Keywords
monitoring
nazorat
pedagogik tamoyillar
me'zonlar
HEMIS
oliy ta'lim
so'rovnoma
empirik tahlil
How to Cite
Abstract
Ushbu maqolada oliy ta'lim muassasasida ta'lim sifati monitoringi va nazoratining pedagogik tamoyillari hamda me'zorlari ilmiy-nazariy va empirik jihatdan o'rganilgan. Tadqiqot 20 nafar professor-o'qituvchi ishtirokida o'tkazilgan strukturlashtirilgan so'rovnoma natijalari asosida qurilgan bo'lib, monitoring tizimining hozirgi holati, samaradorligi, asosiy kamchiliklari va takomillashtirish yo'nalislari tahlil etilgan. So'rovnoma ma'lumotlari ko'rsatishicha, professor-o'qituvchilarning 65 foizi HEMIS tizimidan kundalik foydalanadi; monitoring umumiy darajasi 3,30 ball (4 ballik shkalada) bilan baholanib, eng zaif ko'rsatkich monitoring natijalarining boshqaruv qarorlariga ta'siri (3,05 ball) ekanligi aniqlangan. Tizimning asosiy kamchiliklari sifatida: raqamli platformaning to'liq ishlamasligi (35%), o'qituvchilarning jarayonga jalb etilmasligi (20%), monitoring natijalarining yopiq qolishi va boshqaruvga ulanmasligi (20%) belgilangan. Maqolada ta'lim sifatini oshirishga yo'naltirilgan monitoring modelini takomillashtirish bo'yicha amaliy tavsiyalar ishlab chiqilgan.References
1. UNESCO. (2015). Education 2030: Incheon Declaration and Framework for Action for the implementation of Sustainable Development Goal
4. Paris: UNESCO. — 84 b.
2. OECD. (2019). Education Policy Outlook 2019: Working Together to Help Students Achieve their Potential. Paris: OECD Publishing. — 312 b.
3. O'zbekiston Respublikasi Prezidentining 2022-yil 28-yanvardagi PF-60-son Farmoni. «2022–2026-yillarga mo'ljallangan Yangi O'zbekiston taraqqiyot strategiyasi to'g'risida». Toshkent: O'zbekiston Respublikasi qonun hujjatlari bazasi.
4. O'zbekiston Respublikasining «Ta'lim to'g'risida»gi Qonuni (2020-yil 23-sentabr, O'RQ-637-son). Toshkent: O'zbekiston Respublikasi qonun hujjatlari bazasi.
5. Mardanova, D., & Rахimov, A. (2023). HEMIS platformasining oliy ta'lim boshqaruvida samaradorligi. Ta'lim va fan jurnali, 5(3), 88–101.
6. Xoliqov, A., & Nishonova, Z. (2022). Oliy ta'lim muassasalarida sifatni nazorat qilish tizimi: muammolar va yechimlar. Pedagogika fanlari jurnali, 4(1), 22–36.
7. Harvey, L., & Green, D. (1993). Defining quality. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(1), 9–34.
8. Stufflebeam, D. L., & Shinkfield, A. J. (2007). Evaluation Theory, Models, and Applications. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. — 736 b.
9. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. London: Routledge. — 392 b.
10. Scriven, M. (1991). Evaluation Thesaurus (4th ed.). Newbury Park: Sage Publications. — 374 b.
11. Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay. — 207 b.
12. European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA). (2015). Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG). Brussels. — 48 b.
13. Muijs, D., Harris, A., Chapman, C., Stoll, L., & Russ, J. (2004). Improving schools in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas: A review of research evidence. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 15(2), 149–175.
14. Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating Significant Learning Experiences: An Integrated Approach to Designing College Courses (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. — 320 b.
15. Elmore, R. F. (2004). School Reform from the Inside Out: Policy, Practice, and Performance. Cambridge: Harvard Education Press. — 266 b.
16. Darling-Hammond, L., & Snyder, J. (2000). Authentic assessment of teaching in context. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16(5–6), 523–545.
17. Finnish Education Evaluation Centre (FINEEC). (2020). National Core Curriculum for Basic Education and Evaluation. Helsinki: FINEEC. — 76 b.
18. National Institute of Education, Singapore. (2021). Teaching Quality Framework for Higher Education. Singapore: NIE. — 58 b.
19. Xoliqov, A., & Nishonova, Z. (2021). O'zbekiston oliy ta'lim sifatini monitoring qilishning huquqiy-me'yoriy asoslari. Huquq va ta'lim, 3(2), 25–40.
20. Mirzayev, B. (2023). Oliy ta'limdagi raqamli monitoring vositalarining pedagogik samaradorligi. Axborot texnologiyalari va ta'lim, 5(1), 105–119.
21. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications. — 520 b.
22. MacBeath, J. (2006). School Inspection and Self-evaluation: Working with the New Relationship. London: Routledge. — 187 b.
23. World Bank. (2022). The State of Global Learning Poverty: 2022 Update. Washington D.C.: World Bank Group. — 48 b.
24. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.
25. Fullan, M. (2015). The New Meaning of Educational Change (5th ed.). New York: Teachers College Press. — 328 b.
26. National University of Singapore, Centre for Development of Teaching and Learning. (2022). Annual Quality Assurance Report. Singapore: NUS. — 62 b.
27. Astin, A. W., & Antonio, A. L. (2012). Assessment for Excellence: The Philosophy and Practice of Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education (2nd ed.). Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. — 320 b.