Implementation of a Monitoring System in the Educational Process in Primary School

Olha A. Komar, Oleh S. Komar, Natalia A. Kolomiiets, Liudmyla M. Roienko, Pavlо V. Diachuk

Abstract


The purpose of this study is to explore how primary school teachers perceive the practice of implementing monitoring support on the basis of autonomous monitoring groups by educational level, and what factors have a decisive influence on their positive or negative perception of the above approach to assessing educator/student effectiveness. Several tools were used to collect the data, including: classroom observations, lesson checklists (evaluation forms), lesson plans evaluation forms, interviews for teachers and parents, focus group survey questionnaires. The quantitative data were analysed and consolidated in tables, represented as row percentages, and calculated using the Chi-Square statistical method. In addition, the data comparison strategy, triangulation of data sources, and study validation method were used. The Textalyzer web tool was used to process the data obtained through the focus group survey. Focus group teachers spoke positively about the format and content of the project. The majority of the teachers who had formed the experimental group reported improvements in self-organization and self-discipline, flexibility in problem-solving, teamwork skills, and improved learning process engagement and learning outcomes of their pupils. The study illustrated the initial stage of implementation of a monitoring system in the educational process by primary school teachers in Ukraine. The research conditions, constraints and contextual factors that influenced teachers’ perception of this innovation were identified. This monitoring system helps to optimize the quality of education in primary school. Teachers reported that by participating in the project, they upgraded their professional skills, improved both their pedagogical mastery and self-study skills, increased their self-esteem and motivation. The colleagues’ and headteachers’ feedback and criticism are often perceived as discouraging factors. The results of the study can be regarded as a baseline due to several limitations, which include a number of participants, potential bias in school choice and limited availability for observation.

https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.18.11.14


Keywords


monitoring support; educational process; primary school; autonomous monitoring group.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Bibik, N. M. (2017). New Ukrainian School: Teacher Guide. Pleiada Publishing House LLC.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage.

Duan, X., Du, X., & Yu, K. (2018). School Culture and School Effectiveness: The Mediating Effect of Teachers’ Job Satisfaction. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 17(5), 15–25. doi:10.26803/ijlter.17.5.2

Durlak, J. A., & DuPre, E. P. (2008). Implementation matters: A review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(3-4), 327–350. doi:10.1007/s10464-008-9165-0

Environmental Change Institute. (2014, March). A step by step guide to Monitoring and Evaluation. https://www.geog.ox.ac.uk/research/technologies/projects/mesc/guide-to-monitoring-and-evaluation-v1-march2014.pdf

Fegan, J., & Field, M. H. (2009). Education across Borders: Politics, Policy and Legislative Actions. Springer.

Ferdaus, J. (2016). Monitoring and Evaluation in education system of Bangladesh: Theory, reflection, and recommendation. BRAC Institute of Educational Development, BRAC University. doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.28186.54723.

Fullan, M. (2014). Teacher development and educational change. Routledge Falmer.

Fulton, C. (2018, February). Monitoring and Evaluating Policy. https://www.victoriaprimary.org.uk/cmsfiles/items/downloads/doclett-20180226113324-5179/Monitoring%20and%20Evaluating%20Policy.pdf

Grischenko, M. (Ed.). (2016, October). New Ukrainian School. Conceptual Principles of Secondary School Reform. https://www.kmu.gov.ua/storage/app/media/reforms/ukrainska-shkola-compressed.pdf

Hoover, J. J. (2009). RTI Assessment Essentials for Struggling Learners. Corwin Press.

Hu, G. (2002). Potential cultural resistance to pedagogical imports: The case of communicative language teaching in China. Language Culture and Curriculum, 15(2), 93–105. doi:10.1080/07908310208666636

Kayani, M. M., Begum, N., Kayani, A., & Naureen, S. (2011). Effectiveness of monitoring system at primary level in Pakistan. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(19) (Special Issue), 148–154.

Law of Ukraine # 2145-VIII. (2017). On Education. Retrieved September 23, 2019, from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2145-19

Luginbuhl, R., Webbink, D., & Wolf, I. (2009). Do Inspection Improve Primary School Performance? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 31(3), 231–237. doi:10.3102/0162373709338315

Marriott, N., & Goyder, H. (2009). Manual for Monitoring and Evaluating Education Partnership. International Institute for Educational Planning.

Mertens, D. M. (2009). Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology. SAGE Publications, Inc.

Miller, D. (2017, May 5). Importance of School Monitoring and Evaluation Systems. http://leansystemssociety.org/importance-of-school-monitoring-and-evaluation-systems/

Mishra, R. C. (2005). Educational Research. A.P.H. Publishing Corporation.

Mngomezulu, N. M. (2015). Strategies of monitoring teaching and learning: A school management team perspective. PhD thesis. University of Kwazulu-Natal.

Niyivuga, B., Otara, A., & Tuyishime, D. (2019). Monitoring and Evaluation Practices and Academic Staff Motivation: Implications in Higher Education Within Rwandan Context. SAGE Open. doi:10.1177/2158244019829564

Noh, H. J. (2006). Policy Evaluation system reform for efficient outcome-oriented management. Bupmunsa.

O’Mahony, K., & Garavan, N. T. (2012). Implementing a quality management framework in a higher education organization: A case study. Quality Assurance in Education, 20, 184–200. doi:10.1108/09684881211219767.

Order of the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine. (2019, May 28). Procedure for Monitoring the Quality of Education. https://mon.gov.ua/storage/app/media/gromadske-obgovorennya/2019/05/28/poryadok-na-obgovorennya-1.docx

Shah, M., & Nair, S. C. (2012). The changing nature of teaching and unit evaluations in Australian universities. Quality Assurance in Education, 20, 274–288.

Sima, S. (2006). Monitoring and Evaluation. EDU 506: Leaders as Learners: How Children and Adults Learn. Class Lecture.

Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. SAGE Publications. Textalyser. (n/d). http://textalyser.net/

Ukrainian Center for Educational Quality Assessment (UCEQA). (2017, April 26). Primary School Education Monitoring: Questions and Answers. http://testportal.gov.ua/2017/04/26/monitoring-pochatkovoyi-osviti-zapitannya-i-vidpovidi/

Ukrainian Center for Educational Quality Assessment (UCEQA). (2018, April 27). Monitoring the Quality of Primary Education: Pupil Questionnaires. http://testportal.gov.ua/2018/04/27/monitoryng-yakosti-pochatkovoyi-osvity-uchnivski-ankety/

Ukrainian Center for Educational Quality Assessment (UCEQA). (n./d.). Examples of Questionnaires for Fourth-Formers. PIRLS, TIMSS. https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/18HJGpLz2gzTjHfoJiHSZT-cwVCvMPozv

Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: design and methods. Sage.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


e-ISSN: 1694-2116

p-ISSN: 1694-2493