Finek is official. Point-rating system in spbgau

Memo to the student

Distribution of students by profile (in the framework of the direction of preparation of a bachelor's degree at the faculty),

Assignment to practice with the possibility of subsequent employment,

Internship directions,

Providing a hostel for nonresident students,

Advantages of participating in the competitive selection for a master's degree program for a similar educational program.

Academic rating - max 100 points (by discipline)
Attendance at training sessions (max 20 points)
The results of mastering each module of the academic discipline (current and midterm control) (max 20 points)
Intermediate certification (exam, test with assessment, test) (max 40 points)
Attendance at training sessions is assessed cumulatively as follows: the maximum number of points assigned to the attendance record (20 points) is divided by the number of lessons in the discipline. The resulting value determines the number of points a student gains for attending one lesson.
The midterm assessment is carried out either in the last practical lesson (pass with grades or pass), or in accordance with the schedule for the examination session (exam). To be admitted to the midterm certification, it is necessary to score a total of at least 30 points, to successfully pass the midterm control in each discipline (not to have arrears on current performance).
¤ A student can be exempted from passing the intermediate certification (credit, credit with an assessment or exam) if, according to the results of attendance, the results of current and midterm control and creative rating, he scored at least 50 points. In this case, he is given a mark "passed" (for offset) or a mark corresponding to the number of points scored (for offset with a mark or exam) with the consent of the student.
¤ the teacher of the department, who directly conducts classes with the student group, is obliged to inform the group about the distribution of rating points for all types of work in the first lesson of the educational module (semester), the number of modules in the academic discipline, the timing and forms of control of their development, the opportunity to receive incentive points, the form intermediate certification.
¤ students have the right to receive information about the current number of points scored in the discipline during the educational module (semester). The teacher is obliged to provide the head of the group with this information for the acquaintance of students.
Into the traditional four-point

Participation in competitions of student research papers;

Presentations at conferences;

Participation in Olympiads and competitions;

Participation in scientific work on the subject of the department and work in scientific circles;

is determined by the dean's office together with the student council of the faculty and the curator of the group 2 times a year at the end of the semester (cannot exceed 200 points). It characterizes the student's active participation in the social life of the university and faculty.

The total educational rating is calculated as the sum of the products of the received points in each discipline (according to a 100-point system) by the labor intensity of the corresponding discipline (ie the volume of hours in the discipline in credit units), with the exception of the discipline "physical culture".

SPbGEU has a long history (since 1897), a building-palace opposite the Kazan Cathedral and a classic architectural style. Within the framework of traditions, students of many directions study the history and architecture of St. Petersburg. But the university does not lag behind the progress. For example, he uses a point-rating system of assessments, which has replaced the outdated five-point scale.

The essence of the system: the student collects points for the entire semester, their sum determines the final grade. They are posted in the SPbU electronic office with open access. Points can be viewed by students, teachers, parents, potential employers, or just curious people.

How the point-rating system works

Points can be earned on tests or tests 2-4 times per semester. The results of the work are displayed in the electronic rating of the group, at the end of the semester, the scores of each student are summed up and determine the final grade in accordance with the teacher's scale, voiced to the students and indicated on the website.

What is new: transparency of the system, objectivity of assessment and competition for the first places in the rating.

Objectivity- the main advantage of the system. It takes into account many factors:

how the material was mastered as a whole, for the entire course, and on individual topics;
attendance;
the transparency of the system eliminates surprises in the estimates;
points can be earned several times;
ranking builds students into an honest hierarchy of knowledge.
As a result, they give an objective picture of knowledge. In the point-rating system, the exam ceases to be the “last sentence”, because the work per semester is taken into account.

What the point-rating system looks like in practice

If there are really a lot of points, the student may be exempted from the exam or, on the contrary, be denied admission if he has not received points. If a student answered poorly on the exam, but scored enough points during the semester, the mark will be given in his favor; and vice versa, if someone did not show up during the semester, but answered well on the exam, they may receive a lower grade or an additional question.

SPbSEU students said goodbye to the methods of study, which should not exist at all: grades for taking notes (which can be written in one night), automatic machines for attendance (after all, a student may well play all the couples quietly on the back seat), grades for participating in competitions , KVN or student spring and other things that do not benefit education.

Competition and open grades spur on constant active work throughout the semester (although for some, this is probably a minus).

it takes time to develop a draft rating model;
the ability of teachers to work with points and ratings is not everywhere;
conflict situations in the group due to competition (arise due to mistakes on the part of the teacher).
the distribution of points between works is not thought out - for example, the answer in the seminar and the essay are evaluated with the same number of points.

The system of accumulating points and rating of students, although not ideal, is good in that it offers an alternative to the five-point system. Assessments are becoming more objective, more transparent and focus on the quality of knowledge, and not on the fulfillment of the teacher's requirements. In order to see how the rating will look like, you can go to the official website of SPbSEU, select any group and subject from the list and see how the students are doing. And at the same time present yourself in their ranks.

I am finishing the 4th year of the Faculty of Humanities. I think our university is really one of the best in St. Petersburg, but I can say that since the university is a union of three, now everything is rather ambiguous. I can say with 100% certainty that it is worth applying for economics and, possibly, management - these areas receive the greatest attention. It is clear from the guys who study in these areas that they really work and receive knowledge. Moreover, it is the students of these areas who take the most active part in the life of the university, as most of the events take place in their educational buildings. Other students may not even be aware of all the activities and opportunities. And there are a lot of opportunities, both for study and for leisure. St. Petersburg State University of Economics has a dance studio of a very good level, its own language learning center, and a Sports Club. Students can also try themselves and be selected for an international internship, since the university has a huge number of connections with universities in Europe and Asia. The conditions for internships are different, but all students can familiarize themselves with them on the website and choose an internship to their liking. A controversial point is the point-rating system introduced at the university. It is good in the sense that students who work throughout the semester regularly pass checkpoints and have some advantages in the session. We do not have traditional credits - credits are set based on the results of work in the semester. Thus, we do not have the principle "from session to session ..." - rather from control to control. The bad thing about the university is that because of the unification, the level of awareness of students of faculties who study not in the "main" buildings suffers, since even the dean's offices receive some information much later than it should, or even does not reach it at all. Over the past year, however, it has become clear that the university is working on this problem, so maybe in another year or two all faculties will be truly equal. Another plus: SPbSEU is one of the few universities that provides hostels for EVERYONE. We have really good dormitories, both of the university itself, where mainly contract workers are settled, and the MSG, which has already become famous throughout the country, where state employees live. No matter what they say, it is really possible to live in our hostels - everywhere there is a normal repair, it is clean and there is all the necessary furniture. At least I have never heard of students doing repairs in their own rooms. We also have an excellent website that reflects all aspects of the university's activities. On the site you can find absolutely all the information, another question is that most students are just too lazy to find something on their own. We also have one of the best admissions committees, I can say with confidence. The selection committee employs students of different directions and ages, attentive and friendly, ready to answer all the questions of parents and applicants. The procedure for accepting documents is very fast, rarely anyone is delayed when accepting documents for more than 15 minutes. In general, I can say that SPbSEU is an excellent university, with good teachers and a busy student life. However, a lot depends on the student himself: if you want to study well, it is not enough to go to pairs, you need to try to learn something yourself. If you want some leisure, go and find out everything yourself, it is not customary for us to run after students and impose something. The university needs to work on the quality of education, I think this is due to the unification: teachers, curricula, etc. are changing. I think in a couple of years everything will be settled and all problems will be solved.

Today, the main task facing the country's universities is to improve the quality of education. One of the key directions in its solution is the need to move 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 a revision and creation of new forms of control. One of the innovations was the point-rating system for assessing students' knowledge. Let's consider it in more detail.

Appointment

The essence of the point-rating system is to determine the success and quality of mastering the discipline through certain indicators. The complexity of a specific subject and the entire program as a whole is measured in credit units. A rating is a kind of numerical value that is expressed in a multi-point system. It integrally characterizes the progress of students and their participation in research work within a particular discipline. The point-rating system is considered as the most important part of the quality control of the educational work of the institute.

Advantages

Importance for educators

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

Value for learners

Selection of criteria

Implementation of the program in terms of practical, lecture, laboratory studies.
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 set by the lead teacher. The teacher responsible for the implementation of the control must, at the first lesson, inform the students about the criteria for their certification.

Structure

The point-rating system assumes the calculation of the results obtained by the student for all types of educational activities. In particular, attendance at lectures, writing tests, performing standard calculations, etc. is taken into account. For example, the overall result at the Department of Chemistry can be made up of the following indicators:

Additional elements

The point-rating system provides for the introduction of fines and incentives for students. Teachers inform about these additional elements in the first lesson. Penalties are provided for violations of the requirements for the preparation and execution of abstracts, untimely submitted standard calculations, laboratory work, etc. At the end of the course, the teacher can reward students by adding additional points to the number of points earned.

Transfer to academic grades

It is carried out on 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 in the following form:

Point-rating system: pros and cons

The positive aspects of this form of control are obvious. First of all, an active presence at seminars, participation in conferences will not go unnoticed. For this activity, the student will be awarded points. In addition, the student who will gain a certain number of points will be taken into account, can receive an automatic credit for 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 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 learners to compare their results with those of fellow students. Monitoring and evaluating educational achievements is an essential element of the educational process. They should be carried out systematically throughout the semester and throughout the year. For this, ratings of students in a group and on a course in specific disciplines are formed, intra-semester and final indicators for a certain period are displayed.

The introduction of a point-rating system is part of the "bolognaization" 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 educational model, which has proven its high efficiency

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

First, the strict opposition of the traditions of Soviet pedagogy and the educational model that has been emerging in recent years is completely incorrect. The essence of the competence-based approach is to give the learning process a pronounced activity-oriented character with a personality-oriented and practice-oriented orientation. In this capacity, the competence model is 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. N. Chomsky's research and the concept of competence-based learning was first presented). It is another matter 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 its peak in the 1960s - 1970s. and was absolutely adequate to the social, intellectual and psychological state of the then society, technological conditions and tasks of economic development of that time. Is it correct to compare it with the problems of the education system that took shape half a century later in a society that is going through complex social metamorphoses and the deepest psychological stress, has a vague idea of the paths and prospects of its development, but at the same time faces the need for a new leap in “catching up modernization” under the slogan of innovation? Nostalgia for conceptual harmony, methodological orderliness, meaningful consistency, psychological comfort of Soviet education is easily explainable from the point of view of the mood of the teaching community, but it is unproductive in dialogue with the generation born under 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 retained many external attributes. Russian higher school will have to create a new educational model, open to the demands of not even today, but of tomorrow, capable of maximally mobilizing the creative potential of students and teachers, ensuring their successful integration into a 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 primarily at ensuring the openness of the educational space and academic mobility of all its participants. It does not change the foundations of the European educational model and therefore is carried out mainly by 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 of transfer and accumulation of credits (credit units), thanks to which the student's learning outcomes are formalized and can be taken into account when moving from from one university to another, when changing educational programs. At the same time, student progress 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 pass the exam, and the FX and F categories are received by the students who fail it), so that as a result, the student accumulates not only credits, but also rating categories. In Russian universities, such a model is meaningless already 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 connected not with purely administrative reforms, but with a change in the teaching model itself, the introduction of technologies of competence pedagogy.

The use of a point-rating system violates the integrity and consistency of the educational process, in an absurd way changes the ratio of the importance of lectures and practical classes (from the point of view of a set of rating points, lectures turn out to be the most “useless” form of educational work), heaps up the procedures of “current” and “midterm” control, although at the same time it destroys the classical model of the examination session - a high rating may allow a student not to appear at the exam at all, and his preparation is deprived of systemic control.

Such fears have a certain basis, but only if we are talking about incorrectly designed rating models, or the teacher’s inability to work in a point-rating system. So, for example, if a university, for reasons of “preserving the contingent,” establishes a generally obligatory minimum threshold of a satisfactory mark of 30 points out of 100 and the same insignificant point level for “credit”, then losses in the quality of education will be inevitable. But the same negative role can be played by the overestimation of rating requirements, when, for example, at least 90-95 points are required to assess “excellent” (which means a disproportionate gap with the level of “good”) or the obligatory confirmation of the mark “excellent” on 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 when the teacher does not see the connection between the design of the rating system and the real organization of the educational activities of students, or at the level of the faculty or university, attempts are made to excessively formalize the point-rating system, to impose a certain model of it, regardless of the specifics. disciplines and author's teaching methods. If the teacher gets the opportunity to creatively design the rating system within the framework of the university-wide model, but taking into account the peculiarities of his discipline, then it is in his power to preserve the "integrity and consistency" of the educational process, and ensure the importance of lectures, and achieve a reasonable balance between all forms of control. Moreover, as will be shown below, within the framework of the point-rating system, the main parameters of the classical learning model can be preserved, if it does not clearly contradict the requirements of the Federal State Educational Standard.

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

Indeed, the essential formalization of the educational process and the control system is an integral feature of the point-rating system. However, two circumstances must be taken into account. First, formalization should not be an end in itself, but only a tool to ensure the quality of education. Therefore, both the volume of written work and the intensity of control must be correlated with the didactic and substantive specifics of the discipline. In addition, the teacher has a very wide choice of forms of control, and a correctly used technology for designing a point-rating system may well ensure the priority of oral forms over written, creative over routine, complex over local. For example, many teachers express dissatisfaction with the use of written tests, essays, testing, which do not allow the student to "hear". However, this position only indicates that the teacher's professional tools are very poor or overly traditional - that, for example, students are offered assignments for writing essays, and not creative essays or complex problem-analytical assignments, that the teacher uses simplified forms of testing "in the old fashioned way" instead of multilevel tests with “open-ended” questions and tasks aimed at different forms of intellectual actions, that the teacher is not ready to use interactive educational technologies (cases, project presentations, debates, role-playing and business games). Likewise, the situation when some of the students do not have time to accumulate a sufficient number of points during the semester during the seminars does not indicate the "risks" of the rating system, but that the teacher himself does not use enough group research technology in the classroom (allowing control the entire composition of the 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 for educational and methodological support. The format of the Working Programs of Academic Disciplines (RPUD), in contrast to the previous Educational and Methodological Complexes (TMC), is not limited to the setting of the general objectives of the course and a detailed description of the content of the discipline with the attached list of references. The development of the Federal State Educational Standard is an integrated design of the educational process, as close as possible to the teaching practice. Within the framework of the RPUD, the tasks of the discipline should be linked to the competencies that are being formed, 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 should be verifiable with the help of the proposed educational technologies and forms of control, and the fund of assessment tools attached to the program must provide all these planned forms of control. If such a system of educational and methodological support is developed with high quality, then it will not be difficult to integrate the rating plan into it.
As for the impossibility of promptly making changes to the curriculum of the discipline under the conditions of the point-rating system, this requirement, of course, creates obvious inconveniences 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 evaluation means and the rating plan must be approved by the department for each academic year before the start of the academic year or at least a semester. All necessary changes should be made following the implementation of this educational model in the previous year. And during the current academic year, neither the work program nor the rating plan can be changed - students must receive information about all educational requirements at the beginning of the semester and the teacher has no right to change the "rules of the game" until the end of the course. However, within the framework of the already approved rating plan, the teacher can provide himself with a certain "freedom of maneuver" - by introducing options such as "rating bonus" and "rating penalty", as well as fixing duplicate forms of control (when the rating plan provides for the possibility of transferring certain topics of seminars into the format of assignments for independent work, or a certain control event planned for the semester is duplicated by a compensating control assignment from the additional part of the rating plan - this approach is useful when planning forms of educational work that end the semester and in the event of a force majeure may remain not implemented in the classroom).

The point-rating system can provoke conflict situations, create an unhealthy atmosphere in the student group, not stimulate the individualization of learning, but encourage individualism, the desire to "put a spoke in the wheel" of his colleagues.

Such pedagogical situations are possible, but they, as a rule, arise due to erroneous actions on the part of the teacher. In itself, the competitiveness of the educational process is a powerful stimulating factor, especially if it is consolidated with the help of game forms, is implemented openly and is stimulated not only by the rating, but also by the emotional background, moral rewards. The excesses of "individualism" can be easily prevented by making personal rating achievements dependent on the results of team actions. The main condition for the adaptation of students to the point-rating system is its consistency, balance and informational 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 academic 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 arising in the course of rating assessment: if a student does not agree with the set score for the discipline, he can apply to the dean for a review of the results with the subsequent consideration of this issue by the 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, provides a noticeable increase in the level of academic performance, strengthens the reputation indicators of the faculty and the status of specific teachers.

A 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 introduced, a paradoxical tendency is observed: with an increase in the quality of education, a decrease in the level of student performance occurs.

There are many reasons for this. The cumulative assessment reflects not only the student's level of training, but also the total volume 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 unwillingness of many students to introduce a point-rating system also affects. First of all, this concerns the categories of "excellent" and "C grade". Students who are accustomed to receive "automatic machines" with the help of regular attendance and active behavior at seminars, in the conditions of a point-rating system, are faced with the need to confirm a high level of their training in each procedure of midterm control, and often - to perform additional rating tasks to obtain the final grade " Great". "Troes" are deprived of the opportunity to get an examination mark, convincing the teacher of the "complexity of life circumstances" and promising to "learn everything later." Students with academic arrears find themselves in a particularly difficult position. Having an "open session", they are forced to spend a lot of time preparing additional rating assignments (in contrast to the previous practice of "retaking" the exam), which means that they initially find themselves in the role of outsiders in the rating of disciplines of the new semester that has already begun. Another reason for the decline in the level of academic performance when introducing a point-rating system may be the teacher's mistakes in its design. Typical examples are overestimation of scores for marks “excellent” and “good”, excessive saturation of forms of control (when the labor intensity of students' independent work established by the curriculum is not taken into account), lack of methodological explanations about the rating tasks performed and requirements for their quality. The inconsistency of the rating plans of different disciplines can also have a negative effect. For example, if during the session the 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 loads for students. All such risks are virtually inevitable in the transition phase. Their minimization depends on the systematic nature of actions aimed at introducing a new assessment model, conducting regular monitoring of the educational process, and improving the qualifications of the teaching staff.

The point-rating system provides an increase in students' motivation for mastering fundamental and professional knowledge, stimulates daily systematic educational work, increases the academic discipline, including class attendance, allows students to move on to building individual educational trajectories.

Such theses are quite fair in their essence and they can often be seen in the composition of university regulations on the point-rating system. However, the practical results, as a rule, turn out to be much more modest than expected. And here it is not only the specificity of the transitional stage that affects. The rating system has a deep contradiction. On the one hand, it is one of the elements of the competence-based learning model, the implementation of which is associated not only with the conditions of innovative social development and the requirements of the modern labor market, but also with the socio-cultural consequences of the information revolution - the formation of a generation with developed lateral ("clip") thinking. Lateral thinking is based on a positive attitude to fragmentariness, contradictory nature of the surrounding reality, situational logic of decision-making, flexible perception of new information with unwillingness and inability to build it into “large texts” and “hierarchy of meanings”, an increased level of infantility in combination with a readiness for spontaneous creative activity ... A vivid example of "clip" sign culture is the interface of any Internet portal with its "fragmentary", plurality, incompleteness, openness to manifestations of spontaneous interest, followed by nonlinear movement along the system of hyperlinks. This virtual "architecture" reflects the features of behavioral reactions, thinking systems, communicative culture of the generation that grew up under 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 a key requirement for any educational publication. Meanwhile, the pedagogical concept of 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 fulfillment of educational tasks. A small category of students ("excellent students" of the classical sample) can quite comfortably adapt to such requirements. But from the point of view of the interests of a "typical" modern student, the first place comes out the opportunity to "join" the educational process at "different speeds", to intensify one's efforts at one time or another, to experience periods of decline in educational activity relatively painlessly, to choose the most interesting and comfortable learning situations. Consequently, the most important qualities of the point-rating system are its flexibility and variability, modular structure, and not academic integrity, maximizing the educational activity of students and increasing the formal level of academic performance. The teacher must build a system of information support 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 volume of accompanying methodological recommendations, advanced planning of their actions and construction of “individual educational trajectories”. But the teacher must understand that the majority of students will not actually build any "individual educational trajectories" and will be seriously interested in the rating system only towards the end of the semester. Therefore, focusing on the algorithm of actions of the “ideal student” when designing a rating plan (and this is how the maximum 100-point scale is constructed), the teacher should initially include “imperfect” models of educational behavior in the rating model, including isolating those few units of content and educational situations, which, by increasing their rating scores, will become basic and strictly obligatory for all students to master, duplicate them with the help of compensating rating assignments. The complex of compensating rating assignments itself should be excessively wide - it is intended not only for successful students to “get” a small number of points before the start of the session, but also for organizing the individual work of students who have completely “dropped out” of the rhythm of the educational process.

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

Removing the "exam stress" and providing comfortable conditions for the academic work of students are important tasks of the point-rating system. However, in an effort to ensure flexibility and variability of the educational process, one should not neglect the requirements of the academic discipline. The rating model of assessment should not be positioned as a system of “automata”, when “even a top three 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 with additional assignments cannot be perceived as a reason not to attend classes for two or three months, and then "quickly" make up for lost time during the session. An effective balance between the variability and flexibility of rating requirements, on the one hand, and the academic discipline, on the other, can be achieved by several tools: first, it is important to apply a stimulating distribution of points between different types of workload (those that the teacher considers the most important - be it lectures or control procedures, creative assignments or seminars, should be attractive in terms of the number of points; additional rating assignments should either be inferior in terms of the number of points to the tasks of the basic part, or exceed them in complexity); secondly, in the basic part of the rating plan, the teacher can fix those forms of educational work and control that are mandatory regardless of the number of points scored; thirdly, when checking the rating tasks, the teacher must show consistency, including avoiding situations, when during the semester the tasks are checked with a high degree of exactingness, and during the session and especially after its end - in a “simplified manner”; fourthly, students must be fully informed about the structure of the rating plan and the requirements, and it must be borne in mind that it is not enough to transmit the relevant information during the first week of the semester - many students are involved in the educational process very imposingly and with a delay, 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 the awareness of students under control and "stimulate" potential outsiders in advance, without waiting for the end of the semester; fifthly, the procedures of midterm control and the regular calculation of the accumulated number of points have a disciplining 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 statements with four “slices” of accumulated points) ...

The point-rating system significantly increases the objectivity of assessment, ensures impartiality on the part of the teacher; the rating score 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 attitudes play an important role in the normal functioning of the point-rating system, however, in practice, a completely different development of events is possible. The most illustrative example is the comparison of the classic exam and checking the rating tasks. The exam has a strong reputation for being a very subjective test procedure. Student folklore is full of examples of how a teacher is able to subtly "blame" on an exam, and recommendations on how to overcome the examiner's vigilance, with the help of what tricks to bypass the rigor of examination control. But, in reality, the format of the exam includes a number of mechanisms that increase its objectivity - from the direct relationship between the content of the course and the exam (the knowledge of the main content of the program is comprehensively tested in the exam) 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. By itself, the definition of an assessment in a wide range of rating points is more subjective than the usual "three", "four" and "five". In the course of the classical exam, a student may well find out the criteria for the assessment received, but when 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 fund of assessment tools, including a full set of educational and control tasks that exactly correspond to the rating plan with an indication of their score. It is necessary that the approval of these materials at the meeting of the department is not formal, but preceded by an examination - this procedure will help to ensure the proper level of requirements. In addition, it is very important that rating assignments are accompanied by methodological comments for students, and in the case of creative and training assignments - examples of their successful implementation. Another effective tool for increasing the objectivity of rating assessment is the development of tiered scoring criteria for each of the tasks. The most effective and comfortable for the teacher is a three-level detailing of the requirements for each assignment (a kind of analogue of "three", "four" and "five" with "pluses" and "minuses"). For example, if an assignment is assessed in the range from 1 to 8 points, then as part of the methodological recommendations for students, three sets of assessment criteria can be given, in accordance with 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 assignments can be used from year to year.

Such a judgment cannot be heard from teachers who have at least minimal experience in the implementation of the 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. And this is not only about the intensity of control procedures. First of all, it is required to perform a huge amount of educational and methodological work related to the design of the rating system, the development of appropriate didactic materials and assessment tools. And this work is not one-time in nature - a full-fledged and effective rating system is developed in at least three to four years, and adjustments to it have to be made annually. When implementing the point-rating system, the teacher is also assigned additional functions for its organizational and information support. Moreover, the need for regular scoring, which especially confuses "newcomers", is in fact perhaps the simplest element of this work. As for the lack of "full-fledged examinations and tests", the labor intensity of these forms of control is clearly inferior to checking the rating assignments. So, for example, if, within the framework of the classical model of the educational process, the teacher met a student at the exam a maximum of three times (including the examination board), then when implementing the point-rating system, he is forced to check additional compensating tasks until the student accumulates points for the final evaluations "satisfactory". Thus, the myth of a decrease in the volume of teaching work when introducing a point-rating system has not the slightest foundation. However, unfortunately, it often manifests itself in the formation of requirements for the labor standards of the teaching staff, when, for example, it is believed that the previous total workload of the teacher associated with monitoring the independent work of students and the examination is comparable to the provision of a point-rating system. The inconsistency of such an approach is confirmed even by the simplest mathematical calculations: if, for example, taking an exam in a discipline is estimated at 0.25 hours per student, and checking the control tasks provided by the curriculum (essays, tests, abstracts, projects) - at 0.2 –0.3 hours per assignment, then the rating system with three or four procedures for midterm control during the semester and additional rating assignments that students can perform on their own initiative in any quantity (including passing the same exam), more than covers the complexity of the classical model evaluation.

It is also worth noting that after the introduction of the point-rating system of assessment, the practice of "attendance days" or "contact hours" (when a teacher, in addition to classroom lessons, must 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, as well as the need for consultations about rating assignments arises from 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 the point-rating system, it is advisable to develop universal models of rating plans and standard forms for describing rating assignments. The use of unified rating schemes will not only ensure the required quality of the educational process, but also solve the problem of adaptation of students and faculty 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 rating system. In particular, this will allow avoiding obvious mistakes in the design of rating plans, simplify the information and organizational support of the point-rating system, unify the requirements for the main forms of control, and provide a higher level of control over the educational process during the 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 the 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 system of assessment is mainly due to the fact that teachers do not see an opportunity to adapt it to the usual schemes of the educational process. The main reason why the unification of rating plans is inappropriate is that the introduction of this rating system is not an end in itself. The rating model is designed to consolidate the transition to competence-based learning, to expand the scope of interactive educational technologies, to consolidate the activity-based nature of the educational process, to activate 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.