Keywords
kognitiv murakkablik
tabiiy-ilmiy savodxonlik
baholash savodxonligi
bo‘lajak biologiya o‘qituvchisi
topshiriq tahlili.
How to Cite
Abstract
Maqolada PISA tabiiy fanlar topshiriqlarining kognitiv murakkabligi bo‘lajak biologiya o‘qituvchilarining baholash savodxonligi nuqtayi nazaridan tahlil qilindi. PISA 2025 qamrov doirasi, tayanch tasniflar va 2015–2026-yillardagi tadqiqotlarni qamrab olgan 29 manba qiyosiy-tematik usulda sintez qilindi. Natijalar empirik qiyinlik va kognitiv murakkablik o‘zaro bog‘liq, ammo farqli hodisalar ekanini ko‘rsatdi. Kognitiv talabni baholashda bilim turi, mulohaza jarayoni, dalillarni birlashtirish, bilimni yangi vaziyatga ko‘chirish va o‘quvchi mustaqilligi muhimligi aniqlandi. Shu asosda besh mezonli tahlil matritsasi va uch tarkibli metodik model taklif etildi.References
1. Al Sultan A., Henson H. Jr., Fadde P. J. Pre-Service Elementary Teachers’ Scientific Literacy and Self-Efficacy in Teaching Science. IAFOR Journal of Education, 2018, 6(1), 25–41. DOI: 10.22492/ije.6.1.02
2. Anderson L. W., Krathwohl D. R. (Eds.). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Longman, 2001.
3. Atjonen P., Pöntinen S., Kontkanen S., Ruotsalainen P. Enhancing Preservice Teachers’ Assessment Literacy: Focus on Knowledge Base, Conceptions of Assessment, and Teacher Learning. Frontiers in Education, 2022, 7,
891391. DOI: 10.3389/feduc.2022.891391
4. Bozorova U. B. Biologiya fanidan PISA topshiriqlarini tuzish metodikasi. Fan, ta’lim va amaliyot integratsiyasi, 2024, 5(2), 1–6. https://journal.bilig.uz/isepsmj/article/view/1336.
5. Doniyorov M. Biologiya darslarida PISA topshiriqlaridan foydalanish. Biologiyaning zamonaviy tendensiyalari: muammolar va yechimlar, 2023, 1(5), 789–791. https://inashr.uz/index.php/bztmy/article/view/467.
6. Ergasheva M., Niyozov Q. A. O‘quvchilarning tabiiy-ilmiy savodxonligi monitoringida baholash dasturlari va topshiriqlaridan foydalanish metodikasi. Toshkent: A. Avloniy nomidagi Pedagoglarni kasbiy rivojlantirish va yangi metodikalarga o‘rgatish milliy-tadqiqot instituti, 2023. 160 b.
7. Hull P., Vígh T. Preservice Teachers’ Assessment Literacy: A Systematic Review. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 2026, 89,
101600. DOI: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2026.101600
8. Ismailov A. A., Tog‘ayeva G. O., Akbarova S., Asqarova D. Xalqaro tadqiqotlarda o‘quvchilarning tabiiy fanlar bo‘yicha savodxonligini baholash. Toshkent: Sharq, 2019. 112 b.
9. Joachim C., Hammann M., Carstensen C. H., Bögeholz S. Modeling and Measuring Pre-Service Teachers’ Assessment Literacy Regarding Experimentation Competences in Biology. Education Sciences, 2020, 10(5),
140. DOI: 10.3390/educsci10050140
10. Niyozov Q. A. O‘quvchilarni PISA xalqaro baholash dasturida keltirilgan topshiriqlarni bajarishga tayyorlashdagi muammolar va ularning yechimlari. “Aniq va tabiiy fanlarni o‘qitishda zamonaviy yondashuv: muammo va yechimlar” xalqaro ilmiy-amaliy anjumani materiallari. Surxondaryo viloyati Pedagoglarni yangi metodikalarga o‘rgatish milliy markazi, 2023, 45–50.
11. Niyozov Q. A. Methodology for Developing the Skills of Working with the PISA in Future Biology Teachers. Pedagogical Cluster: Journal of Pedagogical Developments, 2024, 2(5), 402–406. https://euroasianjournals.org/index.php/pc/article/view/412
12. Niyozov Q. A. Bo‘lajak biologiya fani o‘qituvchilarida xalqaro baholash dasturlari bilan ishlash kompetensiyasini rivojlantirishda 4K ko‘nikmalaridan foydalanish. Berdax nomidagi Qoraqalpoq davlat universiteti axborotnomasi, 2025, 2(69),180–183. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/393067429_BOLAJAK_BIOLOGIYA_FANI_OQITUVCHILARIDA_XALQARO_BAHOLASH_DASTURLARI_BILAN_ISHLASH_KOMPETENSIYASINI_RIVOJLANTIRISHDA_4K_KO'NIKMALARIDAN_FOYDALANISH
13. Niyozov Q. A. Bo‘lajak biologiya fani o‘qituvchilarida xalqaro baholash dasturlaridan foydalanish malakalarini rivojlantirishda multimedia vositalaridan foydalanish. Namangan davlat universiteti ilmiy axborotnomasi, 2025, 3, 963–966. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/390972812_Bo'lajak_biologiya_fani_o'qituvchilarda_xalqaro_baholash_dasturlaridan_foydalanish_malakalarini_rivojlantirishda_multimedia_vositalaridan_foydalanish
14. Niyozov Q. A. Strategies for Improving Biology Education Based on Innovative Approaches. Galaxy International Interdisciplinary Research Journal, 2025, 13(5), 121–128. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.15496896
15. Niyozov Q. A. PISA uslubidagi biologik kontekstli topshiriqlar asosida o‘quvchilarning tabiiy-ilmiy savodxonligini rivojlantirish metodikasi. “Ta’lim va taraqqiyot” ilmiy-uslubiy jurnali, 2026, 2, 1006–1017. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11402525.
16. OECD. PISA 2025 Science Framework (Draft). Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2023. https://pisa-framework.oecd.org/science-2025/assets/docs/PISA_2025_Science_Framework.pdf
17. Özer F., Sarıbaş D. Exploring Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Understanding of Scientific Inquiry and Scientific Practices Through a Laboratory Course. Science & Education, 2023, 32, 787–820. DOI: 10.1007/s11191-022-00325-3
18. Pastore S. Teacher Assessment Literacy: A Systematic Review. Frontiers in Education, 2023, 8,
1217167. DOI: 10.3389/feduc.2023.1217167
19. Risyukova Y., Pardayeva M., Sangirova Z., Odiljanov O‘. Tabiiy-ilmiy savodxonlikni rivojlantirish: o‘qituvchilar uchun metodik qo‘llanma. Toshkent: Ta’limni rivojlantirish respublika ilmiy-metodik markazi, 2025. 59 b.
20. Ruziqulova N. A., Bozorova U. B. Use of PISA Tests in Teaching Biological Sciences. Science and Innovation, 2023, 2(B2), 277–281. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7640669
21. Tekkumru Kisa M., Stein M. K. Learning to See Teaching in New Ways: A Foundation for Maintaining Cognitive Demand. American Educational Research Journal, 2015, 52(1), 105–136. DOI: 10.3102/0002831214549452
22. Tekkumru-Kisa M., Coker R., Atabas S. Learning to Teach for Promoting Student Thinking in Science Classrooms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2022, 120,
103869. DOI: 10.1016/j.tate.2022.103869
23. Tekkumru-Kisa M., Stein M. K., Schunn C. A Framework for Analyzing Cognitive Demand and Content-Practices Integration: Task Analysis Guide in Science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2015, 52(5), 659–685. DOI: 10.1002/tea.21208
24. Tsoumanis K. G., Stylos G., Kotsis K. T. A Comparative Study between Greek Pre-Service Teachers and Primary School Students’ Scientific Literacy Levels. Science Education International, 2023, 34(2), 121–131. DOI: 10.33828/sei.v34.i2.6
25. Webb N. L. Criteria for Alignment of Expectations and Assessments in Mathematics and Science Education. Research Monograph No.
6. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Center for Education Research, 1997.
26. Yunusova N. A., Pulatova Z. Sh., Ibodullayeva D. M. Tabiiy fanlardan PISA topshiriqlari tayyorlash metodikasi. Samarqand: Samarqand viloyati XTXQTUMO hududiy markazi, 2020. 36 b.
27. Whittemore R., Knafl K. The Integrative Review: Updated Methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 2005, 52(5), 546–553. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x
28. Snyder H. Literature Review as a Research Methodology: An Overview and Guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 2019, 104, 333–339. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
29. Xu Y., Brown G. T. L. Teacher Assessment Literacy in Practice: A Reconceptualization. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2016, 58, 149–162. DOI: 10.1016/j.tate.2016.05.010