MONITORING OF EDUCATION AS A PROGNOSTIC BASIS FOR ITS STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT

The article presents the analysis of the solution of the problem of building educational reality for the purposes of formation of development strategies based on indicators of monitoring of education systems. First of all, it was necessary to form an array of key indicators as a predictive basis for determining the ways of strategic development of national education systems. To solve this problem, various methods were used: descriptive, comparative, temporal, correlation, prognostic, etc. As an example of the results, a table of composite indices with administrative levels of monitoring and strategic decision-making is presented. The model of global education 2030 is also described. The empirical part of the study is represented by: a) forecasts for the stages of education on the basis of monitoring of different types; b) categorization of monitoring indicators characterizing school teachers.

1. Youngblood, D. (2007). Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and bridging disciplines: A matter of process. Journal of Research Practice, vol. 3, no. 2, article M18, viewed 1, December 2018, http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/104/101

2. Young, M. et al. (2016). Preliminary reflections and research on Knowledge, Skills, Attitudes and Values necessary for 2030. World Bank. 2015. Incheon declaration: education 2030 - towards inclusive and equitable quality education and lifelong learning for all (English). Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group.

3. Рогачева Е.Ю. Воспитание детей в семье Джона Дьюи / Историко-педагогический журнал, №2. — 2013. — С. 81-97.

4. Leask, B. (2014). Internationalizing the Curriculum and all Students’ Learning. International Higher Education. No. 78: special issue 2014, pages 5-6.

5. UNESCO. 2017. A National Strategy for the Development of Education Statistics (NSDES). Guidelines for country-level design of the NSDES.

6. European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice (2018). Structural Indicators for Monitoring Education and Training Systems in Europe 2018 , an internal report. European Commission (2017).

7. York, T., Gibson III, C. & Rankin, S. (2015). Defining and Measuring Academic Success. Practice Assessment, Research & Evaluation. 20.

8. Найденова, И.С. Оценка качества образования в режиме мониторинга учебных достижений // Современная педагогика. 2016. № 4.

9. OECD (2018), Education at a Glance 2018: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/eag-2018-en.

10. Долгановская Н.В. & Катичева М.Г. (2014). Прогнозы и стратегии развития образования на современном этапе. Известия высших учебных заведений. Северо-Кавказский регион. Общественные науки, (6 (184)), 137-141.

11. Руднева Т.И., & Рубцова Т.П. (2018). Внутривузовский мониторинг качества обучения. Вестник Самарского университета. История, педагогика, филология, 24 (2), 70-76.

12. Найденова, Н.Н. Качество образования: глобальное и национальное измерение / Н.Н. Найденова // Профессиональное образование. – № 6. – Уфа, 2015. С. 15-21.

13. Глебова Л.Н., Кузнецова М.Д., Шадриков В.Д. Мониторинг качества высшего педагогического образования: монография. М.: Логос, 2012.

14. Rassulova, S. Мировое образовательное пространство: перспективы и горизонты (World Educational Space: Perspectives and Horizons. March 20, 2015). http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2583522

15. Janova M.G., Adolf V.A., Ignatova V.V. Antinomy as a structuring principle of the formation of organizational and pedagogical culture of the student in the socio-cultural educational environment [Alma mater], no. 12, (2012): 82-87.

16. OECD (2018) The future of education and skills: Education 2030.

17. UNESCO. Institute for Statistics (UIS). (2017b). SDG 4 Data Digest 2017. The Quality Factor: Strengthening National Data to Monitor Sustainable Development Goal 4. Montreal: UIS.

18. Боровкова Т.И., Морев И.А. Мониторинг развития системы образования. Часть 1. Теоретические аспекты: Учебное пособие. – Владивосток: Изд-во Дальневосточного университета, 2004.

19. Индексы и индикаторы человеческого развития. Обновленные статистические данные (2018). Программа развития Организации Объединенных Наций (ПРООН). Полноправные люди, Устойчивые страны.

20. Naydenova N.N., Shaposhnikova T.D., Zianshina R.I., Myasnikov V.A. Interdisciplinary educational reality of basic education: religious and secular components // 7th icCSBs 2018 Annual International Conference on Cognitive - Social, and Behavioural Sciences, 12-14 November 2018. https://www.futureacademy.org.uk/files/images/upload/icCSBs2018_agenda&abstract_book.pdf.

21. Naydenova N.N., Mamchenko A.A., Shaposhnikova T.D., Sukhin I.G., Dolgaya O.I., Myasnikov V.A. Constructing Interdisciplinary Educational Reality into Information Age // 2018 International Conference "Education Environment for the Information Age" (EEIA-2018), 05-06 June 2018. – Pp. 472-484. – doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2018.09.02.55.

22. Scheerens, J. (2015). School Effectiveness Research. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 21, 80-85.

23. Bebenina E.V., Elkina I.M. University Rankings as a Subject and an Object of Educational Space. http://dx.doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2017.08.19

24. OECD (2019). Trends Shaping Education 2019, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/trends_edu-2019-en.

25. Иванова С.В. Репрезентация и интерпретация решений как поиск компромисса в современном гражданском обществе // Альманах Пространство и Время. 2015. Т. 9. Вып. 2: Пространство и время принятия решений.

26. Eriksson E., Björklund Boistrup, L. & Thornberg, R. (2017) A categorisation of teacher feedback in the classroom: a field study on feedback based on routine classroom assessment in primary school, Research Papers in Education, 32:3, 316-332.