PROTOCOL NO.
meetings of the State Examination Commission
(to be completed at each state exam)
"" 20 g.
Present: Chairman __________________________________________
members of
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
About passing the state exam _____________________________________
the name of the exam in accordance with GOS VPO (FGOS VPO)
Examined student (s) _____________________________________________
Full Name
Ticket number ____________
Questions: 1. _________________________________________________________
2. __________________________________________________________________
General characteristics of the answer of the student (s) to the questions asked: ___________
Recognize that the student (s) passed the state exam with a grade of ________
Note that ________________________________________________________
Dissenting opinion of the members of the State Examination Commission _________
____________________________________________________________________
signature full name ..
Members of the State Examination Commission:
signature full name signature full name
_________________________________ _________________________________
signature full name signature full name
_________________________________ _________________________________
signature full name signature full name
____________________________________________________________________
Protocol form for a member of the GEC
to defend the final qualifying work
Full name of the member of the SEC ______________________________________________________
| P / p No. | Surname, name, patronymic of the student | Indicators of the quality of the final qualifying work, its defense and their assessment | ||||||||||
| Technical level (relevance) | Originality of the project, | CAD application level | The level of economic efficiency of the proposed solutions | Explanatory note quality | Quality of graphic material | Quality of the report at the GEC meeting | Correctness and validity of answers to questions | Erudition and knowledge in the field of professional activity | final grade | |||
Each indicator is assessed according to the accepted four-point system.
The final score of a member of the GEC is determined as the arithmetic mean.
The total score of the HEC assessment is determined as the arithmetic mean of the scores of the HEC members and the reviewer. The indicated score is rounded to the nearest whole value. If there are significant differences in scores between the members of the GEC, the assessment of the FQP and its protection is determined as a result of a closed discussion at the GEC meeting. The chairman's voice is decisive. The number and content of indicators by which the quality of FQP is assessed and its defense is determined by the educational and methodological council in the specialty.
APPENDIX 2
The form of the minutes of the meeting of the state examination commission
PROTOCOL No. ______
MEETINGS OF THE STATE EXAMINATION COMMISSION
"" 20 g.
On consideration of the graduation project (work) of the student (s) ___________________________
On the topic of ________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
PRESENTED:
Chairman ________________________________________________________
SEC members __________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
PROJECT (WORK) COMPLETED (a):
Under the direction of ___________________________________________________
In consultation ____________________________________________________
THE FOLLOWING MATERIALS ARE SUBMITTED TO THE GEC:
1. Order for ________________ faculty from __________ 20___. No. ________
on the performance of the student (s) _________________________________________
curriculum and admission to the defense of a master's thesis
2. Estimated and explanatory note on ______________________ pages.
3. Drawings for the project on _____________________________________ sheets.
4. Review of the head ___________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
5. Review _____________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
6. Resume on work in _________________________ language
After reporting the completed work (within ________ min.)
the graduate (s) were asked the following questions:
1._______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
(surname and initials of the person who asked the question, content of the question)
2.___________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
3. __________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
"DECISION GEC"
1. Recognize that the student (s) ___________________________________________
completed and defended a master's thesis with a grade of ____________
2. Assign ____________________________________________________
qualifications ____________________________________________________
in the field of training ____________________________________________
3. Issue a diploma _____________________________________________________
(With Honours)
4. Note that _____________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SEC Chairman: __________________________________
(surname, initials) (signature)
Members of the GEC _________________ _________________________
(surname, initials) (signature)
___________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
Surname, initials and position of the person who drew up the minutes _____________
___________________________________________________________________
(signature)
APPENDIX 3
Structure of the report of the chairman of the SEC
Title page
MINISTRY OF BRANCH OF RUSSIA
Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution
Higher professional education
"Amur State University"
(FGBOU VPO "AmSU")
REPORT
Chairman of the State Examination Commission (SEC)
in the field of training ___________________________________________________________________
code, name of specialty
at the Amur State University at 20____ - 20 ___ academic. year
Blagoveshchensk, 20 ___
The report should contain the following information:
Qualitative composition of state examination boards;
A specific list of examination tests that are part of the final state certification of masters for a specific professional educational program (defense of the final qualifying work);
Characteristics of the general level of training of students in this specialty (direction of training);
A detailed analysis of the results of the defense of graduate qualification works, with an emphasis on the relevance of the FQP topics, their scientific nature and practical significance, highlight the works prepared on the instructions of enterprises and institutions;
Disadvantages in the preparation of masters in this area of training;
The results of the defense of final qualifying works should be reflected in the appendix.
APPENDIX
Results of the state final interdisciplinary exam * in the specialty (field of study) __________________________________________________
code name of specialty, direction of training
The results of the defense of diploma theses in the direction of training
| № | Indicators | Total | Form of study | ||||
| Qty. | % | Full-time | Extramural | ||||
| Qty. | % | count | % | ||||
| 1. | Accepted for the defense of master's theses (Dr.) | ||||||
| 2. | Protected by Dr. | ||||||
| 3. | Estimates d.r. excellent good satisfactory unsatisfactory | ||||||
| 4. | Number of etc. performed: | ||||||
| 4.1 | On topics suggested by students; | ||||||
| 4.2 | At the request of enterprises; | ||||||
| 4.3 | In the field of fundamental and exploratory scientific research | ||||||
| 5. | Number of etc. recommended: | ||||||
| 5.1 | For publication; | ||||||
| 5.2 | For implementation; | ||||||
| 5.3. | Implemented | ||||||
| 6. | Number of honors diplomas |
The protocol for a member of the GEC is developed taking into account the specifics of the main educational program.
Samples of filling in the minutes of the SAC meetingsProtocol No. 1
meetings of the state attestation and state examination commissions of the faculty ... ... FSBEI HPE "Shadrinsky State Pedagogical Institute"
from ……………… .. 20… .. years.
Attended: list all the members and examiners of the state certification and examination commissions in accordance with the order of the rector.
We heard: about the readiness of the faculty…. to the state (final) certification.
Speakers:
Dean of the Faculty- acquaints the members and examiners of the commissions with the Regulation on the state (final) certification of university graduates.
Heads of departments- report on the readiness of the department to conduct state (final) certification.
Decided: to recognize that the faculty ... .. is ready to conduct the state (final) certification of students 4,5, (6) courses.
Signatures with decryption: Chairman of the SJSC
Deputy chairman
Commissioners and examiners
Secretary
Signatures are affixed after each protocol.
Protocol No.….
meeting of the state examination
from ……………… 20… year.
Attended: list all members of the commission and examiners who attended this meeting.
They heard: about passing the state exam in ...
Examined student (s) ___ Full name.____
Ticket no ... ..
1 .... ... the content of the questions is rewritten
Commission members and examiners asked the following questions: list
General characteristics of the answer:
Recognize that student (s) ____ Full name._________ passed the state exam with a mark of _______________.
Signatures with decryption.
Protocol No.….
meeting of the state attestation Faculty commissions ... FGBOU VPO "Shadrinsk State Pedagogical Institute"
from ……………… .20…. of the year
Heard: about the defense of graduation qualification works.
Student (s) ____ Full name._______ WRC theme: …………………………
The following documents are submitted to the SJSC: list
After the student reports on the work done, the following questions are asked:
General characteristics of the defense of the final qualifying work.
Recognize that the student (s) ________ Full name._______ completed and defended a WRC with an assessment of ___________.
Signatures with decryption.
Protocol No.….
meeting of the state attestation faculty commissions ……
FSBEI HPE "Shadrinsk State Pedagogical Institute"
from ……………… .. 20… .year.
Attended: list all the members of the attestation commission who were present at this meeting.
Heard: about the results of the state (final) certification and the awarding of qualifications to students of 4, 5, (6) courses of the faculty …….
Resolved:
The following students of the 4, 5, (6) courses of the faculty ... .. shall be considered as passed the state (final) attestation, give them a qualification ...……… .., issue honors diplomas:
all students are listed (full name and surname, in alphabetical order) who passed the state exams and defended their FQPs with excellent marks, indicating the date of each certification and the given grade.
The next students 4, 5, (6) courses of the faculty ... .. to be considered as passed the state (final) certification, to assign them a qualification ...……………. , issue diplomas without distinction:
all students are listed (full name and surname, in alphabetical order) who passed the state exams and defended the FQP, indicating the date of each certification and the grade.
The following students 4, 5, (6) courses of the faculty ... .., who have not passed the state (final) certification, should be expelled from the institute and issue an academic certificate:
all students are listed (full name and surname, alphabetically) who have not passed the state (final) attestation.
Signatures with decryption.
Date of this protocol must match:
- with the date of the last meeting on the defense of the FQP of this specialty;
- with the date of the order for the release of students of this specialty;
- with the date of issue of the diploma.
All minutes of meetings for a given academic year should be printed (without errors and corrections) on a computer, filed into a folder (3 punctures, the first and last sheets are blank, the sheets should be numbered in the upper right corner with a simple pencil) and submitted to the educational department up to 5 July (for full-time department) and until December 15 (for correspondence department) of the current year.
Folder front design: no need to stick the sheet, the following inscription is made directly on the folder with a ballpoint pen:
The minutes of the meetings of the state attestation and state examination commissions are kept in the archive of the institute.
final certification or who did not pass it) issue a certificate of college education.
MP Chairman of the Commission: ___________ E.V. Naumov
Commission members: ___________ L.V. Grishina
(signature) (decryption of signature)
: ___________ Maslakov A.P.
(signature) (decryption of signature)
Chernyavsky V.I.
(signature) (decryption of signature)
Chumachenko V.G
(signature) (decryption of signature)
MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE OF THE MURMANSK REGION
P R O T O K O L
meetings of the state examination commission for final certification
graduates of the State Autonomous Educational Institution
Murmansk region of secondary vocational education
"Apatity Polytechnic College"
Location: Murmansk region, Apatity, st. Energeticheskaya, 35
Profession SPO 190629.01 "Driver of road and construction machines"
OK 16-94 qualification "Bulldozer driver"
"Single-bucket excavator driver"
Group 304
Commission chairman: E.V. Naumovsenior master of URTT ATC JSC "APATIT"
Deputy chairman of the commission Grishina L.V. deputy. Director for UPR
(surname and initials) (position)
Commission members Maslakov A.P. Head of SD and T
(surname and initials) (position)
Chernyavsky V.I. master p / o
(surname and initials) (position)
Chumachenko V.G. teacher
(surname and initials) (position)
Having considered the presented final grades of academic performance for the entire course of study, production characteristics, the results of final practical qualification and written
examination papers and other materials for the educational activities of students and
After conducting a comprehensive assessment of the level of training of graduates and their compliance with the requirements of the Federal State Educational Standard of Secondary Vocational Education, the State Examination Commission decided:
2. To the students indicated in the list, issue diplomas of secondary vocational education, certificates of conferring qualifications in the profession "Driver of road and construction machines", having assigned the following qualifications in the professions:
|
Full Name |
Christmas year |
Exam score |
The professions and qualifications awarded |
The conclusion of the examination committee about assigned qualifications in the professions. |
|||||
|
Babikov Konstantin Andreevich |
Bulldozer driver, fourth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fourth grade. |
||||||||
|
Baryshnikov Vladislav Evgenievich |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver | ||||||||
|
Nikita Belogorodtsev |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fourth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fourth grade. |
|||||||
|
Vinogradov Alexander Andreevich |
satisfactorily |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fourth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fourth grade. |
||||||
|
Vyshinsky Artem Viktorovich |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fourth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fourth grade. |
|||||||
|
Gnedoy Valery Sergeevich |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fourth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fourth grade. |
|||||||
|
Gorokhov Dmitry Alexandrovich |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fourth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fourth grade. |
|||||||
|
Egorov Oleg Vasilevich |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fourth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fourth grade. |
|||||||
|
Ivanov Evgeny Alekseevich |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver | ||||||||
|
Kozhemyakin Evgeny Alekseevich |
satisfactorily |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fourth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fourth grade. |
||||||
|
Kontsevoy Maxim Dmitrievich |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fourth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fourth grade. |
|||||||
|
Kulikov Anton Mikhailovich |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fourth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fourth grade. |
|||||||
|
Mikhailov Vladislav Olegovich |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fourth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fourth grade. |
|||||||
|
Molotkov Vitaly Sergeevich |
satisfactorily |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fourth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fourth grade. |
||||||
|
Nikolaenko Dmitry Sergeevich |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fourth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fourth grade. |
|||||||
|
Osipov Vladimir Gennadievich |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fourth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fourth grade. |
|||||||
|
Samoilenko Alexey Sergeevich |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fourth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fourth grade. |
|||||||
|
Ruslan Svetlov |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fourth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fourth grade. |
|||||||
|
Svistunov Denis Alekseevich |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fourth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fourth grade. |
|||||||
|
Sinitsyn Maxim Vladimirovich |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fifth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fifth grade. |
|||||||
|
Smirnov Valery Mikhailovich |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fourth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fourth grade. |
|||||||
|
Timofeev Evgeny Vyacheslavovich |
satisfactorily |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fourth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fourth grade. |
||||||
|
Dmitry Tropin |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fourth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fourth grade. |
|||||||
|
Fomin Igor Valerievich |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fourth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fourth grade. |
|||||||
|
Tsygankov Pavel Andreevich |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fifth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fifth grade. |
|||||||
|
Shelamov Petr |
satisfactorily |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fourth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fourth grade. |
||||||
|
Shuvalov Dmitry Andreevich |
Bulldozer driver. Single-bucket excavator driver |
Bulldozer driver, fourth grade. Single-bucket excavator driver, fourth grade. |
|||||||
1. The defense of the FQP is held at an open meeting of the SEC.
2. The defense of the FQP is given up to 1 academic hour. The defense procedure is established by the chairman of the SEC in agreement with the members of the commission and includes a student report (no more than 10-15 minutes) (Appendix 12) and a prepared computer presentation (Appendix 13), reading reviews and reviews, questions from members of the commission, student answers.
3. A speech by the head of the WRC, as well as a reviewer, if he is present at the meeting of the SEC, is possible.
4. When determining the final grade for the protection of FQPs, the following are taken into account: the report of the graduate; answers on questions; reviewer assessment; review of the head.
5. The course of the SEC meeting is recorded. The minutes record: the final assessment of the FQP, questions and dissenting opinions of the members of the commission. The discussion protocol is drawn up for each student.
6. The award of qualifications is carried out at the final meeting of the SEC and is recorded in the minutes of the meeting.
7. Minutes of the GEC meetings are signed by the chairman, executive secretary and members of the commission (Appendix 14).
8. Students who have completed the FQP, but received the grade "unsatisfactory" during the defense, have the right to re-defense.
9. In this case, the SEC may recognize it as expedient for the student to re-defend the same FQP topic, or make a decision on assigning a new FQP topic to him and determine the period for re-defense, but not earlier than six months after passing the GIA for the first time.
Keeping the final qualifying work
1. FQPs performed by students are stored in the technical school after their defense for at least five years. After the expiration of the specified period, the issue of further storage of the FQP is decided by a commission organized by order of the director of the technical school, which submits proposals to write off the FQP.
2. After the defense, the FQP remains in the technical school in full for subsequent use in the educational process.
3. Writing off the FQP is formalized by the corresponding act.
4. The best FQPs, which are of educational and methodological value, can be used as teaching aids in the classrooms of the technical school.
CHAPTER 3 REQUIREMENTS FOR REGISTRATION OF POSTER PRESENTATIONS FOR THE GRADUATE QUALIFICATION WORK
General requirements for poster presentation
The general requirement for a poster presentation is a clear and precise presentation of the key points of the work. Authors can use records of recording devices, fragments of laboratory journals, tools, samples of new products, etc. as demonstration materials. The report should not be overloaded with background information. Poster materials
Poster size: A1 format, landscape orientation (841 x 594 mm). In the upper part there is the title of the work, which is printed in upright type (the recommended size is not less than 48). Below are the names of the authors and the scientific adviser, the name of the institution where the work was done (the recommended size is at least 36). The text containing basic information is printed in roman type (recommended size 18).
Poster sections
Poster materials should contain:
- title, including the title of the report, full name and place of work / study of the authors;
- introduction (optional);
- relevance, goals and objectives of the work performed;
- research methodology;
- results;
- conclusions;
- literature,
- information about the introduction into production or scientific activity (if any).
Registration
Figures and tables should be named. The format of figures, tables, the height of the letters, the thickness of the lines on the graphs, etc. should provide the ability to read the material from a distance of at least 2 m. For greater clarity, highlighting with color is allowed. In this case, however, one should avoid excessive "variegation".
The stand must meet the following requirements:
Visibility. With a cursory glance at the stand, the viewer should have an idea of the theme and nature of the work.
The ratio of illustrative and textual material should be 1: 1. Illustrative material - photographs, diagrams, graphs must have explanations.
Change No. 1RI 4.2.4-1 Rules and procedure for registration
protocols of state
examination boards
___ APPROVED AND PUT INTO EFFECT by order of the rector of the university No. 33-О dated 28.01.2016
Date of introduction 01/29/2016
1Section 2, point 3.1.Replace: " STP 7.5-2 Final examination. Position » on the "STO 7.5-2 Final certification of students. Position » .
2 Clause 5.2
"5.2 The procedure for filling ( Appendix A):
1) the first line indicates the number of the minutes of the SEC meeting;
2) the numbering of the minutes in each book is affixed in Arabic numerals;
3) in the line "On passing the state exam in the direction / specialty" indicate the code of the direction / specialty, name, direction;
4) in the line "Student" the surname, name, patronymic of the student is recorded in full in the genitive case. FULL NAME. the student must strictly comply with the last name, first name, patronymic specified in the order for admission to the state final certification;
5) in the section "Attended" information on the composition of the SEC (surname, initials of those present: the chairman of the SEC, members of the commission) is provided;
6) in the column "Questions":
the ticket number and the full content of each question of the ticket are indicated, while each question is numbered in order;
in the case when the exam is passed in the form of tests, the option numbers are indicated;
when the exam is passed in writing, either the ticket number and the list of disciplines for which the examinee gives a written answer, or the ticket number and the content of the questions are indicated;
when a complex qualification assignment is given, the option number is indicated;
8) in the column “1. To acknowledge that the student has passed the state exam with a mark "the student's knowledge is assessed in words:" excellent "," good "," satisfactory "," unsatisfactory ". Abbreviated grades are not allowed;
9) in the column "Note that" the general characteristics of the student's answer are indicated (for example: given complete answers to the questions posed, demonstrated fluency in educational or scientific material, received comprehensive answers to additional questions etc.).
For instance:
"Great"
exhaustive answers to all questions of the ticket and additional questions from members of the GEC were received;
the graduate demonstrates deep basic knowledge;
is able to show the cause-and-effect relationships of phenomena;
draws conclusions on each question of the examination card;
convincingly argues his own position, deeply and fully reveals the theoretical and practical aspects of the issue;
shows a creative approach to its presentation and demonstrates the controversial nature of this issue, as well as deeply and fully reveals additional questions, etc .;
shows basic knowledge, but not in full;
the student demonstrates the ability to analyze the material, but not all conclusions are sufficiently reasoned;
there is no answer to one of the ticket questions;
there is no complete answer to two additional questions;
the sequence of presentation of the material is violated, etc.;
When testing, the general characteristics of students' answers are indicated in percentage terms, for example:
“Excellent” - more than 80%;
“Good” - 55-80%;
"Satisfactory" - 34-54%;
“Unsatisfactory” - less than 34%;
10) in the column "Dissenting opinion of the members of the state examination commission" the student's answer is analyzed and the conclusion of the commission is given. for instance :
11) the following lines indicate the date, time of the beginning and end of the state examination ( not less than 15 and not more than 30 minutes per student).
3 Clause 6.1 change and state in a new edition:
“6.1 By the beginning of the work of the state examination commissions, the secretaries of the SEC receive from the UMU a book of minutes of the SEC meetings. When defending graduate qualification works, a separate protocol of the SEC meeting for the consideration of FQP is drawn up for each student.
The minutes of the GEC meeting on the protection of the WRC are filled in as follows ( Appendix B):
the first line contains the number of the minutes of the SEC meeting;
the next line indicates the date of the SEC meeting;
in the line "On consideration of the final qualifying work
in the line "Student" the surname, name, patronymic of the student is recorded in full in the genitive case;
in the line “On the topic” the topic of the FQP is indicated in accordance with the order of the rector of the university “On the approval of the topics of the final qualification works and the appointment of scientific advisers”;
in the "Attended" section, information on the composition of the SEC is provided (surname, initials of those present: the chairman of the SEC, members of the commission);
in the section "Graduation qualification work performed under the guidance" the academic degree, title, surname, initials of the student's scientific advisor are indicated in the genitive case;
in the line “upon consultation” the academic degree, title, surname, initials (if a consultant has been appointed) shall be indicated in the genitive case;
below is information about the materials presented in the SEC, namely:
exams and tests and on the fulfillment of the requirements of the curriculum (number, date of the student's full name);
2) the number of pages of the WRC shall be entered with a figure;
3) the number indicates the total number of sheets of the annex to the work;
4) tables, diagrams, figures;
5) the presence of a recall of the head of the WRC is confirmed;
6) the presence of a work review is confirmed;
the number indicates the time (as a rule, no more 15 minutes), during which a message about the completed work is made to the student;
on a separate line with a serial number, it is indicated by whom and what questions were asked to the student ( content of the question);
the section "General characteristics" indicates the characteristics of the responses received (for example: complete answers to the questions posed are given, fluency in the research material is demonstrated, examples from practice are given, etc..);
in the line “Recognize that the student has completed and defended his final qualifying work with an assessment”, the mark is put in words for which the student defended the FQP: “excellent”, “good”, “satisfactory”, “unsatisfactory” ( abbreviated grades are not allowed);
the line "to assign a qualification (degree)" indicates the degree (qualification) to be awarded;
in the line "Mark that", for example, you can specify: In general, the FQP was performed at a high technical level in accordance with the design assignment with visual graphics and a good explanatory note;
in the line "Dissenting opinion" the conclusion of the commission is given (in the case of a positive defense, an opinion may be given that " the student is recommended for admission to the magistracy (postgraduate)" or " the results of FQP research have been implemented at the enterprise (the act of implementation is available)", or " continue work on the topic of the WRC for writing a dissertation"; in case of unsatisfactory protection - " finalization of the WRC theme is needed" or " need to develop a new theme"Etc.).
the following lines indicate the date, time of the beginning and end of the WRC defense.
APPENDIX A
(reference)
An example of filling out the GEC protocol on passing the state exam
_
P R O T O K O L No. _ 1
_
12
_»__
May
__
2016
G.
on passing the state exam in the direction / specialty
_____________01.03.02
___Applied Mathematics and Computer Science
____________
_____________________________________
student __________ Ivanov Andrey Alexandrovich __________________________
(Name of the student)
Attended by:
Sapchenko I.G., Dr. Sci., Deputy Director of IM & M FEB RAS
Bormotin K.S., Doctor of Phys.-Math. Sciences, Associate Professor ________________
Zarubin M.M., Cand. phys.-mat. Sciences, Associate Professor _______________
Khromov A.I., Dr. Phys.-Math. sciences, professor __ _____________
Loshmanov A.Yu., Cand. phys.-mat. Sciences, Associate Professor _____________
Kozlova O.V., Cand. phys.-mat. Sciences, Associate Professor ___ _____________
QuestionsTicket number 8
1 First order differential equations ___________________________
___________
_____________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
2 Fundamentals of Gender Algebra ___
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
3 Find and display all prime numbers not exceeding # = 1000 ____
(use the "sieve of Eratosthenes" method) ________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
Loshmanov A.Yu. _______________________________________________________
1 What are first order differential equations? _________________
2 Explain Bernouli equation ? __________________________________________
Kozlova O.V. __________________________________________________________
1 What is the difference between a tensor and a general object? ________________________
2 What is method "sieve of Eratosthenes")? _______________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
1. Recognize that the student has passed the state exam with a mark of __ Great
__
2. Note that given complete answers to the questions posed, demonstrated fluency in educational and scientific material, received comprehensive answers to additional questions
________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
3. Dissenting opinion of members of the state examination commission
A high level of professional competence was demonstrated. Recommend for admission to the magistracy ___________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
Time of the state exam «_ 12 _»__ May __ 20 16 G.
c _ 10 _ h _ 00 _ min to _ 10 _ h _ 20 _ min.
Chairman of the State Examination Commission
_Sapchenko I.G. ___________________________________
(Full name, signature)
K.S. Bormotin ______________________________________
(Full name, signature)
Zarubin M.M . _______________________________________
(Full name, signature)
_Khromov A.I. ________________________________________
(Full name, signature)
_Loshmanov A.Yu. _____________________________________
(Full name, signature)
. _____________________________________________________
(Full name, signature)
Secretary of the SEC Kozlova O.V. ________________________
(Full name, signature)
APPENDIX B
(reference)
An example of filling out the GEC protocol for the protection of WRC
Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation
Federal State Budgetary Educational
institution of higher professional education
"Komsomolsk-on-Amur State Technical University"
________________________________________________________________________
P R O T O K O L No. __ 3
__
meetings of the state examination commission from "_ 17
__»_ june
__ 20_16
G.
on the consideration of the final qualifying work in the direction / specialty
_________________03.21.02 Land management and cadastres ____________________
(direction / specialty code, name, focus)
______________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________
student ___________ Baranova Vyacheslav Sergeevich
_____________________________
(Name of the student)
on the topic of_ Management of the rehabilitation center reconstruction process _____
for children and adolescents with disabilities
_____________________________
Attended by:
Chairman of the State Examination Commission
Kulikov I.M., deputy. heads of administration _________________
Members of the State Examination Commission
_Tsvetkov O.Yu., Cand. geogr. Sciences, Associate Professor __________________
Antsigin O.I., Cand. tech. Sciences, Associate Professor ___________________
_Gagul I.A., head. administration department _________________
_Grinkrug N.V., Cand. tech. Sciences, Associate Professor ___________________
_Borzova O.N., associate professor __________________________________
Final qualifying work performed under the guidance of
____________ Oleg Ivanovich Antsigin, Cand. tech. sciences ____________________
upon consultation __ Grinkrug N.V., Cand. tech. sciences. __________________________
The following materials are submitted to the state examination commission:
1. Certificate of the dean's office of the faculty / institute __ №
_88
____ from "_ 16
_»__ june
____ 2016
G.
about passed to students ____ Baranov Vyacheslav Sergeevich
_______________
(Name of the student)
exams and tests and on the fulfillment of the requirement of the curriculum.
2. Estimated and explanatory note on _ 130 __ pages
3. Appendix to the settlement and explanatory note on _ 10 _ pages
4. Drawings for WRC on _ 14 __ sheets
5. Review of the head
6. Review of _ WRC _________________________________________________________
After the message about the completed final qualifying work (within _ 8 _ min) the student was asked the following questions:
Tsvetkov O.Yu.________________________________________________________
(Full name of the person who asked the question and the wording of the question)
1 The relevance of the building? ________________________________________________
2 Who is operating this facility? ____________________________________
Borzova O.N. __________________________________________________________
1 How does the investment attractiveness increase upon transferring to an OJSC?
2 Where does the depth of 4.22 m come from? _____________________________________
Grinkrug N.V. _________________________________________________________
1 What is the reason for the choice of the location of the object? _________________________
2
What's on the master plan?
_________________________________________
General characteristics of the student's answers to the questions asked to him
Demonstrated fluency in research material __________
Complete answers to the questions posed are given.
____________________________
1 Recognize that the student has completed and defended the final qualifying work
rated ___ Great
______________________________________________________
2 Assign qualification __ bachelor ________________________________________
3 Note that __ In general, the WRC was carried out at a high technical level ______
in accordance with the design assignment with visual graphics _________
and with an excellent explanatory note _______________________________________
Dissenting opinion of members of the state examination commission _________________
Time of the FQP defense " 17 » june _2016 G.
c __ 9 __ h _ 30 _ min to _ 10 _ h _ 00 _ min.
Chairman of the State Examination Commission
Kulikov I.M. _______________________________
(Full name, signature)
Members of the State Examination Commission:
Tsvetkov O.Yu ._______________________________________
(Full name, signature)
Grinkrug N.V. . ________________________________________
(Full name, signature)
O.I. Antsigin _________________________________________
(Full name, signature)
Gagul I.A. ___________________________________________
(Full name, signature)
_____________________________________________________
(Full name, signature)
Secretary of the SEC Borzova O.N . ___________________________
