Analysis of test results. Based on the results of trial testing For inclusion in tests

An important condition for conducting trial testing is obtaining statistically reliable results, which is ensured by compliance with a number of conditions:

Pilot testing should be carried out in several parallel* groups. At the same time, it is recommended to conduct it twice in each group, but on the condition that the subjects receive test versions with tasks that they have not answered before. It is advisable that repeated pilot testing in the same group be carried out on different days;

The number of subjects in groups should be large enough (at least 20 people);

All parallel groups must be under the same conditions (time allotted for testing, location and time*);

All subjects within one group must also be in identical conditions, without any “discounts” or “indulgences” for individual subjects. All subjects should receive approximately equal (parallel) tasks in complexity;

The time allocated for trial testing should be such that the most prepared have time to answer all the test questions*;

To obtain reliable results, the possibility of prompting among subjects should be minimized.

Trial testing using a specialized program and a PC is subject to approximately the same requirements as for testing “on paper”.

Analysis of trial testing results and test test selection

Tasks

Test results matrix

After the trial testing, the test takers' answers are checked and the test results are processed. Processing of results should begin with the compilation of matrices of test results (with a computer version of testing, such matrices should be created automatically by the program). It is very important that by the number of the test version and the number of the task in it, it would be possible to unambiguously determine which tasks the test taker performed. This is necessary in order, as noted above, to exclude from the general array precisely those tasks that cannot be called test ones.

It is recommended to prepare test result matrices using a PC, for example, table processor Excel, which will greatly facilitate data processing and checking the statistical properties of each task. An example of such a matrix is ​​given in table. 3.4.

Table 3.4 – Matrix* of test results in a group of 10 people

(for all tasks general rule assessments: correct answer – 1, incorrect – 0)

Item no.

Surname

Test option no.

Task number (tasks are numbered and arranged in order of increasing difficulty: No. 1 /easiest/ ® No. 10 /most difficult/)

Total test score

Abramov

Dmitriev

Vasiliev

Borisov

Shchetinin

Zykov

Grigoriev

Kirillov

Ivanov

Zhukov

S

-

In the matrix of test results (Table 3.4), the lines with the results of the test takers should be arranged in descending order of the sum of points scored during testing, i.e. in the first line - the strongest student, in the last - the weakest. In the columns of the table containing the test subjects’ scores for each of the test tasks, the tasks should be arranged in order of increasing difficulty, i.e. from the easiest to the most difficult.

Bottom line of the table. 3.4 contains the sum of points scored by all subjects for each of the 10 test tasks. It is this sum (more precisely, its inverse value) that in the general case serves measure of difficulty tasks and the criterion by which a particular task receives its place (ordinal number) in the system of test tasks. Initially, as mentioned above, the teacher determines the difficulty of the tasks based on his own experience. The bottom line of the test results matrix contains a more objective assessment of the difficulty of the tasks, which in some cases may not coincide with the initial opinion of the teacher. In such a situation, a task whose difficulty differs from that originally expected should be placed in a different place, assigning it a new number corresponding to its difficulty. In this case, responses to the same task obtained in other (parallel) groups of subjects should be taken into account.

Statistical analysis test results and assignment selection

For inclusion in tests

In table Table 3.5 shows some indicators calculated based on the results of trial testing.

Table 3.5 - Analysis of test results*

INDICATORS	Job number
Number of correct answers
Number of incorrect answers
Proportion of correct answers, p j		0,8	0,7	0,6	0,5	0,5	0,4	0,3	0,2
Proportion of incorrect answers, q j		0,2	0,3	0,4	0,5	0,5	0,6	0,7	0,8
Potential difficulty q j/ p j	0,00	0,25	0,43	0,67	1,00	1,00	1,50	2,33	4,00	-
Dispersion of points, p j× q j		0,16	0,21	0,24	0,25	0,25	0,24	0,21	0,16
Correlation coefficient of scores for the task with total scores for the entire test	-	0,41	0,62	0,75	0,82	0,82	0,75	0,62	0,41	-

The most important of those listed in table. 3.5 indicators are:

1) potential for difficulty;

2) score dispersion;

3) the correlation coefficient of scores on the task with the total scores for the entire test.

These indicators are the criteria by which one can judge whether a task can test form used in tests, i.e. be called test task .

The first indicator meets the requirement (see section 1.2) known difficulty tasks. As can be seen from table. 3.5, tasks No. 1 and No. 10 do not meet this requirement, which implies the need for their “revision” by the developer in order to identify the reasons (the task is too easy or too difficult, incorrectly formulated, contains a “hint” in the answer options, is incorrectly perceived by the test takers, etc.). P.). After the “revision,” the task is either reworked or eliminated and is not used in tests.

Equally important is the dispersion of scores, which can serve as an indicator differentiating ability tasks, i.e. his ability to divide a group of subjects into strong and weak. The greater the dispersion of scores, the better the differentiating ability of the item. However, tasks with a low dispersion value (for example, tasks No. 2 and No. 9) can also be used in tests (taking into account the value of the correlation coefficient with the total scores for the entire test). Such tasks make it possible to more clearly separate those who are completely unprepared from those who know at “3” and, accordingly, those who know at “5”, from those who “do not reach” the maximum score.

The third indicator is correlation coefficient of scores on the task with total scores for the entire test , is the most important. If its value is small, then, apparently, you can do without the corresponding task in the test. On the contrary, tasks with a large value of the specified coefficient (above 0.7) can be considered “leading” or “test-forming” tasks, “key” for a given discipline or its section. It is recommended to include the task in the test provided that the correlation coefficient is no lower than 0.25-0.3.

To calculate the correlation coefficient in our case, the most convenient formula seems to be

where is the score for the task; - total score on the test; - number of subjects in the group.

For example, let’s calculate the correlation coefficient of scores on task No. 5 with the total test scores in relation to the matrix of test results given in Table 3.4 (see Table 3.6).

Table 3.6 – Calculation of the correlation coefficient S

When used to analyze test results computer equipment It is advisable to use the corresponding function of the Excel spreadsheet processor to calculate correlation coefficients.

No less important is the comparison of test results obtained in parallel (different) groups. This comparison is made by comparing the difficulty potentials, variances and correlation coefficients of scores on tasks with total scores on the test, which ideally should differ slightly. Significant differences in these indicators may indicate either low reproducibility of test results (i.e., in groups of the same level, the same test gives different results), or a significantly different level of preparedness of subjects in different groups (i.e., the groups are not parallel).

The parallelism of groups can be checked by assessing the homogeneity of the variances of the total test results using the appropriate statistical criteria - Fisher, Cochran, Bartlett. According to these criteria, it is possible, with sufficient high level significance (recommended 0.05) check how parallel groups differ in average level of preparedness.

Another technique that can be used when processing test results is to combine test results from parallel groups. This technique is recommended for use with a small number of subjects in separate groups, but before “combining” the results, it is advisable to check the homogeneity of variances according to the criteria mentioned above.

Mock Test Analysis

for January 20, 2016 in 11th grade

Studying in 11th grade 85 students. Of them, this practice testwrote31 students with Kazakh language of instruction and51 with Russian language of instruction.

Test results from 20 .01.2016 excluding the fifth item:

Class

Number of students

100

110

Total

wrote

11a

11 ә

11b

11th

total

11 "a" class :

8

1.Absamatov -38 points; 2. Moshkal E-47 points;

3.Kumar A - 41 points; 4. Nurmukhanova I - 37 points;

5. Khusainov N - 44 points; 6. Dauren B - 46 points;

7. Ertaeva M - - 44 points; 8. Ibullaeva Zh -34 points

Results by subject:

Mathematics

From 0-3 points - 1 (Nurmukhanova I - 3 points);

From 4-11 points - 9;

From 12-19 points – 3;

Above 20 points -1;

Average score –10 b

Kazak tili

From 0-3 points -0;

From 4-13 points - 2;

From 14-21 points – 8

From 22-25 points -4;

Average score – -16.2 points

Kazakhstan Tarikh

From 0-3 points -0;

From 4-13 points - 4;

From 14-21 points – 10;

From 22-25 points -0;

Average score – -14.3 points

Orys tili

From 0-3 points 0;

From 4-13 points - 4;

From 14-21 points – 10;

From 22-25 points – 0;

Average score – -14.6 points

Subject of choice

Physics-9 student;

From 0-3 points - 0;

From 4-11 points - 4;

From 12-19 points - 3;

Average score -10.6 points.

Geography -2 students

From 0-3 points - 0;

From 4-12 points - 1;

From 13-20 points – 1;

From 21-25 points -0;

Average score -13 points

The World History– 2 students

From 0-3 points - 0;

From 4-12 points - 2;

From 13-20 points – 0:

From 21-25 points -0;

Average score -13 points

English -1

From 14-20 points-1;

Average score -19 points

Biology - 1 student

From 4-12 points-0;

From 13-20 points -1;

From 21-25 points -1:

Average score -18 points

Debit – 1

From 14-20 points -1;

Average score -18 points

Average score for the class - 52.14 points

11th grade :

Did not reach the threshold result: 3

1. Yesilbaeva A -44 points; 2.Toilybay A – 25 points;

3.Kenzhenov K – 44 points;

Results by subject:

Mathematics

From 0-3 points - 0;

From 4-11 points - 8;

From 12-19 points – 2;

Above 20 points 0;

Average score –9.9 b

Kazak tili

From 0-3 points -0;

From 4-13 points - 2;

From 14-21 points – 6;

From 22-25 points -2;

Average score – -18.40 points

Kazakhstan Tarikh

From 0-3 points -0;

From 4-13 points - 2;

From 14-21 points – 8;

From 22-25 points -0;

Average score – -15.7 points

Orys tili

From 0-3 points 0;

From 4-13 points - 4;

From 14-21 points – 5;

From 22-25 points – 1;

Average score – -15.7 points

Subject of choice

Physics-1 student;

From 0-3 points - 0;

From 4-11 points - 1;

From 12-19 points - 0;

Average score -4 points.

Geography -3 students

From 0-3 points - 0;

From 4-12 points - 1;

From 13-20 points – 1;

From 21-25 points -1;

Average score -13.6 points

English -2

From 14-20 points-2;

From 21-25 points -0;

Average score -17.5 points

Biology - 4 students

From 4-12 points-1;

From 13-20 points -3

From 21-25 points -0:

Average score -13.5 points

The average score for the class is 57.2 points

11 "b" class :

Did not reach the threshold result: 7

1. Abdrakhmet A - 44 points; 2.Borgul A - 43 points;

3. Gulyarenko E - 48 points; 4. Burumbaev T- 40 points;

5. Ivanov A - 44 points; 6. Kubzhasarova A – 47 points;

7. Ligai K - 43 points;

Results by subject:

Mathematics

From 0-3 points - 1 (Burumbaev T- 3b);

From 4-11 points - 11;

From 12-19 points - 15;

From 20-25 points - 0;

Average score –12 points

Kazak tili

From 0-3 points - 0;

From 4-13 points - 4;

From 14-20 points-16;

From 21-25 points-7;

Average score -17.2 points;

History of Kazakhstan

From 0-3 points - 0

From 4-11 points - 3;

From 12-20 points-12;

Above 20 points - 12;

Average score ---16.8 points;

Russian language

From 0-3 points - 0

From 4-11 points - 2;

From 12-20 points -25;

Above 20 points - 0;

Average score -14.5 points

Fifth elective subject.

Physics -11 students;

From 0-3 points -0;

From 4-11 points - 4

From 12 -19-7;

Average score 14 points ;

Biology – 4;

From 4-11 points -0 points;

From 12-19 points – 4;

Above 20 points -0

Average score -13.75 points;

Geography - 8 people;

From 4-11 points -6

From 12-19 points –0;

From 20-25 points -2;

Average score -13.9 points ;

World History - 1 student;

From 13 -20 points – 1;

From 21-25 points -0;

Average score -20.0 points ;

English language -3

From 4 -11 points-0;

From 12-19 points – 1:

From 20-25 points -2;

Average score -19.3 points ;

The average score for the class is 57.7 points.

11th grade :

Did not reach the threshold result: 6

1. Abdrakhmanova A - 42 points; 2. Seypysheva K - 47 points;

3. Nezhelev V – 42 points; 4. Kaliev K – 42 points;

5. Samieva L - 46 points; 6. Talgatov Zh – 44 points;

Results by subject:

Mathematics

From 0-3 points - 3 (Abdrakhmanova A -3 b, Zhibitenko M-3b, Sәmieva L -3b);

From 4-11 points - 13;

From 12-19 points-7;

From 20-25 points-0;

Average score –9.3 points

Russian language

From 0-3 points - 0

From 4-11 points - 1;

From 12-20 points -21

Above 20 points-1;

Average score -15.8 points

History of Kazakhstan

From 0-3 points - 0;

From 4-11 points - 6;

From 12-20 points-12;

Above 20 points - 5;

Average score ---15.5 points;

Kazak tili

From 0-3 points - 0;

From 4-13 points - 5;

From 14-20 points-13

From 21-25 points-5;

Average score – 16.7 points;

Fifth elective subject.

Physics -1 student;

From 4-11 points - 0;

From 12 -19- 1;

Average score -13 points ;

Biology – 5 students

From 0-3 points - 0;

From 4-11 points - 1;

From 12-19 points – 4;

From 20-25 points-0;

Average score - 11.2 points ;

Geography -5 students

From 4-11 points - 0;

From 12 -19 points - 5;

Average score - 13.4 points ;

English language – 11

From 12-19 points -6;

Above 20 points -5;

Average score - 18.7 points

Chemistry -1

From 12-19 points-1;

Average score - 12 points

The average score for the class is 56.4 points

Comparative monitoring by class from 01/20/2016.

Comparative monitoring based on the results of the last two tests

The average score for the school was 55.9 points without the fifth subject, which is lower than the previous testing of 2.1 points;

The number of students who did not achieve the threshold result is 24 students, which is 32% ;

Subject teachers should intensify their work on analyzing tests and working on errors;

Deputy dir. UVR: Kipchakbaeva L.S.

REFERENCE

based on the analysis of the results of trial diagnostic testing in the Unified State Exam format in mathematics, Russian language and elective subjects
In accordance with the preparation plan for the state (final) certification of 11th grade graduates, approved by order of the Gymnasium No. 353 dated September 20, 2012. and order No. 406 of October 20, 2012. “On conducting trial diagnostic testing in the Unified State Exam format for 11th grade graduates” in order to prepare 11th grade graduates for passing the state final certification, practicing skills in working with Unified State Exam forms, working with tests, 11th grade students took part in diagnostic testing in Russian language, mathematics and elective subjects.

Staffing

№	Item	Teacher's name	Category
	Mathematics	Safonova L.G.	1st quarter category
	Russian language	Ziyatdinova A.I.	highest qualification category
	Physics	Gilmanova N.N.	1st quarter category
	Social science	Kuzyukova O.V.	highest qualification category
	Computer science	Salakhieva E.M.	1st quarter category
	Story	Karametdinova R.F.	1st quarter category
	English language	Ismagilova G.I., Shamseeva A.D.	1st quarter category
	Biology	Kropacheva L.L.	highest qualification category
	Chemistry	Yuskaeva Ch.M.	1st quarter category

Thus, qualified teachers work in the parallel 11th grade.

In parallel 11th grades in 2012/2013 academic year 45 graduates are studying in two classes. A total of 40 students (89% of the total) took part in the diagnostic testing.

41 out of 45 11th grade students took part in diagnostic testing in the Russian language (this is 91% of total number). Amirova R., Badertdinova L., Yakubova A., Bilyalov A. did not take part.

results trial Unified State Exam in Russian are presented in the table:

Class	Russian language (minimum – 36)
	below min. level	Satisfied. level	Good. level	Excellent level	Academic performance, %	Quality, %	Average score
	0-35	36-63	64-79	80-100
11A	0	12	3	2	100	29	63,9
11B	0	6	11	7	100	75	72,8
total	0	18	14	9	100	56	69,1

Thus, the test performance in the Russian language is 100%, the quality is 56%. The average test test score in the Russian language is 69.1 points: in 11A - 63.8 points, in 11B - 72.8 points. Let me remind you that according to the contract assignment, the average score in the Russian language must be at least 72 points. As you can see, the task was not completed.

In the 2012/2013 academic year, for the first time in the practice of a unified state exam, Rosobrnadzor decree No. 3499-10 dated August 29, 2012 established minimal amount points for all Unified State Exam subjects, confirming that exam participants have mastered the basic general education programs secondary (full) general education in accordance with the requirements of the federal government educational standard secondary (complete) general education. In the Russian language, the minimum number of points is 36 points. In our trial testing, all 11th grade graduates completed the work with scores above the threshold. The lowest number of points was scored by 3 students of class 11A: Fassakhova A., 11A - 52b., Galiullin B., 11A - 52b., Khalimova A., 11A - 53b.

9 graduates completed the work, scoring above 80 points, but the highest results were from V. Plaksin, 11b – 95b., T. Gulyaeva, 11b – 95b., Yu. Nechaeva, 11b – 90b., D. Sitdikov, 11b – 90b.

Comparative results with the results of diagnostic testing in the Russian language, written by the same students in the last academic year, are shown in the diagram. Last year, 97% of students were able to complete the work satisfactorily. This year – 100%. It is understandable that last year, at the time of completing the work, the guys were not ready to do the work; many topics were not studied. But the quality of work, unfortunately, remains at the same level.

Comparative results are also presented for classes separately. Which shows that in the humanities class the quality of work is lower than last year. Although this subject in this class is studied in profile level.

The analysis of errors showed that in the Russian language students made mistakes on tasks related to text analysis, punctuation marks, combined and separate spelling of words, determining methods of word formation, choosing linguistic means of expression, determining types complex sentence. When completing assignment Part C, due to inattentive reading of the text, we were unable to correctly formulate and comment on the problem and select arguments.
36 out of 45 students took part in diagnostic testing in mathematics (this is 80% of the total number). Did not take part: Badertdinova L., Farkhutdinova I., Yakubova A., Bilyalov A., Kiyko D., Nechaeva Y., Sklyarov A., Sklyarova V.

The results of the trial testing in mathematics are presented in the table:

Class	Mathematics (minimum – 24)
	below min. level	Satisfied. level	Good. level	Excellent level	Academic performance, %	Quality, %	Average score
	0-23	24-46	47-64	65-100
11A	1	10	5	0	94	33	37,8
11B	0	7	9	4	100	65	52
total	1	17	14	4	97	53	45,6

Thus, the test performance in mathematics is 97%, the quality is 53%. The average test test score in mathematics is 45.6 points: in 11A - 37.8 points, in 11B - 52 points. Let me remind you that according to the contract assignment, the average score in the Russian language must be at least 57 points. As you can see, the task was not completed.

According to mathematics, the minimum number of points is set at 24 points. In trial testing, 1 graduate of class 11A did not overcome the threshold value: Vakhitova V., 11A – 20b. 1 graduate of class 11A Khalimova A. scored exactly 24 points, i.e. her performance is on the verge of “2”. Only 4 graduates performed at an excellent level, of which only one scored above 80 points: Plaksin V., 11B – 81b.

Comparative results with the results of diagnostic testing in mathematics, written by the same students in the previous school year, are shown in the diagram. Last year, 76% of students were able to complete work above the threshold. This year – 97%. It is understandable that last year, at the time of completing the work, the guys were not ready to do the work; many topics were not studied. But the results might have been different if all test participants had taken part in the testing (I don’t presume to judge whether it’s better or worse).

Comparative results are also presented for classes separately. This shows that in the humanities class the performance of work has increased.

The analysis of errors showed that in mathematics, students made mistakes on tasks: derivative and investigation of a function, transformation of expressions, problems on planimetry and stereometry, solving word problems. In the tasks of part C:

Only 35% were able to solve trigonometric equations and systems of equations. The main drawback in completing this task was that the task was solved completely correctly, but the answer was indicated incorrectly;

43% completed task C3 – solving inequalities;

19% completed geometry tasks;

100% failed to complete the task with parameters, and only two tried to solve it (Sitdikov D., Plaksin V.);

Task C6 was also completed only by D. Sitdikov and V. Plaksin.
Trial diagnostic tests were conducted for 11th grade students in elective subjects. To pass the Unified State Exam in subjects of their choice, students chose the following subjects: physics - 15 people (33% of the total number of 11th grade graduates), social studies - 20 people (44%), history - 11 people (24%), English – 10 people (22%), literature – 8 people (18%), chemistry – 9 people (20%), biology – 8 students (18%), computer science – 9 students (20%).

11 graduates chose only one elective subject, 25 graduates - 2 subjects and 9 graduates - 3 subjects.

Data on the number of people who took part in trial testing are presented in the table:

item	Number of people who chose this item for State Examination	Number of people who took part in diagnostic testing	% of those who took part in diagnostic testing	FI of absentees
physics	15	14	93%	Kiiko D.
social science	20	17	85%	Badertdinova L., Farkhutdinova I., Yakubova A.
story	11	8	73%	Ivanova K., Senkina E., Tsaturyan R.
English language	10	10	100%
literature	6	5	83%	Amirova R.
chemistry	9	8	89%	Bilyalov A.
biology	8	3	37%	Bilyalov A., Nechaeva Yu., Sklyarov A., Sklyarova V.

The choice of specialized subjects and corresponding specialized classes was also analyzed. In the social and humanities class, 15 students choose social studies, which is more than half, and history - 6 students. In a physics and mathematics class, half the class—12 students—choose physics. The choice of subjects indicates the implementation of the profile chosen by the students. There are students in the classes who have not chosen any of the core subjects, with the exception of compulsory subjects. In 11A this is Safina I. (she chooses biology, chemistry) and Gainutdinov D. (he chooses physics). In 11B these are Govorukhina I., Tsybulya K. (they choose social studies, history, English), Ivanova K. (history, English, literature), Ignatieva A., Kaimakov M. (they choose social studies), Senkina E. ( history, English), Tsaturyan R. (social studies, history).

The trial testing results are presented in the tables:

Class	Physics (minimum – 36)
	Below is the minimum. level	Satisfied. level	Good. level	Excellent level	Academic performance, %	Quality, %	Average score
	0-35	36-52	53-67	68-100
11A (3)	1	2	0	0	67	0	38,7
11B (12)	0	3	6	2	100	73	57,7
Total	1	5	6	2	93	62	53,6

Kiiko D., a student in grade 11B, did not take part in the testing.

The success rate of diagnostic testing in physics is 93%, quality is 62%. The average test score is 53.6.

According to the order of Rosobrnadzor dated August 29, 2012 No. 3499-10 in physics, the minimum number of points is set at 36 points. In the trial testing, 1 graduate of class 11A did not overcome the threshold value: Khalimova A., 11A – 30b. 1 graduate of class 11A Ibragimova A. scored exactly 36 points, the work is very weak, i.e. her performance is on the verge of “2”. Moreover, Albina Ibragimova chooses this item “just in case.” Just like Gazetdinov Albert in 2011 chose computer science “just in case,” and accordingly completed the work with a “2”. 2 graduates completed the work at an excellent level and scored above 80 points: Sitdikov D., 11B - 81b., Plaksin V., 11B - 86b.

Class	Social studies (minimum – 39)
	Below is the minimum. level	Satisfied. level	Good. level	Excellent level	Academic performance, %	Quality, %	Average score
	0-38	39-54	55-66	67-100
11A (15)	0	7	5	0	100	42	52,8
11B (5)	1	1	3	0	80	75	55,6
Total	1	8	8	0	94	50	53,6

Badertdinova L., Farkhutdinova I., Yakubova A., students of grade 11A, did not take part in the testing.

The success rate of diagnostic testing in social studies is 94%, quality is 50%. The average test test score is 53.6 points.

According to the order of Rosobrnadzor dated August 29, 2012 No. 3499-10, the minimum number of points in social studies is 39 points. In the trial testing, 1 graduate of grade 11B did not overcome the threshold value: Kaymakov M. – 37b. Vakhitova V., a student of grade 11A, scored exactly 39 points.

The analysis of errors showed that social studies students made mistakes on tasks related to economics (factors of production, reference to social realities and graphic information). Difficulties are caused in defining terms and concepts. In the tasks of part C, difficulties were encountered in listing features, phenomena, using concepts in a given text, and revealing theoretical positions using examples.

The teacher also noted the peculiarity of the work in that the children coped with tasks of increased difficulty, and in the tasks basic level made mistakes.

Class	History (minimum – 32)
	Below is the minimum. level	Satisfied. level	Good. level	Excellent level	Academic performance, %	Quality, %	Average score
	0-31	32-49	50-67	68-100
11A (6)	0	4	1	1	100	33	50,3
11B (5)	0	0	1	1	100	100	66
Total	0	4	2	2	100	50	54,3

Ivanova K., Senkina E., Tsaturyan R., students of grade 11B did not take part in the testing.

The success rate of diagnostic testing in history is 100%, quality is 50%. The average test test score is 54.3 points.

According to the order of Rosobrnadzor dated August 29, 2012 No. 3499-10, the minimum number of points in history is 32 points. Ibragimova A., a student of grade 11A, scored the lowest number of points - 37 points. As a result, Albina is not in physics, not in history passing the Unified State Exam not prepared. Two students wrote work at an excellent level, but no one completed the work above 80 points. The highest score among history test participants is 69 points (Saifullina A., Tsybulya K.).

Analysis of errors showed that history students made mistakes in tasks to establish the chronological sequence of events. All test participants experienced difficulties in working with various sources of information. In the tasks of part C, there were difficulties in the ability to formulate one’s own position on the issues under discussion, use historical information for argumentation, and present the results of historical and educational activities in free form.

Class	English language (minimum – 20)
	Below is the minimum. level	Satisfied. level	Good. level	Excellent level	Academic performance, %	Quality, %	Average score
	0-19	20-58	59-83	84-100
11A (6)	0	2	3	1	100	67	66,2
11B (4)	0	0	1	3	100	100	88
Total	0	2	4	4	100	80	74,9

100% of graduates who chose this subject took part in the testing.

Diagnostic testing performance English language is 100%, quality is 80%. The average test score is 74.9 points.

According to the order of Rosobrnadzor dated August 29, 2012 No. 3499-10, the minimum number of points in English is 20 points. Vakhitova V., a student of grade 11A, scored the lowest number of points – 48b. 4 students wrote the work at an excellent level, three of them scored high points: Govorukhina I., 11B – 97b., Senkina E., 11B – 93b., Ivanova K., 11B – 92b. Farkhutdinova I., grade 11A completed the work with 85 points.

All mistakes made are due to inattentive reading of the text, lack of knowledge of the vocabulary found in the text. Difficulties arose in understanding the text listened to.

Class	Literature (minimum – 32)
	Below is the minimum. level	Satisfied. level	Good. level	Excellent level	Academic performance, %	Quality, %	Average score
	0-31	32-54	55-66	67-100
11A (5)	0	1	1	2	100	75	62
11B (1)	0	0	1	0	100	100	60
Total	0	1	2	2	100	80	61,6

Amirova R. did not take part in testing.

The success rate of diagnostic testing according to the literature is 100%, the quality is 80%. The average test score is 61.6 points.

According to the order of Rosobrnadzor dated August 29, 2012 No. 3499-10, the minimum number of points for literature is 32 points. Bagautdinov A., a student of class 11A, scored the lowest number of points – 43b. 2 students wrote work at an excellent level, but not higher than 80 points: Zateeva N., 11A - 73b., Saifullina A., 11A - 73b.

Mistakes were made in determining the means of expressiveness of a lyrical work. In the tasks of part C, they were unable to provide the necessary arguments.

Class	Chemistry (minimum – 36)
	Below is the minimum. level	Satisfied. level	Good. level	Excellent level	Academic performance, %	Quality, %	Average score
	0-35	36-55	56-72	73-100
11A (1)	0	1	0	0	100	0	47
11B (8)	0	5	2	0	100	28,5	52,6
Total	0	6	2	0	100	25	51,9

Bilyalov A., Gulyaeva T. did not take part in testing.

The pass rate of diagnostic testing in chemistry is 100%, quality is 25% (lowest quality). The average test score is 51.9 points.

According to the order of Rosobrnadzor dated August 29, 2012 No. 3499-10 in chemistry, the minimum number of points is set at 36 points. Almost all test participants wrote at a weak satisfactory level. There were mistakes made on many assignments from the chemistry course. We did not start solving many problems because the material will be studied in the 11th grade course

Class	Biology (minimum – 36)
	Below is the minimum. level	Satisfied. level	Good. level	Excellent level	Academic performance, %	Quality, %	Average score
	0-35	36-54	55-71	72-100
11A (1)	0	0	1	0	100	100	68
11B (7)	0	0	1	1	100	100	67
Total	0	0	2	1	100	100	67,5

Only 4 out of 8 students took part in testing in this subject (A. Bilyalov, Yu. Nechaeva, A. Sklyarov, V. Sklyarova did not participate).

The success rate and quality of diagnostic testing in biology is 100%. The average test test score is 67.5 points.

According to the order of Rosobrnadzor dated August 29, 2012 No. 3499-10 in biology, the minimum number of points is set at 36 points. Test participants made mistakes on topics of grades 8-9, i.e. These questions were not repeated by the boys.
In computer science, school trial testing was not carried out, since the day before, according to the order of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Tatarstan, all schools in the republic, including us, participated in the experiment of conducting the Unified State Exam in computer science in a computerized form. On October 23, 26 and 30, 27 11th grade graduates, including those who chose computer science, wrote the K-USE. The results were summarized in a specially established program and sent to the IMC. The test results have not yet been reported.
Based on the results of the trial Unified State Examination, a ranking of graduates was compiled based on the total score and average Unified State Exam score.

12 graduates have a score above 220 points (since prestigious universities a passing score of at least 220 points is required): Govorukhina I., Saifullina A., Tsybulya K., Ivanova K., Gulyaeva T., Salikova S., Khojakhanov B., Zateeva N., Plaksin V., Butakova K., Rafikova L., Sitdikov D., Sadykova A., Khasanshina G.

2 graduates have an average score on all Unified State Examinations above 80: Plaksin V. - 87.3b., Sitdikov D. - 83.3b.

12 graduates have an average score for all Unified State Examinations below 50. The lowest average score is for two graduates: Vakhitova V. - 40.8b., Khalimova A. - 37.8b.
When it comes to filling out Unified State Exam forms, 11th grade graduates were more responsible than 9th graders. Some participants did not have their passport details written down on the form or did not sign in the appropriate box. I ask subject teachers of both grades 9 and 11 to draw students’ attention to the design of the letter “C” in the forms. Unclear or incorrect writing of any letters will result in the student not receiving their marks, which will affect the final result.
Based on the above, CONCLUSIONS and RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. 
   All subject teachers should take control of the issue of preparing students for the Unified State Exam, develop a plan to eliminate gaps in knowledge, work more often on test tasks with filling out answers in special forms through classwork and extracurricular activities.
2. 
   Prepare graduates for diagnostic work through the StatGrad system (December 12 – in Russian, December 18 – in mathematics).
3. 
   Prepare graduates to conduct paid diagnostic work in the city (December 19 - in Russian for grades 9, 11, December 20 - in mathematics for grades 9, 11).
4. 
   Class teachers Shamseeva A.D., Ziyatdinova A.I. bring the results of trial tests to the attention of parents of 11th grade students at a parent meeting on November 26, 2012.
5. 
   Krasnoperova A.R., deputy director for education, class teachers Shamseeva A.D., Ziyatdinova A.I. conduct individual conversations with students and their parents who failed the test in subjects.

The certificate was compiled by Deputy Director for SD A.R. Krasnoperova

The certificate was read out at a meeting with the director on November 19, 2012.

Analysis of trial testing resultsfor 10.28.09 State Institution “Secondary School No. 6” 11th grade.

1. 30 students out of 30 took part in the testing, which is 100% of the graduating students.

2. The average score is 77.8, which is 0.1 points higher than the last testing result, the quality of knowledge is -20%, which is 10% lower than the last testing results. academic success 100%.

A) Positive dynamics of average score and quality of knowledge in subjects:

Russian language average score is 19, which is 1 point higher than the previous testing result, quality -90%, academic performance -100%, teacher - Dmitrieva T.M.;
Falling topics:

Section on morphology and spelling;

Syntax and punctuation:

Speech styles;

Causes:

the stage of introductory repetition of the Russian language course of the basic school has not been completed

• Geography the average score is 11.9%, which is 1.9% higher than the last testing result, quality -42.9, which is 42.9% higher than the last testing result, academic performance -100%, teacher - Zhezher L.S.;
  Falling topics:

Natural areas of the world and the Republic of Kazakhstan;

"Structure of the Earth's Crust"

Causes:

Many students have not fully decided on the choice of the fifth subject;

The stage of introductory repetition of the material has not been completed.

B) Negative dynamics of average score and quality of knowledge in subjects:

. Kazakh language average score - 18, which is lower than the previous one by 0.2, quality 90%, which is higher than the previous one by 3.3%, academic performance - 100%, teacher - Mamelbaeva G.S., Kuishinova Zh.T.

Falling topics:

• understanding of linguistic terms;
• phraseological units;
• syntax;

- Causes:

Limited lexicon

. Mathematics average score is 11.5, which is 0.5 lower than the previous testing result, quality -50, which is 3.3% lower than the last testing result, academic performance -100% teacher - Matais T.V.;
Falling topics:

Text problems for composing equations and systems of equations;

Progression;

Irrational equations and inequalities;

Logarithms, logarithmic expressions, equations and inequalities;

- Causes:

Failed material;

The introductory repetition stage has not been completed;

Lack of motivation to learn mathematical formulas.

. History of K. average score - 14, quality - 53.3%, which is 10% lower than the last testing result, academic performance - 100%, teacher - Guseva E.E.; Falling topics:

Soviet period in the history of Kazakhstan:

Administrative-territorial reforms of the 19th century;

Tribes and tribal unions on the territory of ancient Kazakhstan.
Causes:

Insufficient level of self-training of students;

Low level of student motivation;

Unreasonably wide range of changes in the content of questions in test collections
different years;

A large number of overly detailed questions to which the answers are different
different sources, while minor details are brought to the fore.

. Physics average score is 10.1, which is 0.6 lower than the previous testing result, quality -20, which is 5% lower than the last testing result, academic performance -100%, teacher - T.I. Galoton;
Falling topics:

First Law of Thermodynamics;

Navigation according to charts;
- Coulomb's Law;

Working with charts;

Basic MKT equation.
Causes:

Lack of self-training system;

Increased level of anxiety;

. Biology average score - 17, quality -87.5, which is 3.4% lower than the last testing result, academic performance -100%, teacher - Boyko G.S.;

Falling topics:

- “Development of life on Earth”;

- “Root, stem, leaf”;
- “Lichens”:

- “Higher nervous activity”;

Causes:

The training material has not been completed;

Errors in tests;

5. Percentage in choosing the 5th subject:

Physics - 33.3%, biology - 26.6%, geography - 23.5%, foreign language- 16.6% - professional plans of graduates.

6. Distribution of students by number of points scored:
0-49 - 1; 50-59-3; 60-70-8; 71-89-11; 90-100-2; 101 and above -4.

8. The number of students achieving “4” and “5” at the end of last year is 15, and
based on the results of trial testing - 6. They have a grade of “3” Belozor I- in history; Bushuev D - in mathematics, history K, physics; Kolesnichenko K - in mathematics.; Pleshakova E - in physics, history K; Solovyova E - in physics; Shumyakova N - in physics, history K; Yatsenko V - in physics; Kulinich K - in mathematics; Vakalov A - in physics, history K.

Ways to solve problems:

1. Due to the increasing complexity of test tasks, continue to analyze the system of repeating the materials and student work covered in the new collection of Tests 2009. Structure the mistakes made by students and organize thematic repetition. Adjust preparation plans for the UNT.

2. Introduce rational techniques for memorizing formulas. Mathematics and physics teachers will conduct a series of thematic consultations on the development of techniques and skills for self-control of completed work. Continue the workshop on solving problems that require repeated sequential operations, draw students’ attention to changes in the content of tasks, orient them to determine a rational algorithm, perform test task, repeat rational methods of computational operations.

3. Improve the quality of consultations for students

Develop a rational algorithm for using reference materials for the course.

1. On the history of Kazakhstan and geography, subject teachers should analyze
   library capabilities in periodical materials. Offer students data
   sources of information, achieve the study and note-taking of new statistical
   data by program sections.
2. Maintain systematic and purposeful work with the category of students,
   having one “three” according to test results.

5. The school administration should strengthen control over the organization and quality of the event.
subject teachers correctional work with students, for efficiency
systematic repetition of educational material.

5. Continue systematic preparation for testing in the new format, take into account the negative aspects of trial testing, and adjust preparation plans taking into account the features of tests in the new format.

Prepared by Miroshnik N.V.

Analysis of the results of trial testing of gymnasium No. 1

2011-2012 academic year

On October 6, 2011, the third trial testing was conducted at the gymnasium, the purpose of which is to adapt students to the UNT, their awareness of testing technology, control the quality of knowledge and preparation for the UNT.

Testing of students was carried out according to the tests of the NSTSTO KEU, the results are as follows

A total of 45 graduates (out of 49), i.e., 93% of students, took part in the testing.

4 students scored 100 or more points

The results show that compared to the previous testing, the average score is 2.8 points lower. Students sat alone, bags and cell phones were put away on the last desk, testing conditions were close to UNT conditions. Based on the preliminary results, low results can be expected this year, so it is necessary to intensify preparation for the UNT and use various forms and methods of work.

Monitoring test results

The chart shows that the results are unstable, lower than last year, but there has been an increase in results over several tests this year.

The results compared to 1 test are slightly higher.

Math scores have improved.

By general history 4 students take it. results are lower than last year. The lowest quality knowledge is in physics and mathematics. Didn't do well in biology on this test.

The contender for Altyn Belgi confirmed all the A's for the first time.

Monitoring testing of applicants for the certificate with honors and Altyn Belgi.

Surname

Russian language p

Story Kazakhstan

Mathematics

kaz yaz with rus language

Total points

Surname

Russian

Story Kazakhstan

Mathematics

kaz yaz with rus language

subject of choice

Total points

name prev

Davletshina

Abdrakhmetova

Kuketaeva

Ukubaeva

From the results it is clear that only one has a 4, the rest of the applicants have threes. Needs to be organized individual work with excellent students in preparation for the UNT.

So far no one has confirmed all A's, poor results in biology, history, and mathematics.

1. The lowest results in physics, mathematics and history of Kazakhstan, the highest in English. language, Kazakh language There are no twos. This academic year, 4 applicants for the certificate with distinction and 1 applicant Altyn Belgi scored all A's only

2. Comparative testing results show instability; it is recommended that all teachers prepare monitoring of individual results on trial testing.

3. Subject teachers should draw up plans for working with low-performing and excellent students.

4. Class teachers conduct parent meetings on Saturdays, invite parents of students who do not meet the threshold level for admission to universities.