Authors
- Durov Viktor I. PhD in History, Associate Professor
Annotation
The new stage of higher education reform in Russia that has begun naturally raises the question of assessment systems, whether it depends on the specifics of training specialists. The purpose of the article is to study the features of the use of the point-rating
system in the system of higher military education and the possibility of its implementation. The article is based on empirical data obtained during a pedagogical experiment in the discipline «Military History» (2012–2020). We used the questionnaire method, which made it possible to study the attitude of students to the analyzed assessment system.
The study sample included 287 cadets. We studied the answers received to open-ended questions by frequency analysis and content analysis. The experiment revealed some features of the use of the studied assessment system in a military university. The analysis of the questionnaire showed the prospects of using such forms of reporting as the defenseof thematic articles and essay writing in the educational process, as well as the predominance of a negative attitude of cadets to the point-rating system. The article provides an analysis of the shortcomings identified during the experiment and ways to overcome them. The author demonstrates the feasibility of using a point-rating system of assessment when introducing it throughout the entire university, automating the accounting, and strictly following its principles.
How to link insert
Durov, V. I. (2025). EXPERIENCE OF USING A POINT-RATING SYSTEM IN A MILITARY UNIVERSITY Bulletin of the Moscow City Pedagogical University. Series "Pedagogy and Psychology", 19 (2), 161. https://doi.org/10.24412/2076-9121-2025-2-161-180
References
1.
1. Ismatova, Sha. M. (2021). Point-Rating System as an Effective Way to Assess Students Knowledge in Credit Module System. Journal NX – A Multidisciplinary Peer Reviewed Journal, 15–23. https://repo.journalnx.com/index.php/nx/article/view/506
2.
2. Cain, J., Medina, M., Romanelli, F., & Persky, A. (2022). Deficiencies of Traditional Grading Systems and Recommendations for the Future. American journal of pharmaceutical education, 86(7), 8850. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe8850
3.
3. Lipnevich, A. A., Guskey, T. R., Murano, D. M., & Smith, J. K. (2020). What do grades mean? Variation in grading criteria in American college and university courses. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 27(5), 580–600. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2020.1799190
4.
4. Terada, Y. (2023). Why the 100-Point Grading Scale Is a Stacked Deck. Edutopai. https://www.edutopia.org/article/why-the-100-point-grading-scale-is-a-stacked-deck/
5.
5. Guskey, T. R., & Brookhart, S. M. (2019). What We Know About Grading: What Works, What Doesn’t, and What’s Next. Alexandria, ASCD.
6.
6. Guskey, T. R. (2020). Get Set, Go!: Creating Successful Grading and Reporting Systems. Bloomington: Solution Tree Press.
7.
7. Schneider, J., & Ethan, L. H. Off the Mark: How Grades, Ratings, and Ran kings Undermine Learning (but Don’t Have To). Harvard University Press, 2023. 296 р. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.4418225.
8.
8. Maki, P. L. (2011). Assessing for Learning: Building a Sustainable Commitment Across the Institution (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003443056
9.
9. Irons, A., & Elkington, S. (2022). Enhancing Learning through Formative Assess ment and Feedback (2nd ed.). Routledge. 248 р. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781138610514
10.
10. Kuepper-Tetzel, C. E., & Gardner, P. L. (2021). Effects of Temporary Mark With-holding on Academic Performance. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 20(3), 405–419.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1475725721999958
11.
11. Sozonov, A. B. (2012). Grade Point Average System as a Fair Measure for the Estimation of Knowledge and the Quality of Educational Process. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia, 6, 28–40. (In Russ.).
12.
12. Podporin, I. V. (2018). Point-Rating System of Evaluation Quality of Know-ledge of Students Krasnodar University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs as a Pre-dictor of Increase their Motivation to Self-Educational Activity. Problems of modern
pedagogical education, 60(4), 333–337. (In Russ.). https://elibrary.ru/download/elibrary_35689098_47167794.pdf
13.
13. Maklachkov, E. A., & Shilenin, D. A. (2022). Impact of Point-Rating Control on the Develop-ment of the Image of Future Officer. Pedagogical Education in Russia, 3, 93–102. https://pedobrazovanie.ru/images/3-2022/11.pdf. (In Russ.)
14.
14. Piven, V. A., Shipalov, V. I., & Maslyaeva, G. N. (2021). Point-Rating System. For Evaluating Educational Activities in Physics of Aviation School Cadets. Bulletin of Military Education, 3(30), 52–56. https://elibrary.ru/download/elibrary_46149354_26660439.pdf. (In Russ.).
15.
15. Izosimov, D. V., & Potapova, M. V. (2021). Modern Means of Verification and Evaluation of Professional Skills Formed in a Diagnostic-Stimulating Environment of a Military University. Bulletin of the South Ural State University. Ser. Education. Educational Sciences, 13(1) 6–17. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.14529/ped210101
16.
16. Menk, A. P., & Kaliazhenkov, А. N. (2016). Rating Assessment System for Military-Technical Competencies of Students of the Military Training Department. Bulletin of the South Ural State University. Ser. Education. Educational Sciences, 8(3), 100–111. (In Russ.). http://dx.doi.org/10.14529/ped160313
17.
17. Shaposhnikov, B. M. (1974). Memories. Military scientific works. Moscow: Voenizdat. (In Russ.).
18.
18. Durov, V. I. (2017, April 20–21). The methodology of the point-rating system as a factor in increasing the motivation of cadets of military universities to study (using the example of the discipline «Military History»). In: Current issues of studying and tea ching world history in schools and universities. Materials of the Intern. scientific-practical. conf. (pp. 134–137). Ryazan: RSU named after S. A. Esenin. (In Russ.). https://op.vlsu.ru/fileadmin/Programmy/Bacalavr_academ/44.03.05/Istoriy_In_lang-Angl/Metod_doc/Konf_Riazan_2016.pdf
19.
19. Durov, V. I., & Basov, A. V. (2023). Mind-map as a tool for systematization and cont rol of students’ knowledge. MCU Journal of Pedagogy and Psychology, 17(4), 10–27. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.25688/2076-9121.2023.17.4.01
20.
20. Domarenko, E. V., & Dombrovskaya, A. Yu. (2013). The implementation of pointsrating system of evaluation of student performance in Russian universities. Concept, 11. (In Russ.). http://e-koncept.ru/2013/13225.htm.
21.
21. Maltseva, N. N., & Penkov, V. E. (2021). Point-Based Grading System: Advantages and Disadvantages. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia, 30(4), 139–145. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.31992/0869-3617-2021-30-4-139-145