. And this work is not one-time in nature - a full-fledged and effective rating system is developed at least three to four years in advance, and adjustments have to be made to it annually. When implementing a point-rating system, the teacher is also assigned additional functions for its organizational and information support. Moreover, the need for regular scoring, which is especially confusing for “newbies,” is in fact perhaps the simplest element of this work. As for the lack of “full-fledged exams and tests,” the labor intensity of these forms of control is clearly inferior to the verification of rating tasks. So, for example, if, within the framework of the classical model of the educational process, the teacher met with the student during the exam a maximum of three times (including the examination committee), then when implementing the point-rating system, he is forced to check additional compensating tasks until the student accumulates points for the final "satisfactory" ratings. Thus, the myth about a decrease in the volume of teaching work with the introduction of a point-rating system does not have the slightest basis. However, unfortunately, it often manifests itself in the formation of requirements for labor standards of teaching staff, when, for example, it is considered that the previous total workload of the teacher associated with monitoring independent work students and conducting an exam is comparable to providing a point-rating system. The illogicality of this approach is confirmed by even the simplest mathematical calculations: if, for example, taking an exam in a discipline is estimated at 0.25 hours per student, and checking test assignments provided for in the curriculum (essays, tests, abstracts, projects) is 0.2 –0.3 hours per task, then a rating system with three to four midterm control procedures during the semester and additional rating tasks that students can complete on their own initiative in any quantity (including passing the same exam) more than covers the complexity of the classical model assessment.

It is also worth noting that after the introduction of a point-rating assessment system, the practice of “attendance days” or “contact hours” (when a teacher, in addition to classroom lessons, is required to be present “at the workplace” according to a certain schedule) looks completely illogical. Students submit rating assignments not according to the teacher’s work schedule, but as they are prepared by the students themselves, just as the need for consultations regarding rating assignments arises for students clearly not according to the schedule. Therefore, it is necessary to develop and implement an effective format for advising students and checking their assignments on a remote basis. Unfortunately, the implementation of such a remote form of control is not yet taken into account when calculating the teaching load.

Taking into account all the difficulties that arise during the preparation and implementation of a point-rating system, it is advisable to develop universal models of rating plans and standard forms for describing rating tasks. The use of unified rating schemes will not only ensure required quality educational process, but will also solve the problem of adaptation of students and teaching staff to the new assessment system.

At first glance, the development of a “universal” rating plan model can indeed solve a number of problems associated with the implementation of this new system assessment. In particular, this will avoid obvious mistakes when designing rating plans, simplify the information and organizational support of the point-rating system, unify the requirements for the main forms of control, and ensure a higher level of controllability of the educational process in transition period. However, there are also obvious disadvantages of this approach. First of all, we are talking about the loss of the main advantages of the point-rating system - its flexibility and variability, the ability to take into account the specifics of specific academic disciplines and the peculiarities of the author’s teaching methodology. There is no doubt that those teachers who, due to difficulties in designing rating plans, actively advocate their universalization, will quickly change their position when faced with a “rigid” rating system developed for a completely different didactic model. And the current criticism of the point-rating assessment system is largely due to the fact that teachers do not see the possibility of adapting it to the usual patterns of the educational process. The main reason why the unification of rating plans is inappropriate is that the introduction of this assessment system is not an end in itself. The rating model is designed to consolidate the transition to competency-based learning, expand the scope of application of interactive educational technologies, consolidate the activity-based nature of the educational process, and enhance its personal perception by students and teachers. From this point of view, the independent participation of each teacher in the design of rating plans and the development of their educational and methodological support is the most important form of professional development.

Since the 2008-2009 academic year, our university has introduced a point-rating system for assessing and recording academic performance, which has somewhat changed students’ usual ideas about studying. Surely everyone knows the saying: “Students live cheerfully from session to session...”, then in 2-3 days they learn the subject (with varying degrees of success), pass it and happily forget it. Not everyone, of course, learns this way, but no one will deny that such a practice exists. And one more thing: everyone knows perfectly well that a traditional session exam is in many ways a lottery: you can prepare from time to time during the semester, get a “good” ticket in the exam and get an “excellent” grade. Or, on the contrary, you can work all semester, prepare, go to lectures, read textbooks, but be unlucky in the exam. And if the teacher is in a bad mood on the day of the exam, then complaints about bias, bias, etc. are inevitable. And all because the usual traditional system almost completely does not take into account what is called the student’s current academic work.

In the point-rating system, these shortcomings are compensated. For certain types of work performed by students throughout the semester, points are awarded, a certain number of points are awarded for an exam or test, then all these points are summed up, and a final rating score for the subject is obtained. This score is converted to the traditional grading system.

The final grade in the discipline, which is included in the test report, grade book and, at the end of training, in the diploma appendix, reflects not only the results of passing the exam or test, but also the results of academic work throughout the semester;

In order to objectively evaluate the results of a student’s work, a system of control activities (control points) of various forms and contents is introduced into the educational process, each of which is assessed with a certain number of points (as a rule, control points are colloquia, testing, etc., for successful completion in which the student is not given grades, as before, but points are awarded);

The final control (test/exam) is part of the overall assessment, and the scores for it are part of the final rating, which accumulates while studying the discipline.

ATTENTION: an important condition of the point-rating system is the timely completion of the established types of work. If a test point in a discipline is missed for an unexcused reason or is not passed the first time, then when it is retaken, even if the student answered well, some of the points are deducted.

Thus, in the process of studying the discipline, points are accumulated and a rating is formed, which ultimately shows the student’s performance.

The normative rating is the maximum possible amount of points that a student can score during the period of mastering the discipline. The normative rating of a discipline depends on the duration of mastering the discipline and is 50 points if the discipline is studied in one semester, 100 points if the discipline is studied in two semesters, 150 points if the discipline is studied in three semesters, etc. Each type of control also has its own standard rating, for example, for current and midterm control - 30% of the standard rating of the discipline, for final control (tests and exams) - 40%;

A passing rating is the minimum score for which a student will be considered certified in the discipline. A passing rating for a discipline is more than 50% of the standard rating, for example, 25.1 points for a discipline with a standard rating of 50 points; 50.1 points – for a 100-point discipline; 75.1 points – for a 150-point discipline, etc. If a student, based on the results of training, scores less than a passing rating, the discipline is considered unmastered;

The threshold rating is the minimum actual rating of the semester control, after gaining which the student is admitted to the final control. The threshold rating of the discipline is more than 50% of the normative rating of semester control;

Firstly, the objectivity of assessing student academic achievements increases. As already mentioned, objectivity, the main requirement for assessment, is not implemented very well in the traditional system. In the point-rating system, the exam ceases to be the “final verdict”, because it will only add points to those scored during the semester.

Secondly, the point-rating system allows you to more accurately assess the quality of studies. Everyone knows that three are different from three, as teachers say, “we write three, two in our mind.” And in the point-rating system you can immediately see who is worth what. For example, the following case is possible: the highest scores were obtained for all current and milestone control points, and average scores were obtained for the exam (you never know). In this case, the total amount of points can still result in a score that allows you to put a well-deserved A in the grade book (on the traditional grading scale).

Thirdly, this system eliminates the problem of “session stress”, since if at the end of the course a student receives a significant amount of points, he can be exempted from taking an exam or test.

And, finally, the quality of preparation for training sessions will certainly increase with the introduction of a point-rating system, which is important for occupying a worthy place in the labor market in the future.

Current control;

Midterm control (colloquiums, testing, coursework, etc.);

Final control (semester test and/or exam).

The recommended amount of rating is: for current control - 30% of the normative rating of the discipline, for foreign control - 30% of the normative rating of the discipline and for final control - 40% of the normative rating of the discipline.

Current control is carried out during the semester for disciplines that have practical lessons and/or seminars, laboratory work in accordance with curriculum. It allows you to evaluate your academic progress throughout the semester. Its forms can be different: oral questioning, solving situational problems, completing an essay on a given topic, etc.

Midterm control is usually carried out 2-3 times during the semester in accordance with the working curriculum of the discipline. Each of the milestone control events is a “micro-exam” based on the material of one or more sections and is carried out to determine the degree of mastery of the material in the relevant sections of the discipline. The type of midterm control is determined by the department. The most popular forms of midterm control are colloquiums, tests, and testing.

Final control is an exam and/or test established by the curriculum. They are accepted, as a rule, in the traditional form.

R disc. = R current + R rub. + R total, where

How many points are awarded and for what? The ratio of grades by type of control activities within the framework of studying a specific discipline is established by the department when developing a schedule for studying the discipline.

At the beginning of the semester, the teacher leading classes in the discipline that students are starting to study must explain its rating structure, how many points can be obtained for a particular work or stage of control, bring to the attention of the study group information about the passing rating, deadlines, forms and maximum scores of control events in the discipline, as well as the terms and conditions for retaking them in the current semester.

After students have completed an ongoing control task or passed a milestone test, the teacher evaluates the work and enters this assessment into the rating sheet (it supplements the gradebook, but does not replace it!). If a student’s answer at a control point is unsatisfactory, he refuses to answer, or simply fails to appear at a control event, 0 points are assigned to the rating sheet.

To be allowed to take a test/exam in a discipline, the following conditions must be met:

The amount of classroom work (including attendance at lectures) required by the curriculum must be completed.

In order to be admitted to the session, the actual semester rating for each discipline studied in the semester must be more than 50% of its standard semester rating. In this case, the student receives “passed” in the grade book for the disciplines studied.

If the rating in a discipline scored in a semester is 50% or less than 50% of its standard semester rating, but more than 15% of the standard semester control rating, the student can “gain” the missing number of points by retaking control events. We remind you that during retakes, even with a brilliant answer, it is impossible to obtain the maximum score established for a given control point, due to the fact that part of the points, as a rule, is deducted by the department (with the exception of missing a class due to an excused illness). Therefore, to master educational material you have to be thorough in order to pass the checkpoints the first time.

If a student, due to regular missed checkpoints or systematic failure, scores a low rating in the semester (15% or less than 15% of the standard semester rating of the discipline), he is not allowed to retake the checkpoints, is considered to have not mastered the discipline and is expelled from the university.

And one more condition: a student’s high rating based on the results of control events does not relieve him of the obligation to attend lectures, seminars and practical classes, which, if missed, must be worked out in the usual manner (not to be confused with retaking control events!).

After the test/exam, points for it are entered into the rating and examination sheets and a certain amount is obtained, which is the final actual rating for the discipline. It is expressed in points (for example, from 28 to 50). Unfortunately, the grades in the student records and the diploma supplement must be given according to the traditional scale adopted in Russia: excellent-good-satisfactory-unsatisfactory. Therefore, after the points are entered into the rating sheet, the rating is recalculated into an assessment on a traditional scale in accordance with the scheme below:

(in % of the maximum score for the discipline)

85.1 - 100% Excellent

65.1 – 85% Good

50.1 – 65% Satisfactory

0% Unsatisfactory

The point-rating system for assessing academic performance is based on regular work throughout the semester and on systematic monitoring by the teacher of the level of students' educational achievements. This means the following: in order to have a good score, all tasks must be completed not only well, but also on time. The schedule of control events, which students are familiar with at the beginning of the semester, indicates the dates for passing control points. Remember: time is also one of the evaluation criteria!

The point-rating system allows you to objectively control all educational activities students, stimulates their cognitive activity and helps plan their study time. In addition, the point-rating system will help develop democracy, initiative and healthy competition in studies.

At the end of each semester, the dean's offices will compile and post consolidated rating lists on their stands and on the university website, so that everyone can see what position each student of the faculty occupies. Maybe this doesn’t matter to some, but being a leader and occupying the highest level of the ranking is always prestigious.

There are more than 50 public and about 40 private higher educational institutions in St. Petersburg. Among the strongest universities is St. Petersburg State University (SPbSUE). In 2014, he was included in this ranking. St. Petersburg State University of Economics was ranked among the best higher educational institutions in the CIS. Not only St. Petersburg residents, but also nonresident and foreign applicants come here to enroll.

History of the educational institution

The founding date of St. Petersburg State Economic University is considered to be 2012. The university appeared as a result of the publication of the corresponding order of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation. In fact, the history of a higher educational institution began in the last century. The Leningrad Financial and Economic Institute (LFEI) was created in early June 1930. The first classes at this educational institution began in September.

In 1934, the Moscow Institute of Finance and Economics was added to the university operating in Leningrad. After 6 years, another consolidation took place. This time, as many as 2 educational institutions operating in Leningrad were attached to the institute. The next merger happened in 1954. LFEI merged with the planning institute.

In September 1991, the educational institution was renamed. From now on, the institute became known as the St. Petersburg University of Economics and Finance. In August 2012, another significant event happened in the history of the university. He teamed up with engineering economic university cities. As a result, St. Petersburg State Economic University was formed. Today this university is one of the largest scientific and training centers Russian Federation. It is included in the top ranking - St. Petersburg State University of Economics is one of the 5 best universities in St. Petersburg.

Information for applicants

Persons who choose SPbSUE can receive higher or secondary vocational education here. Those applicants who are planning to enroll in vocational training programs should know that the university includes the following educational institutions:

• Stankoelectron College;
• technical College Food Industry;
• Polytechnic College.

Many applicants do not apply to the listed secondary institutions vocational education, and in St. Petersburg State Economic University. Selection committee notes that, having a secondary general, secondary vocational or higher education, you can enroll in bachelor’s and specialty programs. To do this you need to provide Unified State Exam results and/or go through entrance tests offered by the university. People who have a diploma higher education, can apply to the master's program. Admission is based on the results of entrance exams.

College "Stankoelectron"

This educational institution is one of the oldest in St. Petersburg. It has been around for over 70 years. During this period, the college, which is part of St. Petersburg State Economic University, received positive reviews in most cases. A huge number of professional specialists were graduated from the walls of the educational institution. Graduates work at the largest factories in the city.

Applicants to the St. Petersburg College "Stankoelectron" are offered the following specialties:

1. Every day, equipment and technology are becoming more and more firmly integrated into modern life. To operate machine tools and industrial robots and manufacture parts, we need people who understand this. The specialty “Mechanical Engineering Technology” allows you to obtain the necessary knowledge.
2. Accounting and Economics. This specialty, which can be obtained at a college affiliated with St. Petersburg State Economic University, receives positive reviews. Graduates note that they quickly find suitable job, because absolutely all organizations need people who would do accounting, compile reports, payroll calculations, etc.
3. Automation of technological processes and production. Many processes in modern life automated. People who want to carry out repairs and Maintenance equipment, implement new automation systems and control production processes, this specialty is required.

All of the above specialties can be entered not only on a commercial basis. There are also budget places at the college, which is a division of St. Petersburg State Economic University. Reviews from applicants include this information. However, some specialties do not require obtaining. These include: “Land and property relations”, “Technical regulation and quality management”, “Operational activities in logistics”.

College of Food Industry

People who want to work in the beverage and food manufacturing industry should pay attention to this educational institution. There has been a food industry technical school since 1945. Since 2011 it has been part of St. Petersburg State Economic University. Address of the technical school in St. Petersburg: st. Bolshaya Morskaya, building 8.

You can enroll in the food industry technical school full-time or extramural for the following specialties:

1. Technology of bread, pasta and confectionery. Graduates who get jobs in their specialty are engaged in receiving, storing and preparing raw materials. They use it to make bakery, pasta and confectionery products.
2. Winemaking, fermentation technology. Persons who have completed the secondary vocational education program in this specialty are engaged in organizing and maintaining processes for the production of various beverages.
3. Graduates are engaged in the development, production, sale of confectionery and culinary products, quality control, and customer service.

Polytechnic College

This educational institution has existed since 1945. During its activity, the technical school was renamed several times, and in 2005 it became a structural subdivision of the future St. Petersburg State Economic University (address of the educational institution in St. Petersburg: Mokhovaya St., building 40). It is worth noting that most graduates get jobs in their specialty. Some people decide to continue their studies at the St. Petersburg State University of Economics on shortened programs.

Applicants who choose a technical school can receive education in the following specialties:

• tourism;
• repair road transport and maintenance;
• accounting and economics;
• automation of production and technological processes;
• operational activities in logistics;
• commerce;
• heat supply and heating equipment;
• hotel service.

The specialty “Tourism” is quite popular. Many foreigners come to Leningrad region. Help them explore local attractions and introduce them to interesting historical information graduates called Polytechnic College who have become tourism specialists.

Another in-demand and popular specialty is “Automotive Repair and Maintenance.” The tasks of graduates include ensuring the reliable operation of various vehicles. While studying at a technical school, people learn about the structure of transport and become familiar with the intricacies of maintenance.

Bachelor's and specialist's degrees at St. Petersburg State Economic University

Many applicants want to enroll in the Faculty of Banking. However, it is not available at the university. There is a Faculty of Finance and Economics (direction “Economics”). It is one of the most popular at the University of Economics. Studying in the first two years of the Faculty of Finance and Economics allows students to gain basic knowledge. In the third year, the distribution of future bachelors is carried out. Students choose the programs that are closest to them. So, in the “Economics” direction you can choose the following profiles:

• accounting, auditing and analysis;
• credit and finance (this profile should be chosen by those people who wanted to enroll in the Faculty of Banking);
• world economy and trade policy;
• National economy;
• mathematical methods and statistical analysis;
• economics of organizations and enterprises.

The Faculty of Law prepares highly qualified specialists in the field of law. Applicants entering this direction will have to study not only legal disciplines, but also those subjects that relate to the field of economics (for example, tax law, legal foundations of accounting). Graduates of the Faculty of Law of St. Petersburg State Economic University (FINEK is the former name of the university) work in courts, law enforcement agencies, real estate agencies, legal departments of various organizations, tax inspectorates, and audit firms.

The higher education institution also has a Faculty of Management. There are other popular and interesting areas:

• linguistics;
• economic security;
• business Informatics;
• service;
• merchandising;
• tourism;
• international relations, etc.

Master's degree at the university

People who have a bachelor's degree and want to advance to a higher level professional level, it is worth paying attention to the master's program for which St. Petersburg State University of Economics is famous. Students are taught here best teachers universities who have theoretical and practical skills and are engaged in teaching and scientific activities.

There are quite a lot of training programs. There are about 50 of them. You can enroll in absolutely any of them, regardless of what direction is indicated in your bachelor's diploma. Thus, a master's degree allows you to gain new knowledge and become a professional in your chosen field.

Training on master's programs implemented both full-time and by correspondence. You can enroll not only for paid education, but also for budget places, and there are quite a few of them at St. Petersburg State University of Economics. Reviews testify to this. An example would be 2016. 733 budget places were allocated for future students.

The educational process in the master's program is interesting. It includes practical classes, lectures, seminars, and scientific conferences. Master's students make various reports, which are subsequently published in special collections of scientific articles. Master's studies are completed by writing and defending a research paper.

Postgraduate studies at St. Petersburg State Economic University

Postgraduate study is not just a level of education. This is a system for training scientific and scientific-pedagogical personnel. People entering here must not only have a diploma of higher education (specialist's degree, master's degree). They must have research and analytical skills.

At St. Petersburg State Economic University (FINEK is a more familiar name to some) there are 14 areas of training. Admission is carried out on a competitive basis. Applicants undergo entrance tests. They include surrender foreign language and special discipline. During the exams:

• the level of knowledge of people who submitted the application and package is checked necessary documents for admission;
• the propensity to carry out research activities is determined;
• the level of scientific interests is determined;
• The motives for entering graduate school are clarified.

When submitting documents to St. Petersburg State Economic University, future graduate students must present a list of previously made inventions, published scientific texts, and research reports. In their absence, an abstract is written on the chosen field of study.

Open days

To get to know the St. Petersburg State University of Economics better, you can visit the day open doors. This event is held several times a year academic year in order to familiarize applicants with the structural divisions of the educational institution, with the features of the learning process. At the event you can find out the passing scores of St. Petersburg State Economic University ( minimum score for one subject it can be 30‒50).

An open day usually includes a general meeting. Speakers include the rector, deans of faculties, and teachers. After the opening speeches, faculty presentations begin. Applicants and their parents can ask university staff any questions they may have. Those interested can take a tour of educational institution. Future students are shown around the building and introduced to some of the classrooms.

In St. Petersburg, the venue for open days is located at the following address: Griboyedov Canal embankment, building 30/32, assembly hall, located on the third floor. It is also worth noting that St. Petersburg State Economic University has branches. They are located in the following cities:

• Anadyr.
• Velikiy Novgorod.
• Vyborg.
• Kizlyar.
• Kaluga.
• Pskov.
• Syktyvkar.
• Cheboksary.
• Cherepovets.
• Dubai.

In each branch, open days are held at specific addresses on designated dates. Detailed information should be clarified by phone numbers of educational institutions.