INTERDISCIPLINARY ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT COMPETENCE IN TECHNICAL DISCIPLINES

The article addresses the problem of pedagogical assessment of learning outcomes in interdisciplinary education of students in technical fields within the framework of the competency-based approach. It is shown that traditional discipline-based assessment systems do not provide sufficient informativeness and reliability when evaluating professional competencies manifested in collective project activities and the integration of knowledge from different subject areas. The need for developing pedagogical models of comprehensive assessment of educational outcomes is substantiated.
The purpose of the study is to develop and pilot a triangulation-based model of pedagogical assessment integrating the instructor’s expert evaluation, self-assessment, and peer assessment of students working in small groups. The methodological framework of the research is based on the competency-based, activity-oriented, and constructivist approaches, as well as methods of pedagogical modeling, expert assessment, self-assessment, and quantitative analysis of learning outcomes.
The results demonstrate an increase in the diagnostic accuracy and reliability of assessment, the possibility of identifying individual contributions of students to collective project work, and the development of reflective skills and self-regulation abilities. The proposed model is considered as a tool for managing the educational process in interdisciplinary learning environments.

1. I. Zeer, E. F. (2005). Kompetentnostnyy podkhod k obrazovaniyu [Competence-based approach to education]. Obrazovanie i nauka, (3).

2. Khutorskoy, A. V. (2003). Klyuchevye kompetentsii kak komponent lichnostno orientirovannogo obrazovaniya [Key competencies as a component of personality-oriented education]. Narodnoe obrazovanie, (2).

3. Polat, E. S. (2000). Metod proektov v sovremennom obrazovanii [Project-based learning in modern education]. Pedagogika, (10).

4. Assessment of the perceived mastery of interdisciplinary competences of students in education degree programmes. (2024). Education Sciences, 14(2), 144. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14020144

5. Laursen, B. K., Motzer, N., & Anderson, K. J. (2022). Pathways for assessing interdisciplinarity: A systematic review. Research Evaluation, 31(3), 326-343. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvac013

6. Rana, K., Aitken, S. J., & Chimoriya, R. (2025). Interdisciplinary approaches in doctoral and higher research education: An integrative scoping review. Education Sciences, 15(1), 72. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15010072

7. Ilyina, N. I., & Ulyashin, N. I. (2024). Modelirovanie obrazovatelnoy sredy na osnove praktikoorientirovannykh pedagogicheskikh tekhnologiy. Pedagogicheskiy zhurnal Bashkortostana, 1(103), 93­ 105.

8. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7­ 74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102

9. Nicol, D., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles o f good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090

10. Panadero, E., & Jonsson, A. (2013). The use of scoring rubrics for formative assessment purposes revisited: A review. Educational Research Review, 9, 129-144. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.01.002

11. Chandra, P., Hitchcock, S., & Seno-Alday, S. (2025). Assessment style in interdisciplinary education: Challenges in creating equitable assessment opportunities. Studies in Higher Education, 50(3), 525-536. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2024.2345187

12. Serikov, V. V. (1999). Lichnostno orientirovannoe obrazovanie. Logos.

13. Vivek, R., Nanthagopan, Y., & Piriyatharshan, S. (2023). Beyond methods: Theoretical underpinnings of triangulation in qualitative and multi-method studies. SEEU Review, 18(2), 105-122. https://doi.org/10.2478/seeur-2023-0088

14. Carter, N., Bryant-Lukosius, D., DiCenso, A., Blythe, J., & Neville, A. J. (2014). The use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41(5), 545-547. https://doi.org/10.1188/14.ONF.545-547

15. Bespalko, V. P. (1989). Slagaemye pedagogicheskoy tekhnologii. Pedagogika.

16. Peer assessment in interdisciplinary learning: Measuring reliability and engaging critical thinking. (2025). Thinking Skills and Creativity, 58, 101950. https://doi.org/10.1016/i.tsc.2025.101950

17. Jarvela, S., Kirschner, P. A., Panadero, E., Malmberg, J., Phielix, C., Jaspers, J., Koivuniemi, M., & Jarvenoja, H. (2015). Enhancing socially shared regulation in collaborative learning groups: Designing for 114 CSCL regulation tools. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(1), 125-142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-014-9358-1

18. An interdisciplinary assessment of information literacy instruction. (2024). Journal o f Academic Librarianship, 50(5), 102944. https://doi.org/10.1016/i.acalib.2024.102944 https://www.x-mol.com/paper/1833275610824421376