Home → Releases → 18 (4) →

LEADING SCIENTIFIC IDEAS TO SUPPORT HIGH ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE OF PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS IN INTERNATIONAL AND RUSSIAN PRACTICE

Pedagogy and Education , UDC: 373.31 DOI: 10.24412/2076-9121-2024-4-80-93

Authors

  • Ryzhov Alexey N. Doctor of Education Sciences, Associate Professor

Annotation

One of the main indicators of professional success of a specialist, building trajectories of his personal improvement is academic success. This indicator accompanies a person throughout the entire period of his training and formation as a specialist. Of particular importance are the conditions for the organisation of this process at the early stages of education — during primary general education. The study of Russian and international experience in ensuring the success of primary school education will allow students to form further educational routes more productively and offer individual forms of professional development. As a result of the analysis of the works of domestic and foreign scientists, pedagogical, psychological and social factors of ensuring the academic success of younger schoolchildren were identified and presented in the article. The identification, grouping and brief description of such factors formed the main purpose of the presented article. Understanding foreign and Russian approaches to the analysis of academic success of schoolchildren will be useful for both scientists and practical teachers in building individual educational trajectories of students.
Tags:
academic performance , academic success , factors of academic success , primary school students

How to link insert

Ryzhov, A. N. (2024). LEADING SCIENTIFIC IDEAS TO SUPPORT HIGH ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE OF PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS IN INTERNATIONAL AND RUSSIAN PRACTICE Bulletin of the Moscow City Pedagogical University. Series "Pedagogy and Psychology", 18 (4), 80. https://doi.org/10.24412/2076-9121-2024-4-80-93
References
1. 1. Sternberg, R. J., Forsythe, J. B., & Hedlund, J. (2002). Practical intelligence. Under the general editorship of R. D. Sternberg; translated from the English by K. A. Shchukina, Yu. A. Butkevich. Saint-Petersburg: Peter. (In Russ.).
2. 2. Hattie, J. A. C. (2017). Visible Learning: Synthesizing the results of more than 50,000 studies involving more than 86 million schoolchildren. Edited by V. K. Zagvozdkin, E. A. Khamraeva. Moscow: National education. (In Russ.).
3. 3. Hattie, J. A. C. (1987). Identifying the salient facets of model of student learning: A synthesis of meta-analyses. International Journal of Education Research, 11(2), 187–212.
4. 4. Marzano, R. J. (2000). A new era of school reform: Going where the takes us. Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning. Aurora, Colorado 80014.
5. 5. Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analysis review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 125(6), 659.
6. 6. Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254.
7. 7. Greenwald, R., Hedges, L. V., & Laine, R. D. (1996). The effect of school resources on student achievement. Review of Educational Research, 66(3), 361–396.
8. 8. Cornelius-White, J. (2007). Learner-centered teacher-student relationships are effective: A meta-analysis. Review of Education Research, 77(1), 113–143.
9. 9. Weinstein, R. S., & Higher, R. (2004). Reaching higher: The power of expectations in schooling. Cambridge. MA: Harvard University Press. The Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare. Article 23. March.
10. 10. Wood, R. E., & Locke, E. A. (1987). The relation of self-efficacy and grade goals to academic performance. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 47(4), 1013–1024.
11. 11. Nesbit, J. C., & Adesope O. O. (2006). Learning with concept and knowledge maps: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 76(3), 413–448.
12. 12. Crissman, J. K. (2006). The design and utilization of effective worked examples: A meta-analysis: Unpublished PhD. The University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE.
13. 13. Allen, M., Witt, P. L., & Wheeless, L. R. (2006). The role of teacher immediacy as a motivational factor in student learning: Using meta-analysis to test a causal model. Communication Education, 55(1), 21–31.
14. 14. Hyde, J. S. (2005). The gender similarities hypothesis. American Psychologist, 60(6), 581–592.
15. 15. Marsh, H. W., & Rowe, K. J. (1996). The effects of single-sex and mixed-sex mathematics classes within a coeducational school: A reanalysis and comment. Australian Journal of Education, 40(2), 147–162.
16. 16. Tihomirova, T. N., Modjaev, A. D., & Leonova, N. M. (2015). Factors of success in learning at the initial stage of general education: gender differences. Psihologicheskij zhurnal, 36(5), 43–54. (In Russ.).
17. 17. Miron, G., & Nelson, C. (2001). Student academic achievement in charter schools: What we know and why we know so little Western Michigan University. Kalamazoo, MI 49008-523. New York: Columbia University, National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education. Occasional Paper N. 41.
18. 18. Stekelenburg, C. R. (1991). The effects of public high school size on student achievement: A meta-analysis. Unpublished Ed. D., University of Georgia, GA.
19. 19. Newman, M., Garrett, Z., Elbourne, D., Bradley, S., Noden, P., Taylor, J., & West, A. (2006). Does secondary school size make a difference?: A systematic review. Educational Research Review, 1(1), 41–60.
20. 20. Chan, C. (2005). Are small classes better? Or what makes a small class better?: Paper presented at the Conference on Learning Effectiveness and Class Size. University of Hong Kong. Hong Kong, May.
21. 21. Oakes, J., Quartz, K. H., Gong, J., Guiton, G., & Lipton, M. (1993). Creating middle schools: Technical, normative, and political considerations. The Elementary School Journal, 93(5), 461–480.
22. 22. Wilkinson, I. A. G., Parr, J. M., Fung, I. Y. Y., Hattie, J. (2002) Discussion: Modeling and maximizing peer effects in school. International Journal of Educational Research, 37(5), 521–535.
23. 23. Lubart, T. I., Holling H., & Ushakov, D. V. (2016). Introduction to the special issue «intelligence, creativity and giftedness». Learning and Individual Differences, 52, 120.
24. 24. Springer, L., Stanne M. E., & Donovan, S. S. (1999). Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 69(1), 21–51.
25. 25. Lou, Y., Abrami, P. C., & d’Apollonia, S. (2001). Small group and individual learning with technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71(3), 449–521.
26. 26. Druzhinin, V. N. (2007). Psychology of abilities: selected works. Monograph. Moscow: Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 541 p. (In Russ.).
27. 27. Ravich-Shherbo, I. V., Marjutina, T. M., Trubnikov, V. I., Belova, E. S., & Kiriakidi, Je. F. (1996). Psychological predictors of individual development. Voprosy psychologii, 2, 42–53. (In Russ.).
28. 28. Malyh, S. B., Tihomirova, T. N., & Kovas, Ju. V. (2012). Individual differences in learning abilities: opportunities and prospects for psychogenetic research. Educational Studies, 4, 186–199. (In Russ.).
29. 29. Tihomirova, T. N. (2016). Cognitive foundations of individual differences in academic success: a structurally functional model. Author’s abstract of the dissertation of Doctor of Psychological Sciences. Moscow. (In Russ.).
30. 30. Postavnev, V. M., Postavneva, I. V., Dvojnin, A. M., & Romanova, M. A. (2020). General and particular cognitive abilities as predictors of a child’s academic success in the early stages of education. MCU Journal of Pedagogy and Psychology, 4(54), 64–73. (In Russ.).
31. 31. Dvojnin, A. M., & Trockaja, E. S. (2022). Cognitive predictors of academic success: how do general patterns “work” in the early stages of education? Psihologicheskaja nauka i obrazovanie, 27(2), 42–52. (In Russ.).
32. 32. Savenkov, A. I. (2019). Psychology of child giftedness. Textbook. Moscow: Yurayt. (In Russ.).
33. 33. Savenkov, A. I., Ajgunova, O. A., Krivova, T. A., Pavlenko, T. A., Polkovnikova, N. B., & Savenkova, T. D. (2017). Development of emotional intelligence and social competence of a child as factors of educational success formation at the stage of transition from kindergarten to primary school. Monograph. Scientific ed. A. I. Savenkov. Moscow: Pen. (In Russ.).
34. 34. Savenkova, T. D. (2020). The development of social intelligence of preschoolers. Textbook for universities. Moscow: Yurait. (In Russ.).
35. 35. Teplov, B. M. (1985). Abilities and giftedness. In: Selected works: in 2 volumes, vol. 1 (pp. 15–41). Moscow: Pedagogy. (In Russ.).
36. 36. Tihomirova, T. N., Malyh, S. B., Tosto, M. G., & Kovas, Ju. V. (2014). Cognitive characteristics and success in solving mathematical tasks in high school age: cross-cultural analysis. Psihologicheskij zhurnal, 35(1), 41–53. (In Russ.).
37. 37. On the system of assessment of educational achievements of younger schoolchildren in the conditions of non-marketed learning. (2003). Letter from the Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation. Nachal’naja shkola, 8, 3–8. (In Russ.).
38. 38. Ziskin, K. E., & Petrovskij, V. A. (2016). Motivating assessment. Nauka i shkola, 5, 14–23. (In Russ.).
Download file .pdf 388.4 kb