328
V. N. Lukin and L. N. Chernyshov
Systems that allow online training, such as the same Moodle or Populi [9], provided
invaluable assistance in forced remote training during quarantine. However, the use
of such systems, as practice has shown, does not particularly save the teacher’s time,
sometimes just the opposite. More useful in this sense are the tools related to test
preparation and evaluation.
As for complex solutions at the university level, it is worth mentioning the
domestic development of University Information and Analytical System (UIAS)
of the Moscow Aviation Institute based on the 1C System [10]. Its goal is a general
information environment where data on employees, students, courses, programs of
disciplines, schedules, etc., are stored. True, there is no support for the remote educational process, unlike Moodle, which is widely used in the world. The OpenEduCat
[11] is also of interest, but it focuses on administrative functions, as in Collegix from
Aptron [12]. For a detailed overview, see [13].
It would seem that the abundance of existing solutions gives the teacher the opportunity to choose the most suitable one that will facilitate his/her work, reduce fatigue,
and increase labor productivity. However, here we are faced with an unexpected
phenomenon: almost none of the teachers voluntarily use these funds. Factors such
as entry threshold, complexity of use, insufficient efficiency are affected. The first
factor means that a complex, multifunctional product requires time to study, which
is already too short. The second factor is that the development of the product is not
usually done by teachers, and its authors do not feel the needs of the user. In addition,
both age and the level of qualification of faculty members in the field of information
technology affect [14]. The third factor is related to the fact that developers often
make a product of interest to the university administration (it is easier to introduce it)
or overload it with extra functions that are often poorly connected [15]. As a result,
work is not facilitated, but difficult. The teacher of “information” disciplines in this
sense is in a better position: he/her is more freely guided in many software products
and their features. In addition, he/her can find solutions that can do without bulky
applications.
From general resources, the teacher usually uses a schedule, student lists, performance tools, etc. In addition, he/her usually uses office products (Word, Excel) and
e-mail. However, there is still a lot of routine work that takes a considerable time.
Teachers in computer disciplines are faced with the need to use software products
that act as a subject. There is an additional load associated with the preparation of
programming tasks and their verification: last year’s backlog is not always possible
to use. Note that tasks are most often individual, so the tendency to increase groups
of students leads to an additional increase in a workload.
All the software necessary for the teacher can be conditionally divided into two
groups: the one used periodically and the other used daily. The first group includes,
for example, funds for the preparation of Working Programs of Disciplines (WPDs)
or an individual plan. They must be common to all, they must comply with the
standards, and therefore they are subject to serious requirements. The software of
the second group is used in the educational process on a daily basis, it is often created
and accompanied by the teachers themselves. Here are some examples.
V. N. Lukin and L. N. Chernyshov
Systems that allow online training, such as the same Moodle or Populi [9], provided
invaluable assistance in forced remote training during quarantine. However, the use
of such systems, as practice has shown, does not particularly save the teacher’s time,
sometimes just the opposite. More useful in this sense are the tools related to test
preparation and evaluation.
As for complex solutions at the university level, it is worth mentioning the
domestic development of University Information and Analytical System (UIAS)
of the Moscow Aviation Institute based on the 1C System [10]. Its goal is a general
information environment where data on employees, students, courses, programs of
disciplines, schedules, etc., are stored. True, there is no support for the remote educational process, unlike Moodle, which is widely used in the world. The OpenEduCat
[11] is also of interest, but it focuses on administrative functions, as in Collegix from
Aptron [12]. For a detailed overview, see [13].
It would seem that the abundance of existing solutions gives the teacher the opportunity to choose the most suitable one that will facilitate his/her work, reduce fatigue,
and increase labor productivity. However, here we are faced with an unexpected
phenomenon: almost none of the teachers voluntarily use these funds. Factors such
as entry threshold, complexity of use, insufficient efficiency are affected. The first
factor means that a complex, multifunctional product requires time to study, which
is already too short. The second factor is that the development of the product is not
usually done by teachers, and its authors do not feel the needs of the user. In addition,
both age and the level of qualification of faculty members in the field of information
technology affect [14]. The third factor is related to the fact that developers often
make a product of interest to the university administration (it is easier to introduce it)
or overload it with extra functions that are often poorly connected [15]. As a result,
work is not facilitated, but difficult. The teacher of “information” disciplines in this
sense is in a better position: he/her is more freely guided in many software products
and their features. In addition, he/her can find solutions that can do without bulky
applications.
From general resources, the teacher usually uses a schedule, student lists, performance tools, etc. In addition, he/her usually uses office products (Word, Excel) and
e-mail. However, there is still a lot of routine work that takes a considerable time.
Teachers in computer disciplines are faced with the need to use software products
that act as a subject. There is an additional load associated with the preparation of
programming tasks and their verification: last year’s backlog is not always possible
to use. Note that tasks are most often individual, so the tendency to increase groups
of students leads to an additional increase in a workload.
All the software necessary for the teacher can be conditionally divided into two
groups: the one used periodically and the other used daily. The first group includes,
for example, funds for the preparation of Working Programs of Disciplines (WPDs)
or an individual plan. They must be common to all, they must comply with the
standards, and therefore they are subject to serious requirements. The software of
the second group is used in the educational process on a daily basis, it is often created
and accompanied by the teachers themselves. Here are some examples.