Šeštos klasės mokinių teksto supratimo gebėjimų vertinimas

LTStraipsnyje pristatoma teksto supratimo vertinimo problema, teorinė struktūra, testo konstravimo ir patikimumo vertinimo procedūra. Analizuojama, kaip skirtingi mokymosi pasiekimai ir specialieji ugdymosi poreikiai siejasi su mokinių gebėjimu suprasti ir įsiminti tekste pateikiamą informaciją, sieti teksto faktus, daryti tuo pagrindu nesudėtingas išvadas, apibendrinti visą kūrinį ir pagrindinę mintį. Ieškant heterogeninės klasės poreikius atliepiančio ugdymo metodo, efektyvių skaitymo mokymo(si) strategijų, svarbu sukurti patikimus vykstančių pokyčių įvertinimo metodus. Tam buvo atliktas tyrimas, kurio tikslas - sukonstruoti bendrojo lavinimo mokyklos šeštos klasės mokinių teksto supratimo gebėjimų vertinimo testą, atskleisti prastesniais mokymosi pasiekimais pasižyminčių specialiųjų ugdymosi poreikių mokinių teksto supratimo ypatumus. Testo konstravimas ir validavimo procedūra susidėjo iš kelių etapų: testo konstravimo, tobulinimo ir trijų testavimų, kuriais siekta patikrinti testo validumą. Per kelis testo validavimo etapus buvo apklausti 505 bendrojo lavinimo mokyklos 5-7 klasių mokiniai. Be to, konstruojant klausimyną, pusiau struktūruoto interviu metodu apklausti 16 mokinių ir 7 ekspertai (universiteto mokslininkai, pedagogai, turintys ne žemesnę kaip lietuvių kalbos mokytojo metodininko kvalifikacinę kategoriją). Tyrimas parodė, kad aukštesniais mokymosi pasiekimais pasižymintys mokiniai geriau supranta tekste pateikiamą informaciją, negu prasčiau besimokantys ar specialiųjų ugdymosi poreikių turintys jų bendraamžiai, tačiau gebėjimas suprasti gilesnes potekstes, įžvelgti kūrinio „moralę“ menkai priklauso nuo mokinio gabumų ir lietuvių kalbos mokymosi pasiekimų.Reikšminiai žodžiai: Teksto supratimas; Testas; Specialieji ugdymosi poreikiai; Teksto supratimo gebėjimai; Text comprehension; Test; Special educational needs; Text comprehension abilities; Ext comprehension.

ENText comprehension is a multiple construct embracing individual intellectual and problem solving features (Glazer, 1992); that is why designing a reliable instrument for the evaluation of text comprehension is a complex task. Reading skills is one of the most important constituent parts of academic success at school - students who haven't formed good reading skills in primary school experience difficulties in learning various subjects in lower and upper high school (Marston, Dongil, Diment, Rogers, 1995). In looking for education methods to meet the needs of a heterogeneous classroom, efficient reading teaching/learning strategies, evaluation methods of the current changes and their validity becomes a pressing problem. With regard to this problem, the research aim was formulated: to design a text comprehension test for students of Year 6 of the mainstream school, to reveal text comprehension peculiarities of low achieving students and children with special educational needs (SEN). To achieve the aim, 505 mainstream school students of Years 5 to 7 were tested during a few test validation stages. While construing the survey, the method of a semi-structured interview was also used: 16 students and 7 experts (academics, teachers with a qualification not lower than teacher-methodologist of the Lithuanian language) were surveyed. [...] The research allowed arriving at the following conclusions: 1. The designed text comprehension test can be considered a reliable instrument for measuring the sixth-formers' ability to link the facts of the text and on the basis of this to arrive at simple conclusions, and less reliable for measuring the students' ability to understand and remember the facts of the text as well as to generalise the whole text and to understand the main idea.2. While comparing the three text comprehension dimensions - understanding and remembering the facts of the text, linking the facts and generalisation of the whole text, the worst abilities were recorded in generalising the whole text, while the best in linking the facts of the text and making simple conclusions. The respondents did worse than expected in understanding and remembering facts of the text, however, this may be due to the test performing instructions: the students while answering the questions couldn't use the text. 3. A link was established between the achievements in learning the Lithuanian language and the ability to understand/remember the facts of the text, to link them and make simple conclusions: good and average students showed statistically significant better abilities than their peers who studied worse. No statistically significant correlation was established between the learning achievements and ability to generalise all text, to see the main idea. 4. The ability to answer the questions of the test requiring to generalise the whole text, to evaluate the characters, the motives and causes of their actions depends very little on the learning achievements, special educational needs and is completely independent of the gender. 5. Students with SEN lag behind on all text comprehension levels; however, in the answers to the most complicated questions, less connected with the information provided in the text and more with the context, circumstances, motives of the characters, this difference is statistically insignificant. [From the publication]