MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE OF THE KYRGYZ

REPUBLIC

MINISTRY OF HEALTH OF THE KYRGYZ REPUBLIC

I. K. AKHUNBAYEV KYRGYZ STATE MEDICAL ACADEMY

POINT-RATING SYSTEM FOR ASSESSING OF I. K. AKHUNBAEV KSMA

STUDENTS KNOWLEDGE

Methodological recommendations for teachers

BISHKEK-2021

COMPILERS:

T. S. Sabirova, Associate Professor of the Department of Basic and Clinical

Pharmacology, Candidate of Medical Sciences;

G. B. Isakova, Associate Professor of the Department of Faculty Therapy, Head of the

Educational and Methodological Department, Candidate of Medical

Sciences;

N. T. Karasheva, Head of the Department of Physics, Mathematics, Informatics and

Computer Technologies, Candidate of Pedagogical Sciences;

S. Ch. Dotalieva, Acting Associate Professor, Acting Head of the Department of PME and

DT, coordinator of the Pharmacy Faculty , Candidate of

Pharmaceutical Sciences.

T. M. Ibragimova, Associate Professor of the Department of Faculty Therapy, Chairman

of the UMPC of the Faculty of “General Medicine”, Candidate of

Medical Sciences;

S. V. Chechetova, Associate Professor of the Department of Pediatric Infectious Diseases,

Coordinator of the Faculty of Pediatrics, Candidate of Medical

Sciences;

Zh. O. Soltobayeva, Associate Professor of the Department of Medical Biology, Genetics

and Parasitology, Candidate of Biological Sciences;

Zh. T. Konurbayeva, Associate Professor of the Department of Faculty Surgery,

Candidate of Medical Sciences;

S. S. Abilova, Associate Professor of the Department of Faculty Therapy, Candidate of

Medical Sciences;

D. N. Ismailova, Senior lecturer of the Department of Pharmacognosy and Drug

Chemistry;

A. A. Jorbaeva, Head of the Department of General Hygiene, Associate Professor,

Candidate of Medical Sciences;

T. A. Tsivinskaya, lecturer of the Department of Hygiene Disciplines, Candidate of

Medical Sciences;

Sholpanbay u M., Assistant of the Department of Infectious Diseases.

The methodical recommendation was approved by the decree of the Rector of

KSMA No. 170 dated April 20, 2021.

The point-rating system for assessing students’ knowledge at the I. K. Akhunbaev

Kyrgyz State Medical Academy: methodological recommendation for teachers / T. S.

Sabirova [etc.]; Kyrgyz State Medical Academy-Bishkek, 2021. – 21p.

Methodological recommendations are intended for teachers of KSMA to assess the

knowledge of students in the preparation of specialists at the udergraduate level.

CONTENT

1. INTRODUCTION...................................................................................... 4

2. ESSENCE AND GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF IMPLEMENTATION

POINT-RATING SYSTEM.................................... 5

2.1. Types and forms of students’ knowledge, skills

and abilities control............................................................................. 5

2.2. Incentive (bonus) and penalty points............... 8

3. PROCEDURE AND FORMS OF CONDUCTING THE FINAL

CONTROL BY DISCIPLINE................................................. 9

3.1. General algorithm for forming an IR by discipline...... 9

3.2. Final control of the discipline ........................... 9

3.3. State final certification ........................ 12

4. APPLICATIONS............................................................................... 13

5. REFERENCES.............................................................. 21

1. INTRODUCTION

The traditional system of assessment of students’ knowledge, based on the final control in

the form of an exam and / or credit test, does not sufficiently stimulate the systematic work

of students. If there is no or insufficient current control during the semester or academic

year, the exam and / or credit test is overloaded. At the same time, the assessment obtained

by a student on an exam depends to a certain extent on a number of random factors (the

choice of cards, the psychological and physical condition of the student and the examiner,

etc.). With such a system, there is no sufficient differentiation in the assessment of

students’ knowledge and skills, and there is no competition between students in mastering

knowledge.

The use of a cumulative point-rating system provides for continuous monitoring

of students’ knowledge at all stages of training, integration of control results from one

stage to another, determination of a student's rating in a discipline for a cycle, semester or

academic year.

The objectives of the PRS assessment of students’ knowledge are:

increasing students’ motivation for systematic work on the study of disciplines during

the semester;

activation of independent activity of students through their involvement in the

management system for evaluating the quality of academic work;

development of fair mechanisms for forming an objective assessment of students based

on the aggregate of accumulated points in order to reduce corruption risks;

improving the quality of training through the introduction of a system of control

(monitoring and evaluation) of students’ knowledge and skills;

activating the work of teaching staff and students to update and improve the content, as

well as teaching methods;

ensuring comparability of learning outcomes with the international student assessment

system;

improving the level of organization of the educational process through the introduction

of the automated AVN system.

PRS assessment of students’ knowledge is based on the following principles

structuring the content of each academic discipline into separate modules;

openness and accessibility of students’ knowledge assessment results;

regular and objective assessment of students’ work results by assigning rating points;

availability of feedback that implies timely adjustment of the content and methodology

of teaching the discipline;

compliance with performance discipline by all participants of the educational

process;

integrated assessment of the results of all types of educational activities of students

provided for in the curriculum.

2. THE ESSENCE AND GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF IMPLEMENTING A POINT

RATING SYSTEM

PRS is implemented in accordance with the discipline rating plan (DRP), which contains

information about disciplinary modules, forms and terms of control measures, ranges of

points awarded, evaluation criteria, etc. (see Appendix 1).

The discipline under study consists of a set of disciplinary modules, which represent

logically completed parts of the course and are the complex of knowledge, skills and

practical skills that are subject to control.

The number of disciplinary modules per semester depends on the complexity of the

discipline and should not exceed:

1 disciplinary module, if the volume of the discipline is 0.7-1.5 credits;

2 disciplinary modules, if the volume of the discipline is more than 1.5 credits;

Rating plans for each discipline should be brought to the attention of students in the

first lesson of the discipline and posted on the KSMA website.

The regulatory document for recording the academic performance of students

studying under the point-rating system is the attendance and performance register.

2.1. Types and forms of students’ knowledge, skills and abilities control.

Assessment of students ' academic performance within the framework of the PRS is

carried out during current and modular control with possible accrual of bonus and penalty

points.

2.1.1 Current control (current rating) - this is the sum of points scored for all types

of classroom and extracurricular (independent) work in this disciplinary module.

The distribution of points depends on the proportion between classroom work and

the SIW (students’ independent work) and is reflected in the rating plans of disciplines.

Classroom work (CW) it is evaluated using a 5-point system (see Appendix 2) with

subsequent conversion to a 100-point scale according to specially developed tables before

conducting the modular control (see Appendix 3).

If you work out absences from practical classes for a valid reason, the student

receives points from the current rating (according to the 5-point system).

If you work out absences of practical classes for a disrespectful reason, the student

receives a score not higher than 4 (at the first attempt) and not higher than 3 (in other

cases).

If a student participates in various events to maintain the image of KSMA

(Olympiads, scientific conferences, sports competitions, etc.) and has a supporting

document from the dean’s office, the reason for missing classes in all disciplines is

considered valid and the student is given a maximum score (5 points) for one missed class

in each discipline for the specified period of time. If the number of absences in a discipline

is more than one class, then the student must earn points for the rest of the missed classes,

if their classroom rating is lower than the credit minimum (at the same time, class absences

are also considered for a good reason).

Independent work (SIW) includes the types of work defined by the department,

including writing medical records, protocols, forms, etc.

2.1.2. The disciplinary module should be completed with a module control (MC) to

assess the degree of assimilation of educational material and receive a rating. The

maximum score for the MC is 20, and the credit minimum is 12 points.

As forms of modular control, you can use:

oral questioning,

testing,

control work (written, laboratory),

colloquium, etc.

The assessment criteria for MC and SIW are set by each department individually, taking

into account the specifics of the discipline, approved at the department’s meeting and

brought to the attention of students in the first lesson.

If a student has missed classes and lectures in this discipline, he is allowed to pass the

MC only after the debts are eliminated.

If a student does not have academic debt, but his / her CR is below the credit minimum,

he / she is not allowed to take the MC. The student must increase his rating (get the

missing number of points on topics where his score for the lesson was “1” – “2”) by

completing additional tasks provided for in the process of studying this topic. At the same

time, the repeated score must not exceed “4” (on the first attempt) and “3” (in other cases).

If a student has scored a threshold score on the MC, but wants to improve their rating,

then one retake is allowed before submitting the statement to the dean's office (within two

weeks from the date of the MC).

If you get less than 12 points for the MC, the student must retake the MC within two

weeks.

If a student did not pass the previous MC, they can be admitted to pass the next MC

until the semester rating is formed.

Module control is not performed:

if the discipline volume is less than 0,7credits in semester;

in the disciplines related to the elective courses (EC);

in the discipline “physical education and sports”.

2.1.3. The sum of the points of the current rating and module control is the rating for

the disciplinary module (RDM=CR+MC) and does not exceed 100 points.

RDM is not calculated until the student retakes the MC for a passing grade.

If the module control for the discipline is not carried out , then the RDM is equal to

the current rating (RDM=CR).

2.1.4. At the end of the semester, the semester rating (SR) is calculated - the

arithmetic average of all ratings of disciplinary modules in the semester:

SR=(RDM1+RDM2)/2, which also does not exceed 100 points.

If there is no module control in the discipline, then the semester rating is equal to the

current rating (SR=CR).

2.1.5. If a discipline is studied for several semesters, then at the end of its study, the

average semester rating (ASR) is calculated, which is the arithmetic average of all

semester ratings (SR) and also does not exceed 100 points.

2.1.6. If the form of training of students is an interdisciplinary module (for example,

the module “From molecule to cell”, then at the end of it, the following is calculated:

Rating for an interdisciplinary module (RIM) is a numerical indicator equal to the sum of

all RDM included in the module, taking into account indexing depending on the volume of

the discipline (see Appendix 4).

2.2. Incentive (bonus) and penalty points

The point-rating system provides incentive bonus points (BP) and penalty points

PP).

Bonus points (no more than 10 points) are awarded to the student for:

participation intra-university or interuniversity olympiad / conference – from 2 to 4

points,

participation in an international olympiad / conference-from 5 to 7 points,

systematic participation in the scientific section of the department – up to 2 points

availability of publications in a peer-reviewed publication (domestic, foreign) - from 3

to 7 points.

The number of bonus points according to the above criteria is set by the department

depending on the student's achievements (taken place at the Olympiad or conference,

publications in a domestic or foreign publication, etc.).

Bonus points are combined with the points of the midterm rating (if the final control

form for the discipline is an exam) or with the ASR (if the form of final control in the

discipline is credit).

Penalty points (no more than 10 points) are provided for:

skipping lectures and practical (seminar, laboratory) classes without a valid

reason:

up to 25% of skips are deducted up to 2 points,

up to 50% of skips are deducted up to 5 points,

up to 10 points are deducted for 50% or more of absences, and the elimination of

academic debt is carried out only with the permission of the dean's office.;

late delivery of the MC (more than 14 days after the MC is held according to the

rating plan of the discipline) - up to 2 points are deducted;

failure to comply with the rules and norms regulated by acts of the KSMA

(including repeated violation of the clothing form: absence of a robe, cap, phonendoscope)

- deducts up to 3 points.

Penalty points are not provided for students who miss a lecture or practical lesson for a

valid reason (admission from the dean’s office is required).

Penalty points for each discipline are deducted at the end of the semester from the

semester rating indicator (SR) or at the end of studying an interdisciplinary module from

the RDM in the discipline.

3. PROCEDURE AND FORMS OF FINAL CONTROL IN THE DISCIPLINE

The final integral assessment of all types of student's academic activities in the

discipline is Final rating (FR), which is calculated by summing up the assessment of

current academic performance, bonus points, and the results of the final control (if the

discipline ends with an exam). The maximum rating for the discipline is 100 points, and

the minimum score is 60 points.

3.1. General algorithm for the formation of FR in the discipline

(see Appendices 5 and 6):

FR for the discipline ending with the exam, is the sum of the points of the

boundary rating, bonus points, and final control (FR=MR+BP+FC)

Midterm rating (MR) reflects the student's accumulated scores in the discipline

(average semester rating or rating for an interdisciplinary module) with a counted

coefficient of 0.9

(MR=0.9 * ASR or MR=0.9*RIM).

A student is considered eligible for the exam if the MR is at least 54 points.

In the case when the form of FC is a credit test, the MR is not calculated, but

the BP is added to the ASR (or SR, if the discipline is studied only for one semester), and

this score is recorded in the credit list and in the register (FR=ASR/SR+BP).

A student is considered certified in the discipline if the sum of ASR points is/SR and

BP is at least 60.

If the student's FR is more than 100 points after summing up all the indicators,

then 100 points are added to the credit test book.

3.2. The final control in the discipline (session) can be carried out in the following

forms: a test with a score or an exam (oral, test).

For admission to the exam or credit test, it is necessary to complete all types of work

planned for the program, regardless of the number of points scored in the discipline.

If the ASR or SR, scored by a student during the academic semester/year is 40-59

points, then he is not allowed to take the exam or the above-mentioned type of credit, and

must get the missing number of points by eliminating the existing academic debt in the

credit test week or in the session only with the permission of the dean’s office.

If the student's ASR or SR is less than 40 points, then he is considered not to have

mastered the discipline, and is deducted from the KSMA.

In the case when the form of FC is an exam, the student is considered admitted to the

exam if the midterm rating is at least 54 points.

At the same time, a student can be exempted from the exam with

putting 8.6 points for the exam and “excellent” grades in the exam sheet»:

- according to the discipline, if the sum of points scored by the student is MR+BP

= 81-100, provided that the SR for each semester (if the discipline has a duration of more

than one semester) ≥ 88 points;

- for an interdisciplinary module, if the sum of points scored by it is MR+BP = 81-

100, provided that the SR for each discipline (included in the module) is ≥ 88 points.

If a student extends the test week for any discipline for a disrespectful reason, the

exemption from all exams is automatically canceled.

Students who have scored the sum of MR+BP < 81 points pass the exam without fail.

An example of calculating a student's rating for exemption from the exam is provided

in Appendix 7.

When a student is released from taking the exam, the department at the end of the

credit week must provide the dean’s office with the protocol statement of the department

meeting with the attached agreed list of students released from taking the exam.

The maximum number of points that a student can get on the exam is 10.

After passing the exam, the FR is calculated for the discipline, which is translated on

the scale into an assessment and posted in the statement and credit book on the day of

passing the exam.

Scale for converting scores to international letter grades and their numerical

equivalents

Points Letter designation Score on the 4-point system

86-100 A Excellent

80-85 B Good

76-79 C

68-75 D Satisfactory

60-67 E

41-59 FX Unsatisfactory

0-40 F

The question related to the student’s desire to retake the exam in order to improve

their FR is resolved in accordance with other regulatory documents regulating educational

activities at KSMA.

In case of “absence” for the exam, the student is allowed to retake the exam with the

permission of the dean’s office, indicating the deadline for passing.

If the exam scores are lower than the set threshold (less than 6 points), the student

must retake the exam. In the statement and credit book, a grade of "unsatisfactory" is

issued on the day of passing the exam.

On the first retake, a student can get a maximum of 8 points. In case of receiving

scores below the established threshold (less than 6 points), the student must retake the exam

again. In the statement and credit book, the rating "unsatisfactory" is set on the day of the

first retake.

In the case when the student received a passing grade on the first retake (≥ 6 points), the

FR is calculated and evaluated in the statement and credit book:

if the FR is in the range from 60 to 85 points – the score corresponding to these

points;

if the FR is in the range from 86 to 100 points – it is equated to 85 points and the

rating is set as "good".

On the second retake, a student can get a maximum of 6 points. If the student has

received a passing grade (6 points), then the FR is calculated and the following grade is

entered in the statement and credit book:

if the FR is in the range from 60 to 75 points, the rating is "satisfactory" with

corresponding points.;

if the FR is in the range from 76 to 100 – it is equal to 75 points and also rated

"satisfactory".

If you receive a score below the established threshold (less than 6 points) on the

second retake, the score sheet and credit book are marked "unsatisfactory". The assessment

of the second retake is final. The discipline’s FR is not calculated

In case of completing a repeated course of study, the maximum exam score of the

student does not exceed 8. At the same time, the student’s FR is calculated and the

following grade is given in the statement and credit book:

if the FR is in the range from 60 to 85 points – the score corresponding to these

points;

if the FR is in the range from 86 to 100 points, it is equated to 85 points and a

"good" rating is given.

An example of forming a final rating for a discipline is presented in Appendix 8.

3.3. State Final Certification (SFC) of students

evaluated in accordance with the SFC Regulations (Order No. 137 of 24.05.2018)

Appendix 1

Rating- discipline plans

Rating plan of the discipline 50/50

Credit

test

minimum

(points)

Credit

test

maximum

(points)

Disciplinary module

N

Current

rating (CR)

80 points

Credit test

minimum-

48 points

Classroom work

student activity in the

classroom oral

response practical

work etc

24 40

SIW 24 40

Modular

control

(MC)

20 points

Written control work

Testing

Oral questioning

Colloquium

12 20

RIM=CR + MC 60 100

Rating plan of the discipline 70/30

(theoretical departments)

Credit test

minimum

(points)

Credit test

maximum

(points)

Disciplinary

module N

Current rating

(CR)

80 points

Credit test

minimum -

48 points

Classroom work

student activity in the

classroom oral

response practical

work etc 36 60

SIW 12 20

Modular

Control (MC)

20 points

Written control work

Testing

Oral questioning

Colloquium

12 20

RIM=CR + MC 60 100

Rating plan of the discipline 70/30

(clinical departments)

Credit

test minimum

(points)

Credit test

maximum

(points)

Disciplinary module

N

Current

rating

(CR)

80 points

Credit test

minimum

of 48 points

Classroom work

student activity in the

classroom oral response

practical work, problem

solving,prescription

writing etc

36 60

Clinical record 6 10

SIW 6 10

Modular

Control (MC)

20 points

Written control work

Testing

Oral questioning

Colloquium

12 20

RIM=CR + MC 60 100

Rating-discipline plan 40/60 (extramural

education)

Credit test

minimum

(points)

Credit test

maximum

(points)

Disciplinary

module N

Current

rating (CR)

80 points

Credit test

minimum -

48 points

Classroom work

student activity in the

classroom oral response

practical work, problem

solving, prescription

writing etc

18 30

SIW 30 50

Modular

control

(MC)

20 points

Written control work

Testing

Oral questioning

Colloquium

12 20

RIM=CR + MC 60 100

Rating plan of the discipline 70/30 (without

modular control).)

Credit test

minimum

(points)

Credit test

maximum

(points)

Disciplinary

Committee

module N

Current rating

(CR)

-100 points

Credit test

minimum -

60 points

Classroom work

student activity in the

classroom oral

response practical

work, problem

solving, prescription

writing etc.

42 70

SIW 18 30

CR = SR 60 100

Rating plan for a 50/50 discipline

(without modular control).)

Credit

minimum

(points)

Credit

maximum

(points)

Disciplinary

module N

Current rating

(CR)

-100 points

Credit test

minimum-

60 points

Classroom work

student activity in the

classroom oral

response practical

work, problem

solving etc

30 50

SIW 30 50

CR = SR 60 100

Appendix 2

Criteria for scoring points in the classroom

Points Criteria

5

It is awarded for a deep understanding of the educational material,

for the ability to independently explain the studied provisions, for a

logical and literarily correctly constructed answer, when the student does

not make mistakes and is able to integrate the acquired knowledge with

knowledge in related academic disciplines.

4

It is awarded for the correct assimilation of the program material,

but the answer may contain inaccuracies and minor errors, both in the

content and in the form of constructing the answer.

3

It is awarded if the student correctly applies specific terminology,

knows the main, essential provisions of the educational material, but

does not know how to explain them, makes some mistakes and

inaccuracies in the content of knowledge and the form of constructing the

answer.

2

It is awarded for poor assimilation of the material, and not for lack

of knowledge. An unsatisfactory answer shows that the student is

familiar with the educational material, but does not highlight the main

points, makes significant mistakes that distort the meaning of what he

has learned. He transmits information that he has memorized from the

words of the teacher or from the textbook, but which is not logically

processed in his mind, is not included in the system of scientific

propositions and arguments.

1

It is awarded when the student refuses to answer, or their answer

demonstrates a complete absence of educational material knowledge.

Appendix 3

Example of converting a five-point rating to a 100-point rating system

Discipline Z has 7 practical classes

(proportion CW: SIW=70: 30)

7 x 5 = 35 – the maximum possible score =100%

(equates to 60 points)

7 x 3 = 21 – minimum possible (passing) score = 60%

(equates to 36 points)

If a student scored 32 points in the register, then his

CRC is equal to 54.8 points (see the table of

points translation), since

35 – 60

32 – x

x= 32 x 60: 35 = 54.8

5-pointed 100-pointed

35 60

34 58,2

33 56,5

32 54,8

32 53,1

30 51,4

29 49,7

28 48

27 46,2

26 44,6

25 42,9

24 41,4

23 39,4

22 87,7

21 36

Appendix 4.

Example of calculating points for an interdisciplinary module.

Module: “From cell to organ”

Discipline Number of

hours

Points Recalculation

index

Final score

Chemistry 16 80 0.04 3.2

Biochemistry 120 68 0.25 17

Biophysics 40 84 0.09 7.6

Normal

anatomy

120 72 0.25 18

Normal

physiology

120 78 0.25 19.5

Histology 58 82 0.12 9.8

Total (total points) 75.1

Appendix 5.

Algorithm for forming discipline FR

(if the discipline ends with an exam)

Final rating FR=MR+BP+FC

60-100 points

Midterm rating

(MR=0.9 * ASR)

54-90 points

ASR - arithmetic

mean of all semester

ratings (SR)=60-100 points

Bonus Points (BP) and/or

Final control (FC)

10 points

BP- maximum of 10 points

- participation in an intra-

university or inter-

university

Olympiad / conference –

from 2 to 4 points,

- participation in the

international Olympiad /

conference -

from 5 to 7 points,

- systematic participation

in the work of the

scientific circle of the

department-up to 2 points,

- availability of

publications in a peer-

reviewed publication

(domestic, foreign) from3

to7 points

FC (exam) = 6-10

points

Excellent 8.6-10

Good 7.6 – 8.5

Satisfactory 6.0 – 7.5

Unsatisfactory less

than 6.0

Appendix 6

The algorithm for forming the FR for the discipline

(if the discipline ends with a credit test)

Final rating FR=ASR+BP

60-100 points

ASR - arithmetic

mean of all semester ratings

(SR) = 60-100 points

Bonus Points (BP)

SR – the arithmetic

mean of all ratings for

disciplinary modules (RIM)

in the semester (minus penalty

points) = 60-100 points

RDM – the sum of the points of the

current rating (CR) and the points

of the module control (MC) for the

disciplinary module =60-100 points

1st retake = 8 points

2nd

retake = 6

points

The CR includes:

* classroom work

*independent work of the student

(including writing a medical history)

MC=12-20 points is conducted in the

form of:

* an oral questioning

* testing

* control work (written, laboratory)

* colloquium

SR – the arithmetic mean of

all ratings for disciplinary

modules (RDM) in the semester

(minus penalty points) = 60-100

points

RDM-the sum of the points of the

current rating (CR) and the points

of the module control (MC) for

the disciplinary

module = 60-100 points

CR includes:

* classroom work

* independent work of the student

(including writing a medical history)

MC=12-20 points is conducted in the form of:

* an oral questioning

* testing

* control work (written, laboratory)

* colloquium

Appendix 7.

Example of calculating a student’s rating for exemption from the exam

Semester

ratings

Average semester

rating (ASR)

Midterm

rating (MR)

Bonus point MR+BP

SR1=88

SR2=92

90 90*0,9=81 0 81+0=81

student is exempt

from the exam

SR1=88

SR2=88

88 88*0,9=79,2 2 79,2=2=81,2

student is exempt

from the exam

SR1=86

SR2=96

91 91*0,9=81,9 0 81,9+0=81,9

student is not exempt from

BB – maximum of 10 points

- participation in the intra-university or inter-university

Olympiad /conferences – from 2 to 4 points,

- participation in the international Olympiad / conference -

from 5 to 7 points,

- systematic participation in the work of the

scientific circle of the department-up to 2 points,

- the presence of publications in the peer-reviewed

publication (domestic, foreign) – from 3 to 7 points

the exam

SR1=88

SR2=91

89,5 89,5*0,9=80,5 0 80,5+0=80,5

student is not exempt from

the exam

Appendix 8.

Example of forming FR (FR=MR+BP+FC) in XXX discipline,

ending with an exam

Discipline Semester

Semester

rating

(SR)

Average

Semester

Rating

(ASR)

Midterm

rating

(MR=0.9 *

ASR)

BP FC

Final

rating

(FR=MR+

BP+ FC)

Score

XXX

1-

semester

72

75,7 76*0,9=68,4 2 8,6 79 Good 2-

semester

77

3-

semester

78

Example of forming FR (FR=MR+BP+FC) in the YYY discipline,

ending with a credit test

Discipline Semester

Semester

rating (SR)

Average

Semester

Rating

(ASR)

BP

Final rating

(FR=ASR+

BP) Score

YYY

1-semester 72

75.7

2

77.7

Good 2-semester 77

3-semester 78

REFERENCES

1. Gridasova N. V., Smirnova O. G. Methodological recommendations on the criteria and

scales of evaluation in the framework of the point-rating system [Text]/ N. V. Gredasova,

O. G. Smirnova. Yekaterinburg, 2018. 31 p.

2. Mishulina M. V. Methodological recommendations for the implementation of a point-

rating system for evaluating student performance [Text] / M. V. Mishulina.- Saint-

Petersburg, 2013. - 38 p.

3. Petrova M. B., Kharitonova E. A., Alekseev D. V., Sedova A. A. Development and

implementation in the educational process of a point-accumulative system for evaluating

student performance [Text] / M. B. Petrova, E. A. Kharitonova, D. V. Alekseev, A. A.

Sedova. Tver, 2014. 19 p.

4. Yanushevich O. O., Mayev I. V., Yarygin N. V. Point -rating system for assessing

students’ knowledge in MSMSU [Text] / O. O. Yanushevich, I. V., Mayev, N. V. Yarygin.

Moscow: MSMSU, 2012. 29 p.