Texnologik ta’lim yo‘nalishi talabalarining malakaviy va pedagogik amaliyotlari uzviyligini ta’minlashning metodik modeli
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21809526Ключевые слова:
texnologik ta’lim, malakaviy amaliyot, pedagogik amaliyot, uzviylik, metodik model, kasbiy kompetensiya, refleksiya, mentorlik, monitoring.Аннотация
Maqolada texnologik ta’lim yo‘nalishi talabalarining malakaviy va pedagogik amaliyotlarini alohida, birbiridan
uzilgan tadbirlar sifatida emas, balki kasbiy-metodik tayyorgarlikning ketma-ket va o‘zaro bog‘langan bosqichlari
sifatida tashkil etish muammosi tadqiq etilgan. Normativ hujjatlar, pedagogik amaliyot nazariyasi, tajribaviy ta’lim, refleksiv
faoliyat va texnologik-pedagogik bilimlar integratsiyasiga oid ilmiy manbalar mazmuniy jihatdan tahlil qilingan. Tahlil natijasida
maqsadli, mazmuniy, tashkiliy-jarayonli, diagnostik va natijaviy bloklardan tashkil topgan metodik model ishlab
chiqilgan. Model amaliyot topshiriqlarini kurslar kesimida bosqichma-bosqich murakkablashtirish, maktab va ishlab
chiqarish muhitidagi faoliyatni yagona kompetensiyalar tizimi asosida o‘zaro bog‘lash, mentorlik, raqamli monitoring va
refleksiv tahlilni uyg‘unlashtirishga asoslanadi. Taklif etilgan model nazariya bilan amaliyot o‘rtasidagi uzilishni qisqartirish,
talabalarda texnologik jarayonlarni pedagogik vazifalarga aylantirish qobiliyatini rivojlantirish hamda amaliyot natijalarini
dalillarga asoslangan holda baholash imkonini beradi.
Библиографические ссылки
1. O‘zbekiston Respublikasining 2020-yil 23-sentabrdagi O‘RQ-637-son “Ta’lim to‘g‘risida”gi Qonuni. https://www.lex.uz/
uz/docs/-5013007#-5014174
2. O‘zbekiston Respublikasi Prezidentining 2020-yil 27-fevraldagi PQ-4623-son “Pedagogik ta’lim sohasini yanada rivojlantirish
chora-tadbirlari to‘g‘risida”gi Qarori. https://lex.uz/docs/4749364
3. Kolb D. A. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. – Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall, 1984. – 256 p.
4. Schön D. A. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. – New York: Basic Books, 1983. – 374 p.
5. Shulman L. S. Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching // Educational Researcher. – 1986. – Vol. 15,
No. 2. – P. 4–14. – DOI: 10.3102/0013189X015002004.
6. Mishra P., Koehler M. J. Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge
// Teachers College Record. – 2006. – Vol. 108, No. 6. – P. 1017–1054. – DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x.
7. Biggs J., Tang C. Teaching for Quality Learning at University. 4th ed. – Maidenhead: Open University Press, 2011. –
389 p.
8. Redecker C. European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators: DigCompEdu. – Luxembourg: Publications
Office of the European Union, 2017. – DOI: 10.2760/159770.
9. Darling-Hammond L. Constructing 21st-Century Teacher Education // Journal of Teacher Education. – 2006. – Vol. 57,
No. 3. – P. 300–314. – DOI: 10.1177/0022487105285962.
10. Nicol D. J., Macfarlane-Dick D. Formative Assessment and Self-Regulated Learning: A Model and Seven Principles
of Good Feedback Practice // Studies in Higher Education. – 2006. – Vol. 31, No. 2. – P. 199–218. – DOI:
10.1080/03075070600572090.
Загрузки
Опубликован
Выпуск
Раздел
Лицензия
Copyright (c) 2026 MAKTABGACHA VA MAKTAB TA’LIMI JURNALI
Это произведение доступно по лицензии Creative Commons «Attribution» («Атрибуция») 4.0 Всемирная.
