Eesti ja vene õppekeelega kooliõpilaste kirjutamisoskus emakeele e-tasemetööde katsetuse tulemuste põhjal

Abstract

Artiklis keskendutakse eesti ja vene õppekeelega kooliõpilaste kirjutamisoskuse võrdlusele, lähtudes hindamisaluste väljatöötamisel kirjutamisoskuse laiemast definitsioonist ja analüütilise hindamise mudelist. Kirjaliku suhtluse osakaal järjest suureneb ja asjakohane kirjutamisoskus on aina olulisem. Et teada saada, kas ja kuivõrd tulevad eesti ning vene õppekeelega koolide õpilased elulise situatsiooni sarnases kirjutamisolukorras sõnumite edastamisega toime, mõõdeti katselistes e-tasemetöödes ka kirjutamisoskust. Eesti ja vene koolide õpilaste tulemuste võrdlus annab esmast informatsiooni – eestikeelsele õppele ning e-hindamisele täielikul üleminekul – asjakohaste kirjutamisülesannete koostamiseks. Tulemuste analüüsist selgus, et õpilaste kirjutamisoskusest mitmekülgse tagasiside saamiseks tuleb neis hinnata võimalikult paljusid aspekte. Nii e-kirja kui ka jutustava teksti üldine keskmine sooritusprotsent oli kõrgem vene koolide õpilastel. Mõlema koolitüübi II astme õpilaste e-kirja kirjutamise tulemus oli oluliselt parem kui I astme oma, aga jutustavat teksti kirjutasid vene koolides paremini I astme õpilased. Vene õppekeelega koolide õpilaste üldised kõrgemad tulemused annavad põhjust nentida, et eestikeelsele õppele üleminekuks on õppekeeles kirjutamise oskuse edendamiseks olemas sisend, millele õpetamisel toetuda. *** Writing skills of Estonian and Russian language speaking school students based on the results of the mother tongue standard-determining e-tests The Covid-19 pandemic has significantly changed something in society and at school. Communication is increasingly taking place in a hybrid form, and therefore the ability to communicate one’s thoughts in a comprehensible way to a communication partner in writing, i.e., relevant writing skills, is becoming more and more important. Research has shown that mother tongue skills, and more specifically the ability to write in the mother tongue, provide input and help to acquire a second language and / or the language of the learner. Consequently, when preparing for the full transition to Estonian-language education, it is important to know how the writing skills of current first and second stage students of Estonian and Russian speaking basic school are similar and different. The opportunity to compare the writing skills of the students of two school types a little more precisely arose from the basis of the general results of the writing part of the e-tests tested in October 2019 in the 1st and 2nd level of basic school. The definition of the construct to be assessed was based on the definitions of several authors, which can be summarized as complicated and complex activity of creating high-quality writing, which consists of different stages. To assess writing skills, it must be established in advance how, what and for what purpose will be assessed. As in standard-determining tests it is possible to assess the result of writing or text, the assessment guide was based on a product approach and, more narrowly, on an analytical assessment model. At both school levels, there were two writing tasks in Estonian and Russian: the task of writing communication and writing the narrative text. The analysis showed that the tasks were generally reliable and measured what was expected. The reliability of the tasks of writing a narrative text was rather low in the first stage test of Estonian and in both stage tests in Russian. This shows that as many aspects as possible should be assessed at least in the narrative text. In both text creation tasks, three aspects were assessed: text creation or content, orthography, and digital writing skills, and in the written communication task, also the ability of written communication. The analysis of the results of Estonian and Russian speaking school students concluded that it was somewhat surprising that the average results of both the e-mail and the narrative text were better of Russian school students in both stages. Surprisingly because of this that, for example, in the PISA surveys, in reading skills Russian school students performed worse (Puksand 2019). As the texts were evaluated by the teachers and not by the computer, this result can be justified on the one hand by the fact that the human evaluation is always influenced by subjective factors, no matter how unambiguous the evaluation guide is. On the other hand, this makes possible to believe more confidently that for the transition to Estonian-language education, first and second stage students of Russian-speaking basic schools will have at least a satisfactory level input of writing skills. The e-mail was written much better by the second stage students in both languages, with a big difference, but while the narrative text was written equally by students of both grade in Estonian schools, then in Russian school, second stage students wrote slightly worse than first stage students. As a result of analysis described in the article, the opinion was confirmed that the calculation of spelling errors should be based on the length of the text. It was also noticeable that the text creation skills of Russian students are better than those of Estonian students. The reason for this difference also needs further research. In conclusion, it should be noted that the analysis of the general results of the writing part of low stake e-test of first and second stage students in Estonian and Russian language speaking schools provided valuable information and gave direction for further research.