Distance education as an objective necessity. On the problem of modernization of academic curriculum

UDC 387-042:004

https://doi.org/10.20339/AM.02-21.007

S.V. Bakushev is Dr.Sci. (Engineering), Prof., Prof. at sub-faculty “Mechanics” at Penza State University of Architecture and Construction e-mail: bakuchsv@mail; ruoffice@pguas.ru

ORCID: 0000-0001-9134-8106

Presented is definition of the notion of “distance education”. It’s advantages and disadvantages are being discussed. It is shown, that distance education is in fact a combination of full-time and part-time forms of education, and therefore leading to significant increase of academic independent activity and, as a result, students’ overwork. It is proposed to introduce into the university academic process two different curricula for each specialty. The master curriculum is designed for full-time education. The second curriculum is designed for distance learning. The master curriculum needs to be modernized by transferring all disciplines that play a supportive role or serve for general educational development into the category of optional ones. Education in the normal course according to the master curriculum involves studying both compulsory subjects and optional courses equally. In the event of force majeure circumstances, the second curriculum is introduced and only compulsory subjects remain for learning, and all optional courses are removed from the schedule. This would allow relieving the distance education student without lowering either the level or the quality of education.

Key words: higher professional education, distance education, university curriculum, elective course plan, modernization, quality of education.

References

1. Tochon, F.V. Emerging technologies in educational institutions: assets and potential risks. Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers. 2012. No. 3. P. 188–202.
2. Lisachenko, O.D., Yeroshenko, G.A., Bilash, V.P., Pelipenko, L.B., Shevchenko, K.V. Distance learning at the departments of morphological profile in quarantine conditions. advantages and disadvantages, Vestnik of problems of biology & medicine. 2020. No. 3. P. 188–191. DOI: 10.29254/2077-4214-2020-3-157-188-191
3. Andreev, A.A. Introduction to Distance Learning. Moscow: WU, 1997.
4. Distance learning. Moscow: VLADOS, 1998. 192 p.
5. Zinchenko, V.P. Distance education: to the issue statement. Pedagogy. 2000. No. 2. P. 23–34.
6. Malitikov, E.M. Actual problems of the development of distance education in the Russian Federation and the CIS countries. Law and Education. 2000. No. 1 (2). P. 42–54.
7. Malitikov, E.M. Distance education in the Russian Federation and the CIS countries: theory and practice. Telecommunications and digitalization of education. 2001. No. 3. P. 16–36.
8. Ovsyannikov, V.I. (ed.). Distance education didactics: initial course. Moscow: Pedagogy, 2006.
9. Khutorskoy, A.V. Scientific and practical prerequisites for distance pedagogy. Open education. 2001. No. 2. P. 30–35.
10. Ovsyannikov, V.I. Distance and Distance Education: Twins or Antipodes? Open education. 2002. No. 2. P. 64–73.
11. Grunt, E.V., Belyaev, E.A., Lissitsa, S. Distance education during the pandemic: new challenges to Russian higher education. Prospects for science and education. 2020. No. 5 (47). P. 45–58.
12. Shnejder, L.B. Realities of remote studying in the context of pandemic. Higher education today. 2020. No. 7. P. 18–23.
13. Bakushev, S.V. Some considerations on improving of the quality of higher education. Sustainable development of the region: architecture, construction, transport. In: Materials of the 4th International scientific and practical conf. Institute of Architecture, Construction and Transport. Tambov GTU. Tambov, 2017. P. 526–530.
14. Bakushev, S. Some considerations on improving of the educational process in higher education. Alma mater (Vestnik vysshei shkoly). 2018. No. 1. P. 9–12. DOI: 10.20339/AM.01-18.009