Profesinio mokymo kokybės valdymas

LTStraipsnyje analizuojamas profesinio mokymo proceso kokybės valdymas. Aptariami teoriniai profesinių mokyklų kokybės valdymo aspektai, pristatomi juridiniai dokumentai, reglamentuojantys kokybės valdymą, ir atlikto tyrimo duomenys. Iš viso atliekant tyrimą apklausti 628 tyrimo dalyviai (240 mokytojų, 340 mokinių ir 48 mokyklų vadovai). Atsitiktiniu atrankos metodu pasirinkta po tris profesinio mokymo mokyklas iš kiekvieno Lietuvos regiono (Marijampolės, Alytaus, Utenos, Panevėžio, Šiaulių, Telšių, Tauragės, Klaipėdos, Kauno, Vilniaus). [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Kokybės valdymas; Mokymo procesas; Profesinis mokymas; Quality management; Training process; Vocational training.

ENLithuanian vocational education is part of a clearly structured education system, where it is relatively easy to move among different educational levels and without vocational training it also includes general (pre-school, pre-primary, primary, basic and secondary) and higher education (colleges and universities). The majority of vocational training programmes are implemented in the school system, i.e. training takes place in licensed offices. According to the data of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Lithuania, vocational education is initial and continuous. Initial vocational training can be only formal, but continuous – both, formal and informal. Formal vocational training programmes are carried out by 70 state and 3 non-state vocational education institutions. A quantitative study also found that the majority (78%) of educational providers (pedagogues (n = 240), school heads (n = 48) (81% and 66% respectively) perceive quality as a continuous improvement of services. In addition, 52% teachers and school heads (62% and 48% respectively) define quality as the correspondence with the goal, i.e. how much the vocational training institution meets its goals and realizes the functions provided in legal acts. Defining the quality concept, 49% study participants (n = 628) emphasized the satisfaction of consumers’ needs and 28% – the importance of missing errors. However, only a small percentage of educational service providers (n = 288) involved in the study perceive the quality as excellence and service exclusivity (21% respectively), although the same varied services are missed by both pedagogues and users of services – students.The participants of the study (n = 628) unanimously agree that the achievements of the students correspond to the goals set in the curriculum and the powers of the center learners. However, radical attitudes stand out in terms of the educational institution’s effective contribution to the development of personality; teachers take into account students’ personal, social and cultural experience, the context of their life and school activities when raising educational goals; lessons and classes are conducted according to a predefined and agreed schedule; educators in a timely manner notice and properly develop the abilities and talents of each student; the teacher, choosing the methods, forms, and tasks of the education, gets acquainted with the motives of students’ activities and learning. This difference in attitude suggests that students do not always feel understood and appreciated and may lack knowledge of the organization of the teaching process. This is also evidenced by the fact that students do not know what kind of school support and assistance procedures are provided to students. Looking at the responses of school heads (n = 48), they would look much better compared to teachers (n = 240) and students (n = 340). Teachers’ and school heads’ attitudes towards quality management principles distinguishes. Pedagogues, who usually understand their work as performing lessons, do not think that quality management principles are important for an organization and teaching process.Customer orientation is usually understood as the clarification of the customer’s needs and expectations, as well as the quality of service provided. School heads (n = 48) have highlighted this feature as the most important, since many vocational training institutions work in a competitive environment, consequently each learner is important as well as meeting their needs and expectations is a necessary part of the quality management system. Principle of leadership for school heads (n = 48) is also more important than pedagogues (n = 240). Pedagogues probably believe that the school head is the only leader, although the principle of leadership in the educational process has long been implemented, which indicates that the teacher has to strive to become a leader and to show leadership in his activities. School heads highlighted the key indicators of their responsibility: the implementation of the institution’s strategic plan; effective organization communication; organization image creation and improvement; management and planning of changes; the effectiveness of the quality management system; risk management; service quality. However, indicators of some respondents (n = 48) are not just their own responsibility. For example: effective organization communication or organization image creation and improvement. But traditionally, school heads take the most often mentioned indicators personally for themselves, but they cannot be effectively implemented without the educational institution community’s inclusion and full participation. The less topical responsibility areas for school heads (n = 48) are the following: motivation of employees; the creation and support of favorable microclimate; monitoring of educational process; team mobilization; monitoring of students’ achievements and progress. [From the publication]

• Pedagogų nuomonė apie kokybišką vaikų ugdymą sąlygojančius veiksnius ikimokyklinėse įstaigose / Roberta Pranaitytė, Daiva Malinauskienė. Jaunųjų mokslininkų darbai. 2011, Nr. 3 (32), p. 54-61.
• Profesinio mokymo proceso kokybės valdymas: bendruomenės vertinimas / Dalia Martišauskienė, Kęstutis Trakšelys. Pedagogika. 2019, 136, p. 194-202.
• Švietimo paslaugų kokybės valdymo kontūrai : efektyvumas, rezultatyvumas, naudingumas, prieinamumas / Dalia Martišauskienė, Kęstutis Trakšelys. Klaipėda : S. Jokužio leidykla-spaustuvė, 2016. 185 p.
• Universitetų ir kolegijų personalo atsakomybė už aukštojo mokslo kokybės vadybą.. Aukštojo mokslo kokybė. 2006, Nr. 3, p. 44-67.
• Vidinė kokybės užtikrinimo sistema ir jos įgyvendinimo Kauno kolegijoje = Internal quality assurance system and its implementation in Kaunas College / Mindaugas Misiūnas. Aukštojo mokslo kokybė. 2007, Nr. 4, p. 38-52.