Akademik litseylarda kimyo fanini o‘qitishda raqamli ta’lim texnologiyalaridan foydalanish imkoniyatlari
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/a10.5281/zenodo.17553203Ключевые слова:
raqamli ta’lim texnologiyalari, kimyo o‘qitish metodikasi, virtual laboratoriya tizimlari, kengaytirilgan reallik, virtual reallik, teskari sinf pedagogik modeli, akademik litsey ta’lim tizimi, interaktiv ta’lim, STEM ta’limi, o‘quv samaradorligiАннотация
Ushbu maqolada akademik litseylarda kimyo fanini o‘qitishning hozirgi holatiga kompleks tahlil amalga
oshirilgan. Tadqiqot davomida an’anaviy o‘qitish metodlariga xos bo‘lgan fundamental muammolar, xususan, fanning
yuqori darajadagi mavhumligi, o‘quvchilarning kognitiv yuk ostida qolishi, motivatsiyaning sezilarli pasayishi hamda laboratoriya
amaliyotining o‘quv maqsadlariga erishishdagi samarasizligi atroflicha tahlil qilingan. Muammolarni hal qilishning
ilmiy asoslangan yo‘llari sifatida zamonaviy raqamli ta’lim ekotizimining komponentlari – virtual laboratoriyalar, kengaytirilgan
va virtual haqiqat texnologiyalari, interaktiv simulyatsiya dasturlari – ning o‘quv jarayoniga integratsiya qilinishi
ko‘rib chiqiladi. Tadqiqotda pedagogik metodologiya asosi sifatida teskari sinf modeli chuqur tahlil qilinib, uning bilim
o‘zlashtirish samaradorligini oshirish, tanqidiy va ijodiy fikrlash qobiliyatlarini rivojlantirish, o‘quvchilarning fanga nisbatan
ijobiy munosabat va motivatsiyasini shakllantirish imkoniyatlari xalqaro va mahalliy pedagogik tajribalar asosida dalillar
bilan asoslanadi. Maqolada O‘zbekiston akademik litseylari o‘ziga xos xususiyatlari va imkoniyatlarini hisobga olgan
holda ushbu ilg‘or pedagogik yondashuvlarni bosqichma-bosqich, maqsadli va barqaror tarzda amalga oshirish bo‘yicha
strategik asos, metodologik tavsiyalar va amaliy mexanizmlar tizimli ko‘rinishda taqdim etilgan
Библиографические ссылки
1. Johnstone A.H. Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom what they seem. Journal of Computer Assisted
Learning. 1991. Vol. 7, No. 2. P. 75-83.
2. Kozma R., Russell J. Students becoming chemists: Developing representational competence. In: Visualization in science
education. Dordrecht: Springer, 2005. P. 121-145.
3. Chini J.J., Straub C.L., Thomas K.H. Learning from avatars: Learning assistants practice physics pedagogy in a classroom
simulator. Physical Review Physics Education Research. 2016. Vol. 12, No. 1. Article 010117
4. Potkonjak V., Gardner M., Callaghan V., Mattila P., Guetl C., Petrovic V.M., Jovanovic K. Virtual laboratories for education
in science, technology, and engineering: A review. Computers & Education. 2016. Vol. 95. P. 309-327.
5. Makransky G., Petersen G.B. The Cognitive Affective Model of Immersive Learning (CAMIL): a theoretical researchbased
model of learning in immersive virtual reality. Educational Psychology Review. 2021. Vol. 33. P. 937-958.
6. Hofstein A., Lunetta V.N. The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education.
2004. Vol. 88, No. 1. P. 28-54.
7. Bishop J.L., Verleger M.A. The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. 120th ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition.
Atlanta, GA, 2013. Paper ID 6219.
8. Seery M.K. Flipped learning in higher education chemistry: emerging trends and potential directions. Chemistry Education
Research and Practice. 2015. Vol. 16, No. 4. P. 758-768.
9. Anderson L.W., Krathwohl D.R. A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of
educational objectives. New York: Longman, 2001. 336 p.
10. O‘zbekiston Respublikasi Oliy va O‘rta maxsus ta’lim vazirligi. Raqamli ta’lim strategiyasi 2024-2030. Toshkent, 2024.
45 b.
Загрузки
Опубликован
Выпуск
Раздел
Лицензия
Copyright (c) 2025 MAKTABGACHA VA MAKTAB TA’LIMI JURNALI
Это произведение доступно по лицензии Creative Commons «Attribution» («Атрибуция») 4.0 Всемирная.
