Home страница → Archive → A METHOD OF COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SCHOOL CHILDREN ACHIEVEMENT AT THE CHANGE OF IN-PERSON AND DISTANCE LEARNING FORMATS

A METHOD OF COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SCHOOL CHILDREN ACHIEVEMENT AT THE CHANGE OF IN-PERSON AND DISTANCE LEARNING FORMATS

Pedagogy and Education , UDC: 373 DOI: 10.24412/2076-9121-2025-2-98-118

Authors

  • Matyushina Svetlana N. PhD in Physico-Mathematical Sciences, Associate Professor
  • Naumova Alena A.
  • Pisareva Natalia D.

Annotation

The remote learning format, which gained widespread adoption during the introduction of quarantine measures due to the COVID-19 pandemic, has prompted the development of new methods in the field of education. Assessment of the quality of learning outcomes using various organizational and methodological techniques contributes to the formation of thoughtful technologies in the digital space of the education system. This paper presents a method for statistical analysis of school performance during periods of full-time and distance learning. The results of the study revealed differences in the effectiveness of distance education among different age groups of students. The issues of developing optimal strategies and new programs in the field of education remain controversial, the effectiveness of which can be verified using the method presented in the article.
Tags:
criterion of signs , level of training of students , mathematical statistics , statistical criteria , student academic performance
References
1. 1. Smagina, M. V., Migacheva, M. V., & Ivashova, V. A. (2022). Development of distance learning at a pedagogical university during a pandemic: problems and vectors of improvement. MCU Journal of Pedagogy and Psychology, 16(2), 159–173. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.25688/2076-9121.2022.16.2.09
2. 2. Varlamova, A. I., & Manvelova, I. A. (2021). Consequences of the coronavirus for higher education. MCU Journal of Pedagogy and Psychology, 4(58), 67–89. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.25688/2076-9121.2021.58.4.04
3. 3. Sizova, O. V., Kuznetsova, I. A., & Rychikhina, N. S. (2021). Analysis of the equipment of Russian educational institutions with computer technology. Modern science-intensive technologies, 1(65), 37–44. (In Russ.). https://elibrary.ru/amxmav
4. 4. Berger, F., Schreiner, C., Hagleitner, W., Jesacher-Rößler, L., Roßnagl, S., & Kraler, Ch. (2021). Predicting coping with self-regulated distance learning in times of covid-19: evidence from a longitudinal study. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=72412805
5. 5. Savinkov, V. I., & Moshkov, D. M. (2022). Social dysfunction of remote education. MCU Journal of Pedagogy and Psychology, 16(2), 116–142. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.25688/2076-9121.2022.16.2.07
6. 6. Li, J., & Wu, C.-H. (2023). Determinants of Learners’ Self-Directed Learning and Online Learning Attitudes in Online Learning. Sustainability, 15(12), 9381. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15129381
7. 7. Urazikova, Yu. V. (2022). Organization of independent work of students using internet resources as a factor of their success in the digital educational environment. MCU Journal of Pedagogy and Psychology, 16(3), 155–171. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.25688/2076-9121.2022.16.3.09
8. 8. Kiseleva, N. Y. (2022). Distance learning at the university: issues of digital ethics. MCU Journal of Pedagogy and Psychology, 16(2), 27–40. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.25688/2076-9121.2022.16.2.02
9. 9. Erdoğmuş, C., Çakır, R., & Korkmaz, Ö. (2022). Students’ Knowledge Sharing Behaviours and Sense of Online Learning Community in Online Learning Environments. Participatory Educational Research, 9(3), 46–61. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.22.53.9.3
10. 10. Anderson, A. (2019). Advancing global citizenship education through global competence and critical literacy: Innovative practices for inclusive childhood education. SAGE Open, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019826000
11. 11. Koh, J. H. L., Daniel, B. K. & Greenman, A. C. (2023). Adaptiveness for Online Learning: Conceptualising ‘Online Learning Dexterity’ from Higher Education Students’ Experiences. NZ J Educ Stud, 58, 379–397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40841-023-00287-2
12. 12. Koh, J. H. L., Daniel, B. K., Ma, R., & Mazzocco, P. (2024).Validating an Online Learning Dexterity Survey of University Students’ Online Learning Competence. Asia-Pacific Edu Res, 34, 1113–1121. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-024-00925-3
13. 13. Pham, L. T. & Dau, T. K. T. (2022). Online learning readiness and online learning system success in Vietnamese higher education. International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 39(2), 147–165. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-03-2021-0044
14. 14. Loi, Ch. K., Lim, Ja. M. H., Suki, N. M., & Lee, H. A. (2024). Exploring university students’ online learning readiness: a mixed methods study of forced online learning. Journal of Language and Education, 10, 1(37), 49–67. https://www.elibrary.ru/download/elibrary_67997777_60845773.pdf
15. 15. Park, S., & Kim, S. (2021). Is sustainable online learning possible with gamification?-the effect of gamified online learning on student learning. Sustainability, 13(8), 4267. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/8/4267
16. 16. Daniel, J. (2020). Education and the COVID-19 pandemic. Prospects, 49(1), 91–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09464-3
17. 17. García-Peñalvo, F. J. (2023). Avoiding the dark side of digital transformation in teaching. An institutional reference framework for eLearning in higher education. Sustainability, 13(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13042023
18. 18. Pautova, L. E. (2024). Organisation of digital learning environment within the system of continuing professional training. MCU Journal of Pedagogy and Psychology, 18(3), 59–75. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.25688/2076-9121.2024.18.3.04
19. 19. Vesmanov, S. V., & Istochnikov, V. V. (2023). Educational activity of schoolchildren in the digital environment. MCU Journal of Pedagogy and Psychology, 17(4), 166–191. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.25688/2076-9121.2023.17.4.10
20. 20. Bogdanova, D. I. (2021). The influence of distance learning on school performance. Young scientist, 3(345), 38–40. (In Russ.). https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=44577184
21. 21. Bogatyrev, K. A. (2024). The impact of various forms of online certification on the academic performance of Russian universities students. MCU Journal of Pedagogy and Psychology, 18(4), 110–125. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.24412/2076-9121-2024-4-110-125
22. 22. Velichenkova, O. A., Belousova, K. V., & Khakimullina, R. R. (2022). Age-related indicators of phonological working memory of younger schoolchildren with learning difficulties (according to online diagnostics). MCU Journal of Pedagogy and Psychology, 16(3), 195–214. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.25688/2076-9121.2022.16.3.11
23. 23. Matyushina, S. N., & Stolyarova, E. G. (2023). Statistical criterion of Smirnov in studies of the level of preparedness of applicants. Auditorium, 1(37), 70–79. (In Russ.). https://www.elibrary.ru/download/elibrary_50514584_19961526.pdf
24. 24. Lagutin, M. B. (2009). Visual mathematical statistics. Moscow: BINOM. Laboratory of Knowledge. 472 р. (In Russ.).
25. 25. Shevtsova, T. V. (2010). Electronic textbook as a means of introducing distance learning technologies into the educational process. In: Problems of practical training of students: integration of the university’s quality management system with leading enterprises of the food and chemical industry. Proceedings of the VII All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference (pp. 207–211). Voronezh: Voronezh State Technological Academy. (In Russ.). https://search.rsl.ru/ru/record/01004891396
26. 26. Lokalova, N. P. (2009). School failure: causes, psychocorrection, psychoprophylaxis. A textbook. SPb.: Peter. (In Russ.). https://search.rsl.ru/ru/record/01004169180
27. 27. Miselimyan, T. L. & Metelitsa, N. T. (2005). The impact of student attendance on the quality of the educational process. Successes of modern natural science, 5, 76–79. (In Russ.). https://search.rsl.ru/ru/record/01002767633.
Download file .pdf 528.27 kb