How is the Unified State Exam assessed in literature? Exam in literature

The indication of volume is conditional; the assessment of the answer depends on its content (if the examinee has deep knowledge, he cananswer in greater volume, with the ability to accurately formulate your thoughtsthe examinee can answer quite fully in a smaller volume).

If according to Criterion 1 (“Compliance of the answer with the task”) a 0 is given points, the task is considered uncompleted and is not checked further. Byother criteria in the “Protocol for checking answers to assignments” of form No. 20 points are given.

If according to Criterion 2 (“Using the text of the work for argumentation ") is given 0 points, then according to Criterion 3 (" Logicality and compliance with speech norms ") the work is not evaluated, in the "Protocolchecking answers to assignments" of form No. 2 according to Criterion 3 is set 0 points.

Evaluation of tasks 9 and 16, which require writing a detailed answer of 5–10 sentences

The indication of volume is conditional; the assessment of the answer depends on its content (if the examinee has deep knowledge, he can answer in a larger volume; with the ability to accurately formulate his thoughts, the examinee can answer quite fully in a smaller volume).

Criteria 1 and 2 (“Comparison of the first selected work with the proposed text” and “Comparison of the second selected work with the proposed text”) are the main ones. During assessment, the sequence of examples for comparison is determined by their sequence in the work of the examinee.

If according to both criteria 1 and 2 0 points are given, then the task is considered unfulfilled and is not checked further. According to other criteria in the “Protocol for checking answers to assignments” of form No. 2, 0 points are assigned.

If according to criterion 3 (“Using the text of the work for argumentation”) 0 points are given, then according to criterion 4 (“Logicity and compliance with speech norms”) the work is not assessed, in the “Protocol for checking answers to assignments” of form No. 2, according to criterion 4 a 0 is given points.

When completing the task, the examinee independently selects two works for contextual comparison (it is acceptable to refer to another work by the author of the source text). When indicating the author, initials are necessary only to distinguish namesakes and relatives, if this is essential for adequate perception of the content of the answer (for example, L.N. Tolstoy and A.K. Tolstoy, V.L. Pushkin and A.S. Pushkin).

2 A formal comparison is considered to be the case when the examinee is limited to repeating words from the task statement to indicate the comparison aspect.

Assessment of the completion of tasks 17.1–17.4 requiring the writing of a detailed, reasoned answer in the essay genre of at least 200 words

Among the five criteria by which an essay is assessed, the first criterion (content aspect) is the main one. If, when checking the work, the expert gives 0 points according to the first criterion, the task of part 2 is considered unfulfilled and is not checked further. For other criteria in the “Protocol for checking detailed answers” ​​0 points are assigned.

When assessing the performance of part tasks 2 volume should be taken into accountwritten essay. Examinees are recommended to have a volume of at least 200 words. If the essay contains less 150 words ( everyone is included in the word count words , including official), then such work is considered unfinished

and is scored 0 points*.

For essays ranging from 150 to 200 words, the maximum number errors for each point level do not change.

If in the formulation of the topic of an essay on poetry there is an indication reveal it using the example of at least three works(poems, lyric poems), then when evaluating such an essay according to the criterion 2 the number of lyrical works involved is taken into account: at when involving only two works, the score cannot be higher than two points, when attracting one work, the score cannot be higher one point.

Column No. 20 of the protocol contains the number of the alternative.

*The rules for counting words coincide with the rules of the Unified State Exam in the Russian language: “When counting words, both independent and auxiliary parts of speech are taken into account. Any sequence of words written without a space is counted (for example, “still” is one word, “still” is two words). Initials with a surname are considered one word (for example, “M.Yu. Lermontov” is one word). Any other symbols, in particular numbers, are not taken into account when calculating (for example, “5 years” is one word, “five years” is two words).

Assessment of the completion of tasks 17.1-17.3 requiring writing a detailed, reasoned answer in the essay genre of at least 200 words

Among the five criteria by which an essay is assessed, the first criterion (content aspect) is the main one. If, when checking the work, the expert gives 0 points according to the first criterion, the task of part 2 is considered unfulfilled and is not checked further. For four other criteria (2, 3, 4, 5) in the “Protocol for checking answers to tasks” of form No. 2, 0 points are assigned.
The grade for the first position of the assessment of the assignment of part 2 is put in column 7 of the protocol; for the second position - in column 8; on the third - in column 9; on the fourth - in column 10; the fifth - in column 11. When assessing the completion of tasks in part 2, you should take into account the volume of the written essay. A minimum length of 200 words is recommended for examinees. If the essay contains less than 150 words (all words, including function words, are included in the word count), then such work is considered uncompleted and is scored 0 points.
When the essay is from 150 to 200 words, the maximum number of errors for each point level does not change.

In accordance with the Procedure for conducting state final certification for educational programs of secondary general education (order of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia dated December 26, 2013 No. 1400, registered by the Ministry of Justice of Russia on February 3, 2014 No. 31205) “61. Based on the results of the first and second checks, the experts independently assign points for each answer to the tasks of the Unified State Examination paper with a detailed answer... 62. In the event of a significant discrepancy in the points given by two experts, a third check is assigned. A significant discrepancy in scores is defined in the assessment criteria for the relevant academic subject. The expert carrying out the third check is provided with information about the scores assigned by the experts who previously checked the examination work.” 1. If the discrepancy is 2 or more points for any of the tasks 8, 9, 15, 16, then the third expert checks only those answers to the tasks (8, 9, 15, 16) that caused a discrepancy of 2 or more points. 2. If the discrepancy between the scores of two experts is 2 or more points for any of the five criteria for the task of part 2 (17.1-17.3), then the third expert checks the answer only according to those criteria for the task of part 2 that caused a discrepancy in the assessment of 2 or more points .

Control measurement materials (CMM) based on the literature of the unified state exam allow you to differentiate school graduates by the level of subject preparation for the purpose of state final certification and selection for admission to universities. The content of the examination work is determined on the basis of the Federal component of the state standard of general education (Order of the Ministry of Education of Russia No. 1089 of 03/05/2004). Some positions of this document are specified based on the mandatory minimum content of basic general and secondary (complete) general education in literature, approved by orders of the Ministry of Education of Russia No. 1236 of May 19, 1998 and No. 56 of June 30, 1999 (the justification is given in the explanatory note to the codifier of content elements and requirements for the level of training of graduates of general education institutions for the Unified State Examination in Literature in 2016).

Assessment of tasks 9 (C2) and 16 (C4).
In 2013, the system for checking and assessing the completion of tasks 9 (C2) and 16 (C4) was significantly improved, which was a logical continuation of the changes in previous years, as well as the result of an analysis of the results of the Unified State Examination in 2012. The experience of mass checking of examination papers showed that it is necessary to supplement the contextual assessment criteria special requirements for examinees to perform a comparative analysis of works (fragments). Corresponding changes were made to the USE KIM 2013 and differentiated for each point level. To avoid discrepancies when checking contextual comparison in these tasks, the requirements for the selection of contexts for comparison and for the format of the answer, reflected in the notes before the criteria, were also clarified.

The changes made contributed to a clear differentiation of the examinees' answers.
The results of the Unified State Examination of previous years confirmed the feasibility of the changes made. There are no changes to the 2016 exam model.

Content
1. General characteristics of control measuring materials of the Unified State Examination according to the literature of 2016
2. Tasks with detailed answers in the system of control measuring materials based on literature in 2016. System for assessing the completion of tasks with a detailed answer for the Unified State Examination in literature
3. Methodological commentary on the criteria for checking and assessing the completion of tasks with a detailed answer of limited scope 8 (C1). 9 (C2), 15 (C3). 16 (C4)
3.1. Specifics of tasks 8 (C1) and 15 (C3)
3.2. Specifics of tasks 9 (C2) and 16 (C4)
3.3. Criteria and parameters for assessing the completion of task 8 (C1), 9 (C2), 15 (C3), 16 (C4)
4. Methodological commentary on the criteria for checking and assessing the completion of tasks with a detailed answer 17.1-17.3 (C5.1-C5.3)
4.1. Criterion “Depth of disclosure of the topic of the essay and persuasiveness of judgments”
4.2. Criterion “Level of mastery of theoretical and literary concepts”
4.3. Criterion “Reasonableness of using the text of the work”
4.4. Criterion “Compositional integrity and consistency of presentation”
4.5. Criterion “Following speech norms”
5. Types of errors (factual, logical, speech)
5.1. Factual errors
5.2. Logical errors. Errors in argumentation and essay composition
5.3. Speech errors
6. Problems associated with discrepancies between expert assessments when checking the completion of tasks with a detailed answer
7. Examples of using the system for evaluating examinees’ answers when checking tasks with a detailed answer
7.1. Examples of completing tasks with a detailed answer of limited scope 8(C1), 9(C2), 15(C3), 16(C4)
7.2. Examples of completing tasks in part 2 of exam paper 17 (C5))
Appendix 1. Criteria for assessing the completion of tasks with a detailed answer
Appendix 2. Memo for the expert checking answers to tasks with a detailed answer 8, 9, 15, 16, 17.1-17.3 in literature
Appendix 3. References.

Download the e-book for free in a convenient format, watch and read:
Download the Unified State Exam 2016 book, Literature, Methodological recommendations for assessing tasks, Zinin S.A., Novikova L.V., Belyaeva N.V., Gorokhovskaya L.N., Maryina O.B., Popova N.A. - fileskachat.com, fast and free download.

• Unified State Exam 2015, Literature, Methodological recommendations, Zinin S.A., Novikova L.V., Belyaeva N.V., Gorokhovskaya L.N., Maryina O.B., Popova N.A.
• Literature, Methodological recommendations for assessing the completion of Unified State Exam tasks with a detailed answer, Zinin S.A., Barabanova M.A., Belyaeva N.V., Gorokhovskaya L.N., Novikova L.V., Popova N.A., 2019

FEDERAL SERVICE FOR SUPERVISION IN THE FIELD OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE

_______________________________________________________________________

FEDERAL STATE BUDGETARY RESEARCH INSTITUTION

"FEDERAL INSTITUTE OF PEDAGOGICAL MEASUREMENTS"

Methodological materials for chairmen
and members of regional subject commissions

To check the completion of tasks with detailed answers for the 2016 Unified State Examination papers

LITERATURE

Methodological materials for chairmen and members of regional subject commissions for checking the completion of tasks with a detailed answer for the 2016 Unified State Examination in literature have been prepared in accordance with the Thematic Work Plan of the Federal State Budgetary Scientific Institution "Federal Institute of Pedagogical Measurements" for 2016. The manual is intended for preparation experts in assessing tasks with a detailed answer, which are part of control measurement materials (CMM) for passing the Unified State Exam (USE) in literature.

The methodological materials provide a brief description of the structure of control measuring materials of 2016 in the literature, characterize the types of tasks with a detailed answer used in the Unified State Exam KIM in literature, and the criteria for assessing the completion of tasks with a detailed answer, provide examples of assessing the completion of tasks and provide comments explaining the assigned assessment.

© Zinin S.A., Novikova L.V., Belyaeva N.V., Gorokhovskaya L.N., Maryina O.B., Popova N.A., 2016

© Federal Institute of Pedagogical Measurements. 2016

1. General characteristics of control measuring materials of the Unified State Examination according to the literature of 2016. 4

2. Tasks with detailed answers in the system of control measuring materials based on literature in 2016. A system for assessing the completion of tasks with a detailed answer for the Unified State Examination in literature. 7

3. Methodological commentary on the criteria for checking and assessing the completion of tasks with a detailed answer of limited scope 8 (C1), 9 (C2), 15 (C3), 16 (C4) 9

3.1. Specifics of tasks 8 (C1) and 15 (C3) 11

3.2. Specifics of tasks 9 (C2) and 16 (C4) 13

3.3. Criteria and parameters for assessing the completion of tasks 8 (C1), 9 (C2), 15 (C3), 16 (C4) 16

4. Methodological commentary on the criteria for checking and assessing the completion of tasks with a detailed answer 17.1–17.3 (C5.1–C5.3) 24

4.1. Criterion “Depth of disclosure of the topic of the essay and persuasiveness of judgments”. 27

4.2. Criterion “Level of mastery of theoretical and literary concepts”. 28

4.3. Criterion “Reasonableness of using the text of the work”. 32

4.4. Criterion “Compositional integrity and consistency of presentation”. 33

4.5. Criterion “Following speech norms”. 34

5. Types of errors (factual, logical, speech) 34

5.1. Factual errors. 35

5.2 Logical errors. Errors in argumentation and essay composition. 35

5.3. Speech errors. 36

6. Problems associated with discrepancies between expert assessments when checking the completion of tasks with a detailed answer.. 37

7. Examples of using the system for evaluating examinees’ answers when checking tasks with a detailed answer.. 43

7.1. Examples of completing tasks with a detailed answer of limited scope 8(C1), 9(C2), 15(C3), 16(C4) 43

7.2. Examples of completing tasks in part 2 of exam paper 17 (C5)) 45

Appendix 1. Criteria for assessing the completion of tasks with a detailed answer... 49

Appendix 2. Memo for the expert checking answers to tasks with a detailed answer 8, 9, 15, 16, 17.1-17.3 in literature. 57

Appendix 3. References... 58

General characteristics of control measuring materials of the Unified State Examination according to the literature of 2016

The Unified State Exam (hereinafter referred to as the Unified State Exam) is a form of objective assessment of the quality of training of persons who have mastered educational programs of secondary (complete) general education, using tasks of a standardized form (control measuring materials). The Unified State Examination is conducted in accordance with the Federal Law of December 29, 2012 No. 273-FZ “On Education in the Russian Federation.”

Control measurement materials (CMM) based on the literature of the unified state exam allow you to differentiate school graduates by the level of subject preparation for the purpose of state final certification and selection for admission to universities. The content of the examination work is determined on the basis of the Federal component of the state standard of general education (Order of the Ministry of Education of Russia No. 1089 of 03/05/2004). Some positions of this document are specified based on the mandatory minimum content of basic general and secondary (complete) general education in literature, approved by orders of the Ministry of Education of Russia No. 1236 of May 19, 1998 and No. 56 of June 30, 1999 (the justification is given in the explanatory note to the codifier of content elements and requirements for the level of training of graduates of general education institutions for the Unified State Examination in Literature in 2016).

Examination tests meet the specifics of literature as an art form and academic discipline.

The study of literature at school is aimed at achieving the following goals:

· upbringing a spiritually developed personality, the formation of a humanistic worldview, civic consciousness, a sense of patriotism, love and respect for literature and the values ​​of national culture;

· development the need for independent reading of works of art, emotional perception of literary text, imaginative and analytical thinking, creative imagination, reading culture; the formation of ideas about the specifics of literature, the development of a culture of oral and written speech among students;

· mastery of skills reading and analyzing works of art using literary concepts and necessary information on the history of literature; competent use of the Russian literary language when creating your own oral and written statements.

The main planned results of teaching the subject in close relationship with each other are characterized by:

The depth and independence of mastering the ideological and artistic content of literary works;

The level of mastery of knowledge in the theory and history of literature, including the ability to apply the most important of them in the analysis and evaluation of works of art;

The quality of speech skills developed in the process of studying literature.

The most important knowledge and skills that students must master can be recognized as:

Knowledge of texts of software works of fiction;

Knowledge of the main stages of the creative biography of major writers;

The ability to identify the theme, idea and main problem of a work of art;

The ability to determine the specific historical and universal significance of a work of art;

Knowledge and understanding of theoretical and literary concepts and terms: types of fiction (epic, lyric, drama), their main genres (novel, story, short story, poem, etc.), literary trends and trends (romanticism, classicism, symbolism and etc.), poetic meters (iamb, trochee, dactyl, etc.), etc.;

The ability to apply information on the theory and history of literature when analyzing a work of art: means of artistic representation (metaphor, epithet, comparison, antithesis, grotesque, allegory, etc.); structure-forming elements of a literary text (system of images, plot, composition, extra-plot elements), etc.;

Mastery of the necessary types of logically coherent, figurative speech utterance, the skills of which are formed in the process of studying literature.

In addition to the above regulatory documents on the subject, the named goals and learning outcomes are reflected in the Model programs in literature of basic general and secondary (complete) general education in literature, corresponding to the Federal component of the state educational standard of 2004 (website of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia http://www.mon .gov.ru), as well as in textbooks certified by the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia.

The control measurement materials of the Unified State Exam in literature were compiled in such a way as to reflect the most important of the named goals of literary education, which is based on the reading and study of literary works of Russian classics of the 19th and 20th centuries. All tasks are aimed at testing understanding and ability to analyze and interpret works studied at school. The main elements of the examination model in literature are tasks with a detailed answer, in which knowledge of a literary work, an understanding of its problems and the author’s position, and a personal attitude to what has been read are freely expressed. On this basis, it becomes possible to identify the attitude towards literature as a high value of national culture, analytical skills and features of figurative perception, knowledge of the necessary information on the theory and history of literature and the skills of using them in the analysis of literary works.

The Unified State Examination model in literature is the result of many years of experimental work, the purpose of which is to find an examination model that is most adequate to the specifics of the subject. From this point of view, the least effective tasks were those with a choice of answers, the structure of which does not take into account the peculiarities of literary analysis, which does not always involve the choice of the only correct, generalized, formalized answers. The use of so-called false distractors (incorrect answers) in tasks of this type in relation to literature can lead to their actualization in students’ memory to the detriment of correct ideas (in 2008, multiple-choice tasks were removed from the examination paper). To a greater extent, when working with a literary text, it is effective to use short-answer tasks that test knowledge of specific literary facts and individual elements of the artistic form (features of composition, genre specificity of the work, types of visual and expressive means, etc.). However, the most important, “supporting” constructive part of the examination model is the now expanded set of tasks that require a detailed, coherent answer.

In general, the results of the Unified State Examination in recent years indicate the effectiveness of the developed examination model. The exam results allow us to conclude that the present examination model provides the necessary content validity of the exam and reveals the level of development of basic educational skills in the subject among graduates.

Examination model for literature 2016 has not undergone any changes.

In the examination paper of 2016 (as well as 2015), two parts were distinguished and continuous numbering of tasks was adopted.

CMM includes 17 tasks that differ in form and level of difficulty.

Part 1 suggests completing tasks that include questions
to the analysis of literary works. The ability of graduates to determine the main elements of the content and artistic structure of the studied works (themes and problems, heroes and events, artistic techniques, various types of tropes, etc.) is tested, as well as to consider specific literary works in interrelation
with the course material.

Part 1 includes two sets of tasks.

The first set of tasks relates to a fragment of an epic, or lyric epic, or dramatic work: 7 tasks with a short answer (1–7), requiring the writing of a word, or a phrase, or a sequence of numbers, and 2 tasks with a detailed answer in the amount of 5–10 sentences: 8 (C1), 9 (C2).

The second set of tasks relates to a lyrical work:
5 tasks with a short answer (10–14) and 2 tasks with a detailed answer in the amount of 5–10 sentences: 15 (C3), 16 (C4).

The general structure of part 1 is subordinated to the task of broad content coverage of literary material. Literary texts offered for analysis make it possible to test not only graduates’ knowledge of specific works, but also the ability to analyze the text taking into account its genre affiliation; 2 tasks involve access to a broad literary context (substantiation of the connection of this literary text with other works according to the aspects of comparison specified in the tasks ). Thus, relying on intra-subject connections of the studied course allows for additional coverage of the content of the tested literary material.

Following the proposed work algorithm allows examinees to identify the place and role of the episode (scene) in the overall structure of the work (fragment analysis), reveal the plot-compositional, figurative-thematic and stylistic features of the analyzed text, and generalize their observations into the literary context.

Part 2 of the work requires Unified State Examination participants to write a full-length, detailed essay on a literary topic (thus, another substantive component of the course being tested is added to the literary material worked out in Part 1). The graduate is offered 3 questions 17.1–17.3 (C5.1–C5.3), covering the most important milestones of the national historical and literary process: 17.1 (C5.1) - on works of ancient Russian literature, classics of the 18th century. and the first half of the 19th century; 17.2 (C5.2) – based on works of the second half of the 19th century; 17.3 (C5.3) – based on works of the 20th century. The graduate selects only one of the questions and gives an answer to it in the form of an essay, justifying his judgments by referring to the work (from memory). Work of this type gives the graduate the opportunity to show his attitude to the problems raised by the writer and his understanding of the artistic originality of the work. Writing an essay requires a large measure of cognitive independence and is most consistent with the specifics of literature as an art form and an academic discipline that aims to form a qualified reader.
with a developed aesthetic taste and a need for spiritual and moral
and cultural development.

Structurally, the two sets of tasks in Part 1 are built stepwise: from basic-level questions aimed at testing theoretical and literary knowledge (1–7 and 10–14), to tasks of a higher level of a generalizing type (8, 9 and 15, 16). Part 2 contains an alternative task of a high level of complexity (17.1–17.3), which best reflects the requirements of the profile level standard.