Dear Colleagues!
We invite you to a meeting December 25, 2015 at 15:00 to the City Methodological Center.
The meeting will present the results of the Russian language Olympiad "We know the Russian language", held November 28, 2015, and discussed organizational matters holding
January 23, 2016 Olympiads on the world around "The world around".
Address: st. Vorontsovskaya, d. 6A.
Directions: metro Taganskaya (radial).
Exit towards st. Big Bricklayers.
Entrance to the building of the Methodological Center from Bolshie Kamenshchiki street.
Organizing Committee of the Olympiad
November 28, 2015 16 Moscow schools hospitably opened the doors to the participants of the Moscow city Olympiad "We know the Russian language".
Olympiad in Russian for children with handicapped health was organized in Moscow for the second time and was held with the joint participation of State Institute Russian language named after A.S. Pushkin and the City Methodical Center.
Almost 300 fourth graders schools of the capital took part in a creative competition. Young Olympians stormed the heights of knowledge of the Russian language, performing exciting Olympiad tasks showing ingenuity and resourcefulness.
The work of each participant of the Olympiad was checked by three members of the jury. As a result of the evaluation of the Olympiad tasks, 21 winners and 100 runners up.
The Organizing Committee thanks all children for participation in the Olympiad "We know the Russian language", congratulations winners and runners up olympiad 2015,
thanks teachers and parents for the preparation of children.
Diplomas for children and letters of thanks for teachers are issued in the City methodical center December 17-18, 2015 from 10:00 to 21:00 (room 308) at the address st. Vorontsovskaya, house 6a. Directions: Taganskaya radial metro station, exit to Bolshie Kamenshchiki street, then walk 1-2 minutes.
For clearance thank you letters teachers who prepared the winners of the Olympiad, the Organizing Committee asks to provide the last name, first name, patronymic of the teachers and send information to the address
According to the results of a survey conducted on the day of the Olympiad, the vast majority of teachers and parents accompanying the participants of the Olympiad supported independent organization of the solemn presentation by schools diplomas to the winners and prize-winners of the Olympiad, letters of thanks to teachers.
The Organizing Committee of the Olympiad appeals to the school administration about the presentation in a solemn atmosphere diplomas to the winners and prize-winners of the Olympiad, teachers of the winners and teachers responsible for holding the Olympiad in pivotal schools - letters of thanks.
Invitation to participate in the Olympiad "The World Around"
Dear parents and teachers, January 23, 2016 the Moscow City Olympiad on the surrounding world is held "The world around".
Can take part in the Olympiad fourth graders students studying according to the adapted basic educational programs of primary general education.
Zh.K. Gaponova, T.G. Kamenskaya, E.M. Melnikova
The results of the regional stage of the Olympiad in the Russian language
in 2009-2010 academic year
The results of the regional stage of the Olympiad show that purposeful work is needed to prepare philologically gifted children for participation in Russian language Olympiads. The analysis of the Olympiad tasks will help to draw conclusions and give the necessary recommendations for working with students in this direction.
Key words: Olympiad, analysis of Olympiad tasks, in-depth study of the Russian language, philologically gifted children.
Zh.K. Gaponova, T.G. Kamenskaya, E.M. Melnikova
Results of Carrying Out the Regional Stage of the Contest on the Russian Language
in 2009-2010 academic year
Results of the regional stage of the contest show that target-oriented work on training gifted children on Philology to participate in the Contest on the Russian language is necessary. The analysis of the contestable tasks will help to make conclusions and to make necessary recommendations about the work with pupils in this direction.
Key words: the contest, the analysis of contestable tasks, profoundly studying of the Russian language, gifted children on Philology.
Work with gifted children and talented youth is designated as priority direction modern education(The concept of long-term socio-economic development of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2020 / order of the Government of the Russian Federation of November 17, 2008 No. 1662-r). One of the areas of work with intellectually gifted schoolchildren is the holding of subject Olympiads different levels. The All-Russian Olympiad movement is actively developing: the number of participants has increased, the level of complexity of tasks has increased, and at the same time, competition among schoolchildren has grown.
It is gratifying that young philologists of the Yaroslavl region have been recent years adequately represent their region on final stage All-Russian Olympiad for schoolchildren (VOSH) in the Russian language. This indicates that in many schools of the region purposeful work is being carried out to prepare schoolchildren for the Olympiad. Among such educational institutions, lyceum No. 2 and secondary school No. 3 in Rybinsk, gymnasiums No. 1, 2, 3 in Yaroslavl, the gymnasium in Pereslavl-Zalessky, Bolsheselskaya secondary school can be noted.
However, it is still too early to talk about consistently high results. In the Yaroslavl region, it is necessary to improve the system
© Gaponova Zh.K., Kamenskaya T.G., Melnikova E.M., 2010
identification and training of philologically gifted schoolchildren. The success of such a system, in our opinion, lies in the integration of the main general and additional education, in close relationship school teacher with teachers of additional education and higher education.
In the Yaroslavl region, such a link is the Olimp School Education Center, which deals with methodological support municipal stage, organization and holding of the regional stage of VOSh. On the basis of the Center in accordance with additional educational programs, developed by teachers of the FRFK of YaGPU them. K.D. Ushinsky, annually receive new knowledge in the field of philology more than 200 schoolchildren from Yaroslavl and the region, focused on in-depth study of the subject.
The key to success in working with gifted children is a creative approach and systematic training. The first develops the student's motivation for learning, activates his research activities, the second allows you to accumulate the necessary bank of philological knowledge, gain self-confidence. Most of the time devoted to preparing children for the Olympiads, of course, should be spent on solving tasks that require in-depth study of the language. Practice convinces that the Olympics,
as a rule, children who show excellent results in the lessons are invited. But many students, once outside their school, begin to experience stress and lose their spirit of competition after seeing at least 10 tasks of increased complexity.
The conclusion is that it is necessary purposeful work to prepare philologically gifted children for participation in the Olympiad movement, and the classes should represent a well-organized system of methodological and psychological and pedagogical support for schoolchildren on this difficult path. It is quite natural for a language teacher to have a question about the principles and organization of such training of children. Before offering program options with detailed description topics, methods
and forms for conducting additional classes with a potential participant in the Russian language Olympiad, it is necessary to analyze the results of the recently held Olympiad and the specifics of its tasks.
In this article, we offer an analysis of the results of the regional stage of the GOSh in the Russian language of the 2009-2010 academic year and the specifics of its tasks.
In the 2009-2010 academic year, 120 students (9th grade - 48, 10th grade - 42, 11th grade - 30) from 56 educational institutions of the region took part in the regional stage of the VOSh in the Russian language. For each class, 10 tasks were provided, the maximum amount of points was 100. In order to identify the most difficult issues, an analysis of students' work was carried out. The results are presented in diagrams.
100-1 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
□ managed
□ gave an incomplete answer
□ failed
Let's explain the diagram: "did it" - scored maximum score; “given an incomplete answer” - they did not give a comment to the answer or made mistakes, inaccuracies; “failed” - the answer is absent as such or an incorrect answer was given (in the tenth question, the number of those who failed was estimated based on the fact that the participant did not score 1/3 of the maximum number of points).
Thus, the diagram shows that the maximum high scores were recruited when answering question 3, which requires knowledge of the semantic system of the modern Russian language; to question 7, related to knowledge of syntax; to question 1, revealing knowledge orthoepic norms; to question 6, aimed at demonstrating the skill of morphological
analysis of the word; to question 2, related to knowledge of spelling norms.
In connection with the possible maximum indicators, it is interesting to pay attention to the indicators where the students did not cope with the tasks: 10, 4, 2, 1, 5, 8 (see below for the specifics of the tasks). Such a high percentage is explained by the fact that almost all questions, although they relate to various sections of linguistics, require historical commentary. And the last task involves demonstrating a whole range of knowledge from the history of the language in order to translate the Old Russian text. It is precisely the historical changes in the language in school course don't pay attention at all. The inexpediency of such a bias in the Olympiad tasks is obvious.
100-| 908070605040 30-1 20 10 0
□ managed
□ gave an incomplete answer
□ failed
Among 10th grade students maximum amount points were scored when answering the following questions: 7 (the ability to perform syntactic analysis), 9 (culturological skills), 6 (morphological analysis skills), 2 (the ability to substantiate spelling norms from the point of view of the history of the language).
The fifth and ninth questions are the most successful in the sense that the indicator of those who failed the task is low or absent. The fifth question is related to the ability to make a morphological analysis of a word from a modern and historical point of view. The success of the solution of the proposed task is due to the fact that a similar question has already been in the Olympiads of previous years and the task does not require students to have specific language knowledge, but rather is designed for high level development of linguistic flair and intelligence. Percentage in grade 10
questions, where the non-response rate is very high, is 80%, these are a number of questions: about 60% of children did not cope with the question regarding the recognition of dictionary entries from the dictionary of paronyms (8), more than 55% were unable to give an interpretation of modern orthography from the point of view of history (2), 45% of the participants failed to demonstrate elementary knowledge of the origin and history of words (4), 36% did not cope with the task related to the knowledge of orthoepic norms (1), 26% of negative results are recorded in the question aimed at identifying ability to formulate lexical meaning words, expressions, using knowledge of the history of the language (3), and in question 10, where it was required to translate an excerpt from an Old Russian text.
100 9080706050 40302010 0
Students in grade 11 did best on the fourth question (10% scored the maximum score, and there were no students who could not cope with the task) and the second, where the percentage of failure was 5%.
In this chart, we have marked the percentage of failed assignments by class. Thus, the tenth task turned out to be difficult for all students, especially for ninth graders. Logically, the percentage of unfulfilled assignments for all questions in the 9th grade should be higher, since students are starting to participate in the regional stage of the Olympiads for the first time, but the statistics say otherwise. Consequently, the participants of the Olympiad do not have a clear purposeful system of preparation for performance at the Olympiads, which is reflected in the results. The revealed indicators indicate a rather low level of preparedness of students. Only about 40% of the participants in the Olympiad can be considered competitive.
The statistics outlined above are necessary to present the big picture. To delve into the problem of finding new methods and forms of preparing children for performance at the Olympiads, an analysis of the questions proposed by students allows. The content of the tasks is very diverse and covers most of the main sections of the science of language.
The first question of the Olympiad tasks was about testing skills phonetic analysis specific words and expressions and demanded attention to the phenomena of assimilation of sounds
The third and sixth tasks clearly put the participants in difficulty, as evidenced by the statistical data (30% non-response). Difficulties arose during the implementation of the eighth and tenth tasks.
□ Grade 9
□ Grade 10
□ Grade 11
and other combinatorial changes. Interestingly, in most cases, schoolchildren were offered well-known facts of modern speech as material for analysis (for example, a comparison of expressions like “but with a tiger” and “tiger nose”, an explanation of the origin of the title of the play “Why are you in a tailcoat?” ). Such tasks were directly related to the description of the features of modern orthoepic norms of Russian literary language. In the assignment for the 11th grade, a fragment of a poem by V.F. Khodasevich "Monkey", and here the participants were given a good opportunity to score a large number of points for finding the sound [s] in words (8 points out of 13). Unfortunately, few were able to take advantage of this opportunity: inattention did not allow them to see (and hear) the desired sound in combinations ( phonetic words) “a choir of luminaries and sea waves”, “on other days”, as well as in words like “chewed”, “wheat”. The second part of the phonetic task turned out to be beyond the power of everyone without exception: the fact that in the word “heat” according to the old Moscow norm in the first pre-stressed syllable after solid hissing consonants in place of the letter “a” the sound [s] was pronounced no one knew, and no one, of course , could not give three examples of words with the same pronunciation in modern speech (“sorry”, “unfortunately”, “horses”, “rzha-
noah", "jasmine"). How important it is for a modern student to know the norms of the old Moscow pronunciation is a question that can be addressed to the compilers of the Olympiad tasks.
Olympiad tasks related to the analysis of the semantics of words are traditionally the most “solvable”. However, this time, few were able to give a complete answer to the proposed questions. Ninth graders were asked to consider semantic structure the word "heaven" and identify those semes that allowed V.I. I give in my dictionary to reflect such meanings as "ceiling under the arch", "canopy", "tent", "top littered with brushwood" and the like. If we carefully analyze the wording of the meanings, it was not difficult to determine the unifying seme - "cover", "cover".
To the legacy of V.I. Dahl was also asked a question for tenth graders and eleventh graders: they were asked to translate the "recommendation" - "Do not kick the pig: the swarm will come out." Of course, there were good answers here describing the etymology of the verbal noun "svorob" (from the verb "sverb"), but there were few such answers, although many people caught the general warning meaning of the proverb and many replaced the word "svorob" with the words of the corresponding thematic group("sore" and so on.). The fourth question of the Olympiad was also related to the analysis of the meaning of certain units, but also meant a demonstration of knowledge in the field of the history of words. The ninth-graders coped with this task the worst of all, unable to formulate one of the early meanings of the word “amazement” (“loss of mind, reason, madness”), although the proposed context (“The Case of Patriarch Nikon”, 1675) was quite transparent and allowed identify prefix out and root-um- (-uml-). And the eleventh graders, on the contrary, coped with the task, successfully analyzing the meanings of the word "trunk" ("tail", "hook, arc, roundabout") and defining the general seme "curvature, curvature".
The answers to the questions of the grammar block were not presented in full, but the percentage of those who tried (with varying success) to solve these difficult tasks is large. The best students here were 9th grade students. They demonstrated the skills of synchronic and diachronic analysis of words, choosing a number of historical alternations for the words "burn" and "ghost" (fifth task). An attempt was made (and in some cases successful) to list the means of expressing a greater and lesser degree of manifestation of the attribute "white" (task 6): here are many auxiliary
or suffixes of subjective evaluation, words involved in the formation of a compound form of degrees of comparison, adverbs of degree. In the seventh task - the syntactic one - many were able to correctly determine the syntactic function of the turnover "with the mind" in different sentences ("This man is with the mind", "The man with the mind will not be lost", "This man, with the mind, talent, with great passions, lived a bright interesting life”, “Intelligently conceived, but done without the mind”: among these constructions, the second sentence presents the greatest difficulty, in which the expression “with the mind” is considered as part of a semantically indecomposable subject).
10th grade students showed slightly different results. So, in the answers to the fifth question there were no those who would not have coped with the task at all; All questions were answered to varying degrees of completeness. The participants were asked to analyze the morphemic structure of the word from the modern and historical points of view (“keep silent”, “join”, “hint”, “landlord”, “louse”). The words “hint”, “landowner” turned out to be the simplest for analysis here: the correlation of these units with related words “smart”, “place”, respectively, allowed many to correctly identify historical root. The situation was more complicated with the verb “join” (the root -mk- is also difficult to see in such words as “close”, “master key”), with the adjective “louse” (the suffix -r- in which it is possible to single out only in comparison with one- structural words like "kind").
It is not entirely clear why the 10th-graders coped poorly with the morphology task (sixth), concerning the phenomenon of the figurative use of verb forms; transparent contexts should have contributed to the correct answer (“Forget it and think about it”, “Well, now hit the frost - winter will all be gone”, “And if it wasn’t for me, you would smoke in Tver”, etc.). Perhaps the wording of the task was not entirely successful (understandable for schoolchildren): “Compare the highlighted forms of the verb and identify them grammatical meaning in these proposals. The seventh task on syntax also turned out to be quite difficult for schoolchildren, since it concerned the definition of the syntactic function of the word “visible” and, in accordance with this, the syntactic characteristics of different sentences with this word. Note that in a number of cases, indeed, it was impossible to give an unambiguous answer to the question about the structure of the sentence, as the compilers of the task did: the sentence “From Moscow you can see our entire state” can be considered both as a two-part one with the subject “state”, and
as one-component with the addition "state" (Compare: "you can see the country"). A similar duality of the syntactic nature of sentences with the word “visible” was taken into account by the compilers in the third sentence - “From Moscow, as from a big mountain, everything is visible.”
Students of the 11th grade, unfortunately, not all coped with grammar tasks. Mistakes were made in the synchronic and diachronic analysis of the proposed words (“lace”, “smooth”, “lackey”, “weasel”, “privilege”, “to wear down”), and about 10% of the participants did not give correct answers at all, although, as and in the task for the 10th grade, there were both “difficult” words (“favor”, “smooth”, “to wear down”), and “simple” (“lace”, “weasel”). One of the most difficult questions for the 11th graders was the question of morphology. He touched upon the grammatical features of the word “significant” in an excerpt from N.V. Gogol. But, as it turned out, the compilers of the task, when asking about the grammatical features of this unit, for some reason had in mind such a - obviously not grammatical - moment, as the lexical repetition of a word. Maybe the wording of the task was not entirely clear to the students (“What grammatical features can be seen in this text?” - a too general question that does not focus on the word “significant”). And the features are actually very interesting: this is the “coordination” of the adjective “significant” with the neuter noun “person”, and the form superlatives in the comparative sense - "even more significant."
There were many who did not cope with the seventh task. To analyze the syntactic structure, the sentences “It is useful to read books” and “Reading books are useful”, “I love a thunderstorm in early May” and “Do you like to get up early? - I love”, “Light rain in the morning” and “Little rain in the morning”. Accounting for word order, context, connection with the theory of actual sentence division - all this had to be taken into account when considering these constructions (the nature of which, we note, in modern linguistics there is still no consensus). In this task, obviously, not only and not so much the specific knowledge of schoolchildren was tested (taking into account the fact that everyone studies according to different programs and different educational complexes, it is probably impossible in principle to do this with regard to controversial issues of syntax), as much as the ability to reflect, compare linguistic facts, and draw logical conclusions.
The eighth question of the Olympiad deserves special comment. This is one of those tasks that many high school students failed to complete (see diagrams). Fragments of articles from various dictionaries of the Russian language were given: it was required to name the dictionary, indicate dictionaries of this type, describe the features of the construction of dictionary entries. The participants of the Olympiad did not avoid mistakes, which is quite natural. Unfortunately, we have to admit that schoolchildren are little or not familiar with dictionaries. The ninth-graders did not learn the dictionary of synonyms, the tenth-graders - the dictionary of paronyms, the eleventh-graders - the dictionary of antonyms. Few people were able to correctly analyze the structural features of dictionary entries (although this could be done on the basis of the proposed fragments), and terms like “synonymic series”, “paronymic pair”, “antonymic pair”, as well as the authors of other similar dictionaries, were generally unknown to the participants.
The leading role in the All-Russian Olympiads of recent years belongs to tasks on the etymology and history of the language (task ten for all classes). Such questions, of course, are aimed not only at revealing knowledge in certain sections of the Russian language within school curriculum, but also to establish the degree of erudition of the student, to determine his ability to work with vocabulary materials. From the analysis of students' work, we can conclude that the translation of the Old Russian text and questions about it were of particular difficulty. The difficulty of completing tasks of a historical nature is that this type of work is not practiced at school and requires knowledge that goes beyond the school curriculum. Some students could not even partially convey the content of the proposed texts.
Summarizing the above, we note that it is necessary to develop specialized programs aimed at working with philologically gifted children, to develop students' interest in the Russian language as one of the main parts of the culture of their native people. I would like this article to become a kind of appeal for all those who are interested in educating intelligent people, a "push" to search for new effective methods and forms capable of bringing the Yaroslavl region to a consistently high level within the framework of the All-Russian Olympiad movement. In addition, the development of the Olympiad movement in the region can, to some extent, solve the problems of pre-profile training for future philologists.
Analytical report on the results of the school stage All-Russian Olympiad students in Russian.
According to the plan of the Ministry of Defense of the humanitarian cycle, from October 26 to October 27, 2016, on the basis of the MOBU "Secondary School No. 48 No. school stage All-Russian Olympiad in Russian Language and Literature.
The goals of the Olympiad:
Identification and development in students creativity and interest in research activities;
Creation of necessary conditions for support of gifted children;
Promotion of scientific knowledge.
In total, 59 students participated in the Olympiadout of 4 - 11classes educational institution , of which in Russian - 28, literature - 31.
The materials for the Olympiad included tasks from the following sections:
1. Phonetics (sound-letter analysis of words);
2. Word formation (find single-root words and different forms of the same word);
3. Vocabulary (phraseology - add phraseological units, indicate the meaning of obsolete words, etc.);
4. Spelling (work with text with missing spellings);
5. Orthoepy (place stress in words);
6.Syntax (sentence parsing);
7. Punctuation (place the missing punctuation marks).
8. Stylistics (determine the type and style of the text).
Most of the tasks of the Olympiad were based on the school curriculum, however, tasks were also proposed that required deeper knowledge that went beyond the scope of the school curriculum itself (especially in the history of the Russian language), which fully meets the requirements for the level of Olympiad tasks. The tasks offered to students in grades 9-11 are diverse both in form and content and allow students to show not only knowledge of the norms of the Russian literary language, but also to show linguistic flair in solving extraordinary problems related to language system Russian language in its past and present state.
The tasks offered to the participants of the Olympiad were based on several components: from text to language, from language to text, from text to text, from language to language, from language to the science of language. In tasks of the first type, a text, utterance or word usage in speech was offered, and it was necessary to draw a conclusion about the properties of language units as elements of a language system. In tasks of the second type, the initial condition is the rules, patterns, properties of language units that must be applied to the proposed facts of speech. The type of tasks "from text to text" is traditionally associated with philological work with text, which involves a comparative analysis of texts or different interpretations of one text. The tasks of the structural-linguistic plan are quite diverse, aimed at finding patterns according to the proposed examples and analyzing “difficult” units and categories of the Russian language. By completing tasks “from language to the science of language”, students must demonstrate their awareness in the field of Russian linguistics
According to the jury members, the Olympiad tasks of the regional stage of the Olympiad in the Russian language are mainly aimed at identifying only the knowledge of the participants, the formation of linguistic, communicative and cultural competencies is not checked, while the tasks are overloaded with questions on the history of the Russian language
Results of the Olympiad in the Russian language.
Kuleshova Ksenia ViktorovnaArapova T.A.
Ashrafova Narmin Mahir kazy
Arapova T.A.
Diagoleva Daria Vyacheslavovna
Savelyeva T.M.
Loshmanova Victoria Alexandrovna
Savelyeva T.M.
Astafieva Valeria Anatolievna
9a
Mikhailova M.V.
Fedorova Anastasia Denisovna
9a
Mikhailova M.V
Merkulova Svetlana Andreevna
9b
Arapova T.A.
Analysis of the results of the Olympiad in the Russian language showed that the majority of students coped with the proposed tasks. Students are able to apply the theoretical knowledge gained in practice, have the skills to work with text with missing spellings and missing punctuation marks. They correctly determine the style and type of text, but they cannot correctly determine the figurative and expressive means. Difficulties were directly caused by vocabulary tasks (determining the meaning of obsolete words). Also, the students could not give a detailed answer on the topic of the proposed text. This is due to poverty vocabulary, which in turn is a consequence of the lack of systematic reading outside of school.
Results of the Olympiad in Russian Literature.
Arapova T.A
Arapova T.A
Savelyeva T.M.
Minichkina Ksenia Andreevna
Savelyeva T.M.
The materials of the Olympiad in Russian literature included the task of complex analysis of the text, the students had to analyze one piece of art. But, unfortunately, the students did not cope with the task completely. It is also difficult to complete tasks on the theory of literature, students do not know the definitions of terms (epigram, epitaph, sonnet, fantasy, etc.).
According to the results of the Olympiads, the following conclusion can be drawn:
The same students took part in the Olympiads.
The students mostly coped with the tasks of the Olympiads.
1. Subject teachers to intensify work on preparing students for the municipal stage of the Olympiads
