国家统一考试能否成为选拔大学申请人的有效工具(内容方面)?

M. Osipov
{"title":"国家统一考试能否成为选拔大学申请人的有效工具(内容方面)?","authors":"M. Osipov","doi":"10.20339/am.01-24.062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The subject of the research in this article is the content of the Unified State Exam (USE), as well as an assessment of its ability to serve as a tool for selecting applicants to universities. Among the methods used in the research, the results of which formed the basis of this article, is the method of social experiment. Its essence is that the author of the study tried to pass the training versions of the Unified State Exam in social studies, and also looked at a number of tasks on the Unified State Exam in other disciplines. During the study, it was found that there are a number of tasks on the Unified State Exam, to which the correct answer is in principle impossible and the correctness of which is determined entirely at the discretion of the compilers of this test (the so-called ‘failed tasks’). Examples of these tasks are given. Given the absence of a real result in the USE certificates of knowledge by applicants of certain sections of the school course, which are associated with sections of the university course in a particular field of study, as well as due to the presence of ‘failed tasks’, it is concluded that the USE is ineffective as a tool for selecting applicants to universities. In some cases, ambiguous interpretations of certain concepts, especially in the field of social sciences, are not taken into account when compiling tasks for the Unified State Exam. Also, the compilers of the Unified State Exam ignore the psychological patterns of such an exam, which leads to so-called \"gaps in thinking\" among exam takers. Therefore, the results of the Unified State Exam do not always reflect the real knowledge of applicants. The ways of improving the USE procedure in social and humanitarian disciplines (history, social studies) are proposed.","PeriodicalId":179308,"journal":{"name":"Alma mater. Vestnik Vysshey Shkoly","volume":"99 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can the Unified State Exam be an effective tool for selecting applicants to universities (content aspects)?\",\"authors\":\"M. Osipov\",\"doi\":\"10.20339/am.01-24.062\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The subject of the research in this article is the content of the Unified State Exam (USE), as well as an assessment of its ability to serve as a tool for selecting applicants to universities. Among the methods used in the research, the results of which formed the basis of this article, is the method of social experiment. Its essence is that the author of the study tried to pass the training versions of the Unified State Exam in social studies, and also looked at a number of tasks on the Unified State Exam in other disciplines. During the study, it was found that there are a number of tasks on the Unified State Exam, to which the correct answer is in principle impossible and the correctness of which is determined entirely at the discretion of the compilers of this test (the so-called ‘failed tasks’). Examples of these tasks are given. Given the absence of a real result in the USE certificates of knowledge by applicants of certain sections of the school course, which are associated with sections of the university course in a particular field of study, as well as due to the presence of ‘failed tasks’, it is concluded that the USE is ineffective as a tool for selecting applicants to universities. In some cases, ambiguous interpretations of certain concepts, especially in the field of social sciences, are not taken into account when compiling tasks for the Unified State Exam. Also, the compilers of the Unified State Exam ignore the psychological patterns of such an exam, which leads to so-called \\\"gaps in thinking\\\" among exam takers. Therefore, the results of the Unified State Exam do not always reflect the real knowledge of applicants. The ways of improving the USE procedure in social and humanitarian disciplines (history, social studies) are proposed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":179308,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Alma mater. Vestnik Vysshey Shkoly\",\"volume\":\"99 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Alma mater. Vestnik Vysshey Shkoly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.20339/am.01-24.062\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alma mater. Vestnik Vysshey Shkoly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20339/am.01-24.062","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文研究的主题是国家统一考试(USE)的内容,以及对其作为选拔大学申请人的工具的能力进行评估。研究中使用的方法之一是社会实验法,其结果构成了本文的基础。其本质是,研究作者尝试通过社会学国家统一考试的培训版本,同时也考察了其他学科国家统一考试的一些任务。在研究过程中发现,国家统一考试中有一些任务原则上不可能有正确答案,其正确与否完全由该考试的编制者自行决定(即所谓的 "失败任务")。我们将举例说明这些任务。鉴于申请者在 USE 知识证书中没有获得与大学特定专业课程相关联的某些课程的实际成 绩,以及 "失败任务 "的存在,可以得出结论,USE 作为大学选拔申请者的工具是无效的。在某些情况下,在编制国家统一考试任务时没有考虑到对某些概念的模糊解释,特别是在社会科学领域。此外,国家统一考试的编制者还忽视了此类考试的心理规律,导致考生出现所谓的 "思维差距"。因此,国家统一考试的结果并不总能反映考生的真实知识水平。本文提出了改进社会和人文学科(历史、社会研究)统考程序的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Can the Unified State Exam be an effective tool for selecting applicants to universities (content aspects)?
The subject of the research in this article is the content of the Unified State Exam (USE), as well as an assessment of its ability to serve as a tool for selecting applicants to universities. Among the methods used in the research, the results of which formed the basis of this article, is the method of social experiment. Its essence is that the author of the study tried to pass the training versions of the Unified State Exam in social studies, and also looked at a number of tasks on the Unified State Exam in other disciplines. During the study, it was found that there are a number of tasks on the Unified State Exam, to which the correct answer is in principle impossible and the correctness of which is determined entirely at the discretion of the compilers of this test (the so-called ‘failed tasks’). Examples of these tasks are given. Given the absence of a real result in the USE certificates of knowledge by applicants of certain sections of the school course, which are associated with sections of the university course in a particular field of study, as well as due to the presence of ‘failed tasks’, it is concluded that the USE is ineffective as a tool for selecting applicants to universities. In some cases, ambiguous interpretations of certain concepts, especially in the field of social sciences, are not taken into account when compiling tasks for the Unified State Exam. Also, the compilers of the Unified State Exam ignore the psychological patterns of such an exam, which leads to so-called "gaps in thinking" among exam takers. Therefore, the results of the Unified State Exam do not always reflect the real knowledge of applicants. The ways of improving the USE procedure in social and humanitarian disciplines (history, social studies) are proposed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信