Abstract:
The purpose of this study is to explore how primary school teachers perceive the practice of implementing monitoring support on the basis of autonomous monitoring groups by educational level, and what factors have a decisive influence on their positive or negative perception of the above approach to assessing educator/student effectiveness. Several tools were used to collect the data, including: classroom observations, lesson checklists (evaluation forms), lesson plans evaluation forms, interviews for teachers and parents, focus group survey questionnaires. The quantitative data were analysed and consolidated in tables, represented as row percentages, and calculated using the Chi-Square statistical method. In addition, the data comparison strategy, triangulation of data sources, and study validation method were used. The Textalyzer web tool was used to process the data obtained through the focus group survey. Focus group teachers spoke positively about the format and content of the project. The majority of the teachers who had formed the experimental group reported improvements in self-organization and self-discipline, flexibility in problem-solving, teamwork skills, and improved learning process engagement and learning outcomes of their pupils. The study illustrated the initial stage of implementation of a monitoring system in the educational process by primary school teachers in Ukraine. The research conditions, constraints and contextual factors that influenced teachers’ perception of this innovation were identified. This monitoring system helps to optimize the quality of education in primary school. Teachers reported that by participating in the project, they upgraded their professional skills, improved both their pedagogical mastery and self-study skills, increased their self-esteem and motivation. The colleagues’ and headteachers’ feedback and criticism are often perceived as discouraging factors. The results of the study can be regarded as a baseline due to several limitations, which include a number of participants, potential bias in school choice and limited availability for observation.
