The law on professional standards has been in force for several months, but not everyone has finally figured out how to apply the new regulation in their companies. To help employers - practical recommendations from one of the most respected Russian experts in labor law, Maria Finatova.
What is this article about? Once again about professional standards, the application of which is still not clear to many. Let's talk about how to learn to determine the professional level at which the employee is.
All qualification levels specified in professional standards are used during their development to describe labor functions, requirements for education and training of employees. Uniform requirements for the qualifications of workers, established by skill levels, can be expanded and refined taking into account the specifics of the types of professional activity.
The level of qualification is defined as the ability of an employee to perform labor functions (tasks, duties) determined by the composition and level of complexity, which is achieved by mastering the necessary set of theoretical knowledge and skills.
The normative act that names the skill levels is the order of the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection of the Russian Federation of April 12, 2013 N 148n "On approval of skill levels in order to develop draft professional standards." There are 9 levels in total and each has its own requirements. The higher the level, the higher the requirements, the lower the level, the lower the requirements for the position. Usually the 1st level is unskilled work, for which there are no strict requirements. 2,3,4 levels of working specialties, 5.6 - specialists, 7.8 leaders of the organization, top managers, 9 - the leadership of the country.
Each level has certain indicators, which include: powers and responsibilities, the nature of knowledge, the nature of skills and the main ways to achieve qualifications, on the basis of which a professional standard is developed.
For example, at the 1st qualification level they are like this:
And at the 6th qualification level, these are:
In order to understand at what level a particular employee is, the employer needs to carry out a whole range of activities:
- To begin with, select the appropriate professional standard for compliance with which the position of the employee will be checked.
- Then analyze his labor function, defined by the employment contract or job description for its compliance with the labor actions (TD) provided for in the chosen professional standard.
- After that, the already verified labor actions are compared with labor functions in the same professional standard.
- And in the end, from the compared labor functions (TF), determine which or which generalized labor functions (GTF) the employee is suitable for.
For each generalized labor function (GTF), the corresponding qualification level is indicated in the professional standard. By a simple procedure, you can determine what qualification level an employee has and what requirements are set for him.
for example, if you take the professional standard of the "Accountant", you can see that it has only 2 qualification levels: 5 and 6 for the positions of "Accountant" and "Chief Accountant", and, accordingly, the requirements for these qualification levels are different. When comparing, it may turn out that one of the workers does not meet the standard, because he does not have enough experience, or length of service, or the necessary education at a certain level for him. In this situation, the employer must solve this problem: in the case of education, by sending the employee to study, in the case of experience and length of service, by transferring the employee to another position.
Situations may be different, but it must be remembered that the requirements of Law No. 122-FZ must be met by all employers, regardless of the legal form, form of ownership, number of employees, etc. However, the law does not provide for dismissals for non-compliance with professional standards. Therefore, it is important and possible to find the right solution in each specific situation with each specific employee.
Maria Finatova, Head of the Department of Consulting Projects and Partner of Valentina Mitrofanova Group of Companies
In the modern realities of the rapid pace of technological development, high competition and the dynamic development of management approaches, a company that does not invest in the development, training and evaluation of personnel, at least, acts short-sighted. Moreover, taking into account a certain archaism of education systems: both vocational and higher education, which are impenetrably lagging behind the ever-changing market requirements. Therefore, any organization seeking to win or maintain a leading position pays increased attention to the training and development of personnel.
However, the question of the need to evaluate the effectiveness of staff training always arises. The costs of training are always significant, and in this regard, it is reasonable to require an assessment of the economic efficiency of investments.
To date, many companies are limited to filling out evaluation questionnaires based on the results of the training: “Did you like the training / trainer?”, “Evaluate the organization of the training?”, “Was the training useful?”, “Will you use the acquired skills in your daily work?” etc. This method is only a small part of the methodology for assessing the effectiveness of personnel training, and is applicable only for the initial summing up of the results of a specific event, training, internal satisfaction, as well as the work of specific people from the personnel department, but not the effectiveness of the training program as a whole.
In international practice, several methods for assessing the effectiveness of staff training are successfully used.
The most famous of them is Donald Kirkpatrick's four-level model, which today is considered a classic. The model was proposed in 1959 and published in the book Four Levels Evaluation Program.
Modelestimatesefficiencystaff trainingD. Kirkpatrick
Step 1 Reaction. The primary reaction to the training program is measured, the so-called "feedback" or feedback: the interest, usefulness and quality of the material, the trainer and his skills, the complexity or accessibility of the presentation of the material, the organization of the training event are evaluated.
Applicable tools: , Interviews, Focus groups.
Stage 2 Assimilation. The extent to which participants acquire new knowledge/skills is measured, as well as how they plan to apply the acquired skills in the workplace.
Applied tools: Exam, Aptitude Tests, Practical Skills Tests, Making a Plan, Training Other Employees.
Stage 3 Behavior. It is measured how the general behavior of the participants has changed, and to what extent the participants of the training use new knowledge and skills in the workplace.
Applied tools: Work behavior change checklist (review of work, check of action plans - developed according to the principle of evaluation 360 0), KPI, Balanced scorecard.
Stage 4 Results. It measures the extent to which the goals have been achieved, as well as how the change in behavior affects the organization as a whole, that is, changes in the business performance of the organization are determined and analyzed. The results should be evaluated at least three months after the end of the training in order to see the delayed effects.
Applicable tools: KPI (measures must be selected before the start of the tutorial)
It should be noted that when using all levels of the model, the process of assessing the learning effect becomes very time-consuming and costly, and not always appropriate in terms of cost. The fourth level is the most difficult to analyze, since it is required to track the dynamics of the organization's business indicators (increase in productivity, increase in sales, improve quality, etc.). In 1975, Kirkpatrick published the book "" (Evaluating Training Programs), where he described the application of the model in new realities and not only for evaluating the results of personnel training, but also for the change management process in an organization. In addition, it was proposed to use the model in reverse order, starting from the fourth level to the first, that is, the expected results must first be determined, methods and key indicators selected - in this case, the final assessment will be less subjective.
The process of economic evaluation of staff training
In 1991, Jack Philips, an American HR expert and director of the ROI Institute, supplemented the Kirkpatrick model with a fifth level - ROI (Return on Investments). In fact, he introduced a specific quantitative indicator into the personnel training assessment system, as a calculation of the percentage ratio of profit from a training event to its costs:
In addition, he noted that performance evaluation is not a separate program, but an integral part of the system. Evaluation should be carried out at all stages of the learning process, from assessing the needs for training and development of staff, during and after the program, and later, when the results are more evident. Thanks to this approach, it became possible to make training cost-effective: to assess the training program as a business tool, and also to show a direct relationship between increasing the productivity of the organization and the personnel training system.
V-model by J.Philips
Another fairly well-known model is Bloom's Taxonomy. Benjamin Bloom proposed this model in 1956. The main idea of the model is to develop the need for analysis, self-development, responsibility and self-sufficiency of the students themselves, in other words, “teach employees to learn” and apply the acquired knowledge in everyday life. In this case, the employer is required to create the base necessary for training, an atmosphere favorable for training and motivation.
In his system, he divided all stages into three domains: cognitive (knowledge), emotional (attitudes) and psychomotor (skills).
Taxonomy B. Bloom
cognitive domain
|
Levels of High Thinking |
6.Evaluation |
Can reason and evaluate ideas and can present and defend opinions based on logic and facts |
| 5. Synthesis |
Able to integrate parts into a single structure, draws up plans, generates new ideas, draws conclusions, creatively solves problematic issues Key: Integrate, Modify, Replace, Compose, Articulate, Summarize, Organize, Plan |
|
| 4. Analysis |
Knows how to highlight parts of the whole, the relationship between elements within the organization, finds errors, sees driving motives, analyzes cause-and-effect relationships Key: differentiate, divide, explain, connect, classify |
|
| 3. Application |
Applies acquired knowledge in practice, finds relationships, solves problem situations Key: Apply, Demonstrate, Decide, Test, Improve, Change |
|
|
Low Thinking Levels |
2. Understanding |
Interprets facts, rules, compares, identifies groups, anticipates and explains consequences Key: summarize, conclude, compare, calculate, discuss, continue, justify, explain |
| 1. Knowledge |
Knowledge of the specifics, the ability to operate with terminology, facts, knowledge of trends, classifications, procedures, methodologies, theory, structure Key: list, define, describe, depict, name, choose, quote, who, where, when, etc. |
Emotional Domain
| 5. Assimilation of the value system |
Loyalty, choice of ways to solve problems Key: Prove, Listen, Do, Verify |
| 4. Organization of personal value system |
Correlation of the value of objects and phenomena Key: propose, judge, report, demonstrate |
| 3. Valuation - understanding and action |
Understanding and accepting values Key: Initiate, Shape, Share, Track |
| 2. Reaction, response |
Attention, active participation Key: Discuss, Help, Perform, Present, Describe |
| 1. Perception and awareness |
Passive perception and acceptance of information Key: describe, answer questions |
Psychomotor domain
Evaluation of the effectiveness of training is an important step in the process of personnel training. Its meaning is to establish how the organization benefits from employee training, or to find out whether one form of training is more effective than another. Since money has been spent on education, you should know exactly what the organization can get in return.
Information obtained as a result of evaluating the effectiveness of specific training programs should be analyzed and used in the preparation and implementation of similar programs in the future. Evaluating the effectiveness of training employees of the organization allows you to constantly work on improving the quality of training, getting rid of such training programs and forms of training that have not justified the hopes placed on them.
Ideally, the evaluation of the effectiveness of training should be carried out constantly, in a qualitative or quantitative form, assessing the impact of training on such indicators of the organization's performance as sales, product and service quality, labor productivity, employee attitudes, etc.
The main reason an organization should evaluate the effectiveness of training programs is to find out to what extent the learning objectives were ultimately achieved. A curriculum that fails to achieve the required level of performance, skills or attitudes should be modified or replaced by another program. Not always the organization after training its employees achieves the desired result. In this case, it becomes necessary to identify the causes of failure. Even good programs can fail for many reasons: unrealistic or overly general learning goals can be set, the learning process itself can be poorly organized, disruptions can occur for reasons beyond the control of those involved in the organization of training (for example, illness of a teacher, breakdowns equipment or human error), etc. Identification of the reasons why this training program failed, and their analysis, allows you to take the necessary corrective measures in the future.
Evaluation of the effectiveness of training can be carried out with the help of tests, questionnaires filled out by students, exams, etc. The effectiveness of training can be assessed both by the students themselves and by managers, specialists from training departments, teachers, experts or specially created target groups.
There are five criteria that are commonly used in evaluating the effectiveness of training. The data are presented in Figure 1.5.
Let's consider these criteria.
The opinion of the students. Finding out the opinion of students about the curriculum in which they have just been trained, about its usefulness, interest is an accepted practice in many organizations.
Figure-Criteria used in evaluating the effectiveness of training
This involves seeking their opinion on the following questions:
Teaching quality (teacher qualifications, teaching style, teaching methods used);
General conditions and environment during training (physical conditions, absence of distractions, etc.);
The degree of achievement of the learning objectives (compliance with the expectations of the trainees, the readiness of the trainees to use the results of training in the practice of their work).
When evaluating opinions, it is assumed that if the participants liked the training program, then it is good enough. The opinion of students is considered as an assessment of experts who are able to objectively evaluate the curriculum according to the proposed criteria (indicators). Students are usually asked to fill out specially designed questionnaires upon completion of training, which may contain, for example, the following questions:
How useful was this program for you?
How interesting was the training?
How relevant was the topic of study? etc.
Students' answers can provide important information about their attitude to learning, how the material was presented by the teacher, and reveal their readiness to use the acquired knowledge and skills in their work.
Assimilation of educational material.
To assess the degree of assimilation of the educational material by the students, the teacher or the organizer of the study must answer two main questions:
What should a student be able to do to demonstrate that he has mastered the subject?
What should the student know? What questions should he be able to answer?
It is the completeness of assimilation of knowledge and the strength of acquired skills that are the indicators on the basis of which the success of training is assessed. It is possible to assess the completeness of mastering the educational material with the help of oral surveys, tests, tests, oral or written tests and exams. Both written and oral form of knowledge testing assumes that students are asked a variety of questions.
Unfortunately, most Russian companies make almost no attempt to find out to what extent the training material was assimilated by the employees who received the training. Often one has to face the fact that the procedure of "testing" or "testing", which scare the listeners, in fact turns out to be a pure formality - everyone receives a test, and the completed forms with the test results are sent directly, without verification, to the trash. Of course, this form of "learning control" has the right to exist - in this case, it performs the function of increasing the students' motivation for learning. But if you can take much more from this procedure, then you should not refuse it.
Behavioral changes. In accordance with this criterion, it is determined how the behavior of employees changes after completing a training course when they return to their work. For example, safety training should result in a higher level of compliance with the rules for handling combustible or toxic substances; driving training - mastering driving skills, safe driving; business communication training - reducing the number of conflicts in the organization, a higher level of cooperation between employees of the organization.
Working results.
The effectiveness of the training program can also be assessed by the results of the production activities of those who have been trained. If the results of the organization, unit or individual worker improve, then this is the real benefit that the organization receives as a result of training. The incentive to start training staff may be too high a level of waste or rejects. At the same time, the goal of employee training will be to reduce waste, for example, from 10 to 3 percent. If such a result is achieved, it can be considered that the training was successful. The success of a marketing course can be measured by measuring sales volume or by evaluating customer satisfaction as a result of customer surveys. You can ask the immediate supervisors of the employees who have completed the training to evaluate how well they apply the knowledge that they received during the training. This evaluation procedure can be repeated after some time (after 1 month, 3 months, 6 months or more).
Cost effectiveness.
Training programs should also be evaluated for cost effectiveness. Training should be beneficial to the organization, that is, it should strive to ensure that the benefits that will be received at the end of the training exceed the costs of training.
For example, at Honeywell, the effect of a training program on improving productivity and product quality is determined by the formula:
E \u003d P x N x V x K - N x H, (1.1)
where P is the duration of the program (in years); N is the number of trained workers; V - valuation of differences in labor productivity of the best and average workers (USD); K - coefficient of increase in efficiency as a result of training: Z - the cost of training one employee (USD).
Training should be an integral part of the work of the organization, inseparable from its main objectives. Training costs money, but this investment pays off through increased productivity, quality, and customer satisfaction. In addition, employees highly appreciate the opportunities that training opens up for them.
The following indicators of training effectiveness and methods for their calculation can be distinguished (Table 1.5):
Table 1.5 - Indicators of training effectiveness and methods of their calculation
|
Direction of evaluation |
Indicator |
Calculation method |
|
Tuition expenses |
Share of spending on education |
The ratio of training expenses to total expenses |
|
Expenses per employee |
Training costs divided by the number of employees trained |
|
|
Tuition costs per class hour |
Total tuition costs divided by total tuition time |
|
|
Return on investment in training |
Savings achieved in relation to training costs |
Total savings due to the use of previously unused resources or loss prevention, divided by the amount of training costs |
|
Percentage of performance improvement after training per course |
Percentage of employees who improved performance (difference in performance before and after training |
|
|
Income per employee per year |
Total revenue or sales divided by total number of employees |
|
|
Profit per employee per year |
Total annual profit before taxes divided by total number of employees |
|
|
Availability of qualified specialists |
Number of employees of the training department per 1000 employees of the company |
Number of training department divided by the total number of employees x 1000 |
|
Evaluation of the work of the training department |
Satisfaction on the part of consumers of the services of the personnel training and development department |
The ratio of the number of customers of the training department who rated "good performance" or "effective performance" to the total number of customers who completed the evaluation sheets |
It is clear that for different types of assessment the criteria will be somewhat different. For example, for the assessment of primary training, the criteria may be the following: knowledge of products and services, personality profile, communication skills in interacting with customers; activity in the educational process. And for the assessment of practice, monitoring and planned assessment, criteria such as the desire for development, compliance with corporate culture, etc. can also be added.
The procedure for assessing the effectiveness of training usually consists of four stages, which are presented in Figure 1.5.
Figure - Stages of the procedure for evaluating the effectiveness of training
1. Definition of learning objectives. The process of evaluating the effectiveness of training begins already at the stage of training planning, when determining its goals. Learning objectives set standards and criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of training programs.
11 "Military Educational and Scientific Center of the Air Force" Air Force Academy named after Professor N.E. Zhukovsky and Yu.A. Gagarin"
The analysis of currently used methods for monitoring the level of training and assessing the quality of mastering the material is carried out. The need to improve the methodology for assessing and controlling the quality of training of specialists is indicated and justified. Based on the data obtained as a result of the study, a promising methodology for assessing the quality of training under the conditions of a given set of assessed elements was developed, taking into account the ranking of the assessed elements and assigning weight coefficients to the values of the traditional scoring system. The application of the proposed methodology will improve the effectiveness of professional training by obtaining and using objective data on the quality of training of specialists in the process of planning the educational process and managing the quality of training. In addition, it is advisable to use the results obtained in the point-rating systems for assessing the professional readiness of graduates.
quality of training
evaluation methodology
quality control
educational process
1. Bolotov V. A. On the construction of an all-Russian quality assessment system // Educational Issues. - 2005. - No. 1. - S. 5-10.
2. Bordovsky G.A. Management of the quality of the educational process / G. A. Bordovsky, A. A. Nesterov, S. Yu. Trapitsyn. - St. Petersburg: Publishing house of the Russian State Pedagogical University im. A.I. Herzen, 2001. - 359 p.
3. Dalinger V. A. Measuring the quality of professional training of a specialist using the Rasch mathematical model. Sovremennye naukoemkie tekhnologii. - 2007. - No. 11 - S. 47-48.
4. Dresher Yu. N. How to evaluate the quality of specialist training // Educational technologies. Theory and practice of teaching. - 2014. - No. 2. - P. 80-91.
5. Potashnik M. M. The quality of education: Problems and management technologies. (In questions and answers). - M .: Pedagogical Society of Russia, 2002. - 352 p.
6. Sidorov P.I. System monitoring of the educational environment /P. I. Sidorov, E. Yu. Vasilyeva. - Arkhangelsk, 2007. - 360 p.
7. Simonov V. P. Diagnosis of the degree of student learning: a study guide. – M.: MRA, 1999. – 48 p.
In the practice of higher professional education, discrepancies often arise between the quality of graduate training, as a result of the educational process, and the requirements of production and society. These discrepancies are due to differences in approaches to assessing the quality of professional training of a specialist at a university and at a customer enterprise. In addition, in some cases, differences in the assessment system are determined by the imperfection of existing methods for assessing the quality of training.
The transition of the system of higher professional education to a qualitatively new stage requires an adequate technology for evaluating the results of education, which ensures the unity of approaches to assessing the quality of training. At present, the importance of a systematic assessment of the quality of training of specialists directly during the period of their training is increasing. This is done in order to monitor the current indicators of the quality of training of specialists, determine the compliance of the actual indicators of the quality of training with intermediate control values and make timely adjustments to the system of planning and quality management of training applicable to each student. At the same time, a variety of approaches to evaluating learning outcomes are implemented: testing residual knowledge in the disciplines of various cycles of the curriculum for training specialists; standard forms for checking the level of knowledge, skills, abilities, etc. .
The training of a competent, competitive specialist requires resolving the contradiction between the need for a system of effective diagnostic methods in assessing the quality of specialist training and the lack of scientific and methodological support for current and final control of training quality assessment.
Recently, there has been a tendency in pedagogy to actively use the category of "quality" for the analysis and interpretation of various phenomena, aspects of pedagogical reality. One of the directions of such an analysis is a systematic consideration of the quality of training in all pedagogical systems, including higher professional education. Under the quality of training, it is customary to understand the compliance of the level of training of a specialist with the requirements of the professional environment in which he will work. In accordance with modern views, the concept of quality is unambiguously correlated with the evaluation process, which is also reflected in the conceptual structure of education. However, the existing system for evaluating the training of specialists does not fully meet the needs formed by the services market. And this phenomenon has a completely logical explanation, which has historical roots.
With the introduction in Russia in 1944 of the so-called “five-point” assessment system, the concept of assessing the quality of education (level of training), as a characteristic of the degree of assimilation of educational material in the process of forming the necessary knowledge, skills and abilities, was replaced by the concept of “progress”, that is, by counting the number positive marks, which the teacher gave quite subjectively.
In 1981, the Ministry of Higher and Secondary Specialized Education of the USSR, in its letter No. 31 dated October 26, 1981, “On the control of educational work and the assessment of students' knowledge in exams,” established the criteria for a four-point scale of final assessments of student learning. This document actually repeated, excluding the “one” score, the instruction of 1944, while maintaining all its shortcomings.
The formulated criteria are very far from what characterizes knowledge, skills and abilities, but they repeat all the same general provisions of 1944.
In a modern five-point scale, but in reality - in a three-point scale, a score of "two" rather indicates a complete non-compliance with the requirements, and not the degree of assimilation of educational material. This reduced the five-point rating scale to effectively three points. Although initially the five-point system assumed precisely the assessment of the degree of learning of the individual (the assimilation and reproduction of knowledge). Assessing the degree of learning, using only three points as positive, was almost impossible. That is why teachers often used the signs “+” and “-” in conjunction with the evaluation scores, which made it possible to more correctly indicate the degree of learning, and for a qualitative assessment of the level of assimilation of educational material, the concepts of “solid four”, “weak three”, etc. . Such indicators testified to the tendency of actual indicators to limit values and implied the need to bring these indicators to more “confident” values.
The presented graphical model for checking and evaluating the degree of learning of a person (figure) provides a simplified transition to a conditional quantitative interpretation of scores.
On this basis, the problem of obtaining an objective characteristic of learning (preparedness, level of qualification, level of training of the individual) is solved more successfully in any system of education. The general idea is to move away from the traditional assessment system in determining the level and quality of a specialist's professional training.
Practice shows that one of the reasons that can significantly reduce the effectiveness of training specialists can be the bias in assessing the level of their training, due to the imperfection of the assessment system or the lack of the necessary assessment methodology according to the selected criteria. Incorrect values for assessing the quality of training form a false idea of the possibility and readiness of a specialist to realize his potential, require adjustments to the content and direction of further professional training, reducing the overall effectiveness of the training system.
Inaccurate, and sometimes frankly erroneous values of the actual level of training of specialists are often due to the fact that it becomes necessary to evaluate any indicator or parameter of training for several elements, which also have different degrees of importance (influence on the final result).
Model for assessing the correspondence of degrees and levels of personality training
The provision on the need to assess the quality of training of specialists in several elements, taking into account their significance in order to obtain correct values, formed the basis for the development of a special methodology that takes into account these conditions.
The proposed methodology for assessing the quality of training (the degree of assimilation of educational material) of specialists is based on determining the degree of significance of each assessed element by the method of expert assessments and assigning standard assessments for each assessed element of weight coefficients corresponding to their value.
The procedure for assessing the quality of practical training for each i-th parameter (i-th exercise, task) is as follows:
1. The list of assessed elements is determined (the more elements, the higher the accuracy of the final value, respectively) and they are ranked according to the degree of importance, that is, each of them is assigned an absolute rank (as mentioned above, the ranking is carried out by the method of expert assessments).
2. According to the law of normal distribution, the relative rank of each element is determined by the ratio:
where Ni is the ordinal number (absolute rank) of the criterion in the ordered list;
n is the total number of elements taken into account.
3. The normalized rank R n i of each element (the weight ratio between the elements) is determined in the total sum of ranks equal to one:
4. Next, weights are assigned to the estimates. To obtain the correct values of quality indicators, we are satisfied with only the ratings “satisfactory”, “good” and “excellent” from all the values of the five-point system. The rating “unsatisfactory” does not suit us, since it does not characterize the quality of training, but only indicates a discrepancy with the requirements, therefore, its share will be equal to zero (Table 1).
Table 1
Correspondence of standard estimates with the values of their specific weight
There are frequent cases when it becomes necessary to evaluate one or another element for compliance with the requirements on a two-point scale: meets or does not meet (completed - not fulfilled; provides - does not provide). In this case, the condition is acceptable that the share of the assessment corresponding to the laws of this system will be as follows (Table 2).
Moreover, in the calculations, it is proposed that in the case of a correct answer (as the only one that meets the requirements), use the grade "excellent", the share of which is equal to one. In case of an incorrect answer, it is proposed to use the mark "unsatisfactory". Its specific weight will be equal to zero, since the condition of compliance with the requirements will not be met.
table 2
Correspondence of the estimates of the two-point system with the values of their specific weight
6. The final stage is the calculation of the final indicator of the quality of training (To total), which is defined as the sum of the indicators for the i-th element being assessed:
7. In order to obtain a qualitative characteristic of the training indicators corresponding to the received assessment and the calculated value of the quality indicator, you can use the Harrington compliance scale (Table 3).
If necessary, to conduct a comparative analysis or monitor changes in the quality indicators of training, the obtained values of the quality indicator can be presented as a percentage. For example:
Kitog * 100% = 0.87 * 100 = 87% (the degree of development as a percentage of the maximum possible value).
Table 3
Compliance with standard estimates of quality score values
|
Qualitative characteristics of training indicators (corresponds to the standard assessment) |
Indicator value quality |
|
|
Very high |
(Great) |
|
|
(satisfactorily) |
||
|
(unsatisfactory) |
||
|
Very low |
||
In this case (with the value of the final quality indicator Kitog = 0.87), the qualitative characteristic of the specialist's training will correspond to the value "very high".
Numerical values of the quality of training (in decimal and percentage terms), due to the convenience of processing indicators in this form, are recommended to be used in point-rating systems for assessing the professional training of specialists.
At the same time, the qualitative characteristics of training quality indicators will help form the so-called “risk groups” with below-average training quality indicators.
It should be added to the above that, depending on the results obtained using the proposed methodology, it is recommended to control the quality of training with different intensity (Table 4).
Table 4
Intensity of quality control of training, taking into account current indicators
|
Qualitative characteristics of indicators training |
quantitative value quality indicators |
control |
|
Very high |
Periodically, until the current indicators decrease |
|
|
Systematically, until higher scores are achieved |
||
|
Continuously until higher performance is achieved |
||
|
Very low |
In conclusion, it should be noted that the proposed methodology for assessing the quality of specialist training was developed taking into account the shortcomings of existing methods. At the same time, the possibility of evaluating the final results by a given number of evaluated elements in accordance with their absolute rank, which determines the degree of importance or influence on the final result, is implemented.
The application of the developed methodology for assessing the quality of training in the educational process ensures that the correct quantitative values and qualitative characteristics of the indicators of specialist training are obtained, which allows using the obtained values in the point-rating systems of educational institutions and timely adjusting the content and volume of professional training. In general, the results obtained provide an increase in the efficiency of the system of professional training of specialists.
Bibliographic link
Getman A.V. METHODOLOGY FOR ASSESSING THE QUALITY OF TRAINING OF SPECIALISTS UNDER THE CONDITIONS OF A GIVEN SET OF EVALUATED ELEMENTS, ACCORDING TO THEIR RANKING ACCORDING TO THE DEGREE OF IMPORTANCE // Modern problems of science and education. - 2016. - No. 2.;URL: http://science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id=24179 (date of access: 11/25/2019). We bring to your attention the journals published by the publishing house "Academy of Natural History"
