| Abstract [eng] |
The theoretical analysis of the evaluation of the quality of study was carried out in this paper work. The hypothesis that students attitude towards the quality of socioeducational study programmes (social pedagogics/work) is effected by subjective factors (university, speciality, study programmes and so) was made. According to the method of questionnaire there was a research made which aim was to analyse how Lithuanian Bachelor full-time students in higher courses of socioeducational study programmes (social pedagogics/work) evaluate the programmes, their quality. A statistic data analysis was made (descriptive frequency, percentage, average, standard deviation, correlation (r)). 193 Lithuanian Bachelor full-time students in higher courses of socioeducational study programmes (social pedagogics/work) participated in this research. In the empirical part students evaluate the programmes they have chosen, what skills are developed, study components, modules, stimulating/non-stimulating factors influence work and study systematically on the aspects of practical and national educational policy. The most essential conclusions of the research: 1. The hypothesis is reliable that students attitude towards the quality of socioeducational study programmes (social pedagogics/work) is determined by subjective factors. 2. The evaluation of the quality of socioeducational study programmes (social pedagogics/work) was determined by subjective factors such as the respondents speciality, course and university. 3. Students of socioeducational study programmes evaluate the modules of psychology, work with social groups are evaluated best of all. Basics of management, basics of the law, pedagogics modules and those which are connected with secondary education or basics of study course are evaluated worst. Thus, students relate their studies more with practice not with scientific work. 4. The research revealed the main drawbacks of socioeducational study rogrammes. According to students opinions the most improved areas are a lack of practical activities at universities, a lack of theoretical written material in native language, a poor range of teaching approaches, a lack of innovations and opportunities which were not applied for development of the lecturers competence. |
