Distant and Traditional Training Formats in Natural-Science Disciplines

Abstract

Initially developed for a specific contingent, distance learning is replacing the traditional format. Many people wonder if it is a worthy alternative to become exceptional or one of the education system types. The forced transition to distance learning format made it possible to compare distance and traditional formats based on the results of teaching natural sciences. A comparative analysis was conducted in March−May 2020 on the base of the Gorno-Altaisk State University (Gorno-Altaysk, Russia). The comparison results showed that in distance learning, it is difficult for a teacher to assess the quality of mastering the material according to traditional criteria when passing a lecture course. When performing laboratory work in a distance format, the student becomes an observer, not an experimenter. There is no element of developing practical skills and analysis of the obtained results. The assessment of students’ knowledge in a distance format is flexible and convenient for all participants in the educational process. To increase the relevance of test results in the distance format, it is necessary to expand the fund of assessment tools. In traditional learning, the teacher acts as a curator responsible for the level of knowledge of students. In the distance format, the teacher is an intermediary between the educational material and the student’s independent work. Final control in a distance format does not allow to assess the knowledge and level of students’ competencies objectively. The means and methods of distance learning are an effective addition to traditional education in the natural sciences. However, they cannot replace all elements of full-time education.