| Autor: |
A. Boykov, K. Egiazaryan, A. Efremov, Nina Kadykova |
| Rok vydání: |
2023 |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
Geometry & Graphics. 11:4-22 |
| ISSN: |
2308-4898 |
| DOI: |
10.12737/2308-4898-2023-11-1-4-22 |
| Popis: |
It is noted that geometric and graphical disciplines traditionally cause difficulties in studying elementary students. It is pointed out that the requirements for the quality of education and ensuring academic performance are mutually inverse and are in conflict with the limited number of teaching hours, which has been steadily declining for many years. Data are given on the number of hours allocated for the study of geometric and graphic disciplines in Russian universities. The main reasons for the problems of geometric and graphic training of students are listed. The first reason is an attempt to give knowledge and skills from three different sections - mathematics (descriptive geometry), computer science (computer graphics) and engineering (engineering graphics) in conditions of shortage of classroom hours. Provides information about the content of classical textbooks of descriptive geometry, engineering graphics. The second reason is the complexity of the development of spatial thinking. It is noted that information technologies that facilitate the understanding of images do not solve the problem of the development of spatial thinking. Information is given on the heterogeneity of students in terms of the psychophysiological features of spatial thinking in general and in terms of various types of mathematical thinking. The third reason is the poor initial preparation of students. Features and reasons are indicated. The main ways of increasing the motivation of students to study geometric and graphic disciplines are given. The fourth reason is the unpreparedness of students for independent work. Reasons are given. The main ways of increasing the efficiency of students' independent work are given. The shortcomings of automatic control in the form of testing and automatic verification of solutions of graphic tasks are considered in detail. The fifth reason is the difference in the requirements for geometric and graphic training for different educational areas, specialties and profiles. The presence in the geometric-graphical cycle of disciplines of an invariant (common for different specialties and training profiles) core and subject settings is noted. The sixth reason is the high requirements for lecturers of geometric and graphic disciplines. The problem of training lecturing staff of higher education in the field of geometric and graphic education is noted. Conclusions are made about the need to create a methodological training system that takes into account and solves these problems. |
| Databáze: |
OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
