The aim of the investigation is to determine the ways of overcoming methodological uncertainties included into the teacher’s (tutor’s) professional standards.

Methods. The system-activity approach to the teacher’s activity development was used by the author.

Results. The author has developed (on the basis of the system-activity approach) the structure and content of the teacher’s personnel administration plan that allows realizing demands of the teacher’s (tutor’s) professional standards and solving its main methodological uncertainties.

Scientific novelty. The author presents own systematic and activity-based methodology to the development of personnel administration plan for the educational sphere personnel in order to enhance pedagogical potential of educational activity, and create organizational arrangements for its effectiveness, quality and social efficiency.

Practical significance. The proposed system-activity methodology can be used under the modernization of personnel administration plans for teachers within the context of the teacher’s professional standard realization.

1. Bin-Bad B. M. Pro­fes­si­onal’nyj stan­dart pe­da­go­ga – «nas­he vse»? [Te­ac­her’s pro­fes­si­onal stan­dard – «na­ti­onal idea»?]. Akkre­di­ta­ci­ja v ob­ra­zo­va­nii. [Accre­di­ta­ti­on in Edu­ca­ti­on]. 2013. № 4 (964) P. 41–43. (In Rus­si­an)

2. Vif­le­yemskiy A. B. Zac­hem nuz­hen pro­fes­si­onal’nyj stan­dart pe­da­go­ga? [Why do we ne­ed the te­ac­her’s pro­fes­si­onal stan­dard?]. Na­rod­noe ob­ra­zo­va­nie. [Pub­lic edu­ca­ti­on]. 2014. № 3. P. 34–42. (In Rus­si­an)

3. Vo­ro­no­va T. A., Za­so­bi­na G. A. Pro­fes­si­onal’nyj stan­dart pe­da­go­ga: vzgljad che­rez priz­mu ak­me­olo­gii. [Te­ac­her’s pro­fes­si­onal stan­dard: glan­ce thro­ugh the prism of ac­me­ology]. Na­uchnyj po­isk. [Sci­en­ti­fic In­qu­iry]. 2013. № 3. P. 42–46. (In Rus­si­an)

4. Gorb V. G. Me­to­do­lo­gi­ja pro­ek­ti­ro­va­ni­ja or­ga­ni­za­ci­onnyh ob­ra­zo­va­tel’nyh sis­tem: mo­nog­ra­fi­ja. [Met­ho­do­logy of de­sign of the or­ga­ni­za­ti­onal edu­ca­ti­onal systems]. Ye­ka­te­rin­burg: Pub­lis­hing Hou­se of URAGS, 2008. 236 p. (In Rus­si­an)

5. Le­vi­na L. S. O pro­fes­si­onal’nom stan­dar­te pe­da­go­ga. [Con­cer­ning the te­ac­her’s pro­fes­si­onal stan­dard]. Hi­mi­ja v shko­le. [Che­mistry at scho­ol]. 2013. № 4. P. 2–7. (In Rus­si­an)

6. Ma­kus­hi­na N. M. Sov­re­mennyj pe­da­gog i pro­fes­si­onal’nyj stan­dart. [Mo­dern te­ac­her and pro­fes­si­onal stan­dard]. Na­uchnyj po­isk. [Sci­en­ti­fic In­qu­iry]. 2014. № 2 (8). P. 15–17. (In Rus­si­an)

7. Mil­ya­ye­va S. Yu. Po­moz­het li novyj stan­dart uluchshit’ pro­fes­si­onal’nu­ju de­ja­tel’nost’ pe­da­go­ga? [Will the new stan­dard help to impro­ve the te­ac­her’s pro­fes­si­onal stan­dard?]. Na­rod­noe ob­ra­zo­va­nie. [Pub­lic edu­ca­ti­on]. 2014. № 4. P. 45–51. (In Rus­si­an)

8. El­li­li-Che­rif M., Ro­ma­nowski M., Nas­ser R. All that glit­ters is not gold: Chal­len­ges of te­ac­her and scho­ol le­ader li­cen­su­re li­cen­sing system in Qa­tar. In­ter­na­ti­onal Jo­ur­nal of Edu­ca­ti­onal De­ve­lop­ment [se­ri­al on­li­ne]. 2012. May. № 32 (3). P. 471–481. (Transla­ted from English)

9. Ha­me­ed-Ur-Reh­man, Ba­ig M. Te­ac­hers’ opi­ni­on/per­cep­ti­on abo­ut the Na­ti­onal pro­fes­si­onal stan­dards for te­ac­hers (npst-2009) in Pa­kis­tan. In­ter­dis­cip­li­nary Jo­ur­nal of Con­tem­po­rary Re­se­arch in Bu­si­ness [se­ri­al on­li­ne]. 2012. Ap­ril. № 3 (12). P. 262–277. (Transla­ted from English)

10. Le­onard S. Pro­fes­si­onal con­ver­sa­ti­ons: men­tor te­ac­hers’ the­ori­es-in-use using the Austra­li­an Na­ti­onal pro­fes­si­onal stan­dards for te­ac­hers. Austra­li­an Jo­ur­nal of Te­ac­her Edu­ca­ti­on [se­ri­al on­li­ne]. 2012.