Neformaliojo ir savaiminio mokymosi pasiekimų vertinimo ir pripažinimo universitetiniame lygmenyje poreikiai Lietuvoje
Lietuvos žemės ūkio universitetas |
Date Issued |
---|
2007 |
Straipsnyje, kuris parengtas vykdant Europos socialinio fondo remiamą projektą BPD Nr. 2004-ESF-2.4.0-03-05/0086 (sutarties Nr. ESF/2004/2.4.0-03-3OS/BPD-94/PES-7), analizuojami metodologiniai neformaliojo ir savaiminio mokymosi pasiekimų vertinimo universitetinėse studijose aspektai; pateikiami neformaliojo ir savaiminio mokymosi pasiekimų vertinimo ir pripažinimo universitetiniame lygmenyje poreikiu Lietuvoje diagnostinio tyrimo rezultatai iš Vilniaus ir Šiaulių regionų - lyginamuoju aspektu pristatomi minėtų regionų suaugusiųjų požiūriai į Lietuvoje atsiveriančias neformaliojo ir savaiminio mokymosi pasiekimų vertinimo ir pripažinimo universitetinėse studijose galimybes.
The article prepared under the project "Assessment and Recognition of Non-formal and Informal Learning at University Studies" (Project No BPD2004-ESF-2.4.0-03-05/0086; Agreement No ESF/2004/2.4.0-03-308/BPD-94/PES-7) analyses some methodologies aspects related to the process of assessment of formal, non-formal and informal learning at university level, i.e. the principles of good practice of assessment and assessment methods leading to effective assessment. The article also presents results of the study into adults' needs of assessment and recognition of non-formal and informal learning in Lithuania. A sample of 449 respondents in Vilnius and Siauliai regions participated in the study. The main findings of the study indicate that (1) there exists a need of assessment and recognition of non-formal and informal learning at university level: the respondent expressed a positive attitude towards a possibility to participate in the process of assessment and recognition of prior learning at university level; (2) the respondents1 present involvement in training courses does not influence their wish to participate in the training designed to teach future candidates to document their non-formal and informal learning; (3) the respondents age has an impact on their win to participate in the training; (3) the respondents1 education does not influence their wish to participate in the training.