What is the essence of pedagogy - subject-subject relations. Abstract: Abstract Subject-subject relations in the educational process
As a basis for design educational process DOW".
Introduction……………………………..…………………………………. 3
1 . The concept of subject, subjectivity, subject - subject connections…………….. 4
2. Principles for establishing subject-subject relationships…………………… 7
3. Main functions pedagogical activity …………….………… 10
4. Stages of children's activities……………………………………………. 12
5. Models of cooperation between parents and children…………………………….. 16
6. The subject of the educational process is peers ………………………. 20
Conclusion …………………………………………………………...…. 22
References……………………………………………………... 23
Introduction.
Currently, in the practice of preschool educational institutions, despite the ideas of humanization in the preschool education system, the educational and disciplinary model of interaction sometimes dominates. The reason lies in the existence of deep personal attitudes towards the implementation of the so-called subject - subjective connections into practice.
The most desirable for full communication between children and teachers is a person-oriented model of interaction. The child feels emotionally protected because the teacher treats the child as an equal. The person-oriented model of interaction is characterized by subject-subject connections. In this case, both the adult and the child are equally subjects of interaction. Contradictions are resolved through cooperation.
1 . The concept of subject, subjectivity, subject - subject connections.
During subject-subject interaction, the teacher understands his students more personally; such interaction is called personality-oriented.
Activity Observations preschool teachers showed that teachers to a greater extent study, measure their needs, motives, states, and to a lesser extent encourage them to take an active position, without analyzing “reverse actions”, without being able to determine the real subjectivity of the child. In order to implement the program efficiently, there was a need to increase the level of theoretical knowledge of teachers on this issue. At the teachers' meeting “The child is a subject of activity” we considered the theoretical foundations of this issue.
Subjectivity is the ability of a person to be aware of himself, to consciously choose, to be aware of his actions, to be a strategist of his own existence, to comprehend the connections of his “I” with other people. As noted by Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences N.E. Shchurkova, this ability is formed in social life in the process of the child’s spiritual efforts and is brought up purposefully if teachers set the task of its development.
Subjectivity does not appear out of nowhere; it has its own procedural side. First, it is the free expression of one’s “I”, then the correlation of oneself with the rules of culture and social life. Subjectivity is enriched by understanding another person. And then there is one more acquisition: the ability to foresee the actions of others, and therefore to choose, focusing on the expected result. By assessing what has been done and correcting what is done, the child learns to plan his actions.
The conventionally stepwise ascent of a child to self-awareness, according to N.E. Shchurkova, looks like this: I freely express my “I”; I enter into dialogue with another “I”; I foresee the consequences of my actions; I make a free choice; I evaluate the result and plan a new one.
Constancy, not situational nature;
Based on taking into account the interests and needs of the parties, including the creation of space;
A partnership type of communication, which involves an active position on both sides, dialogue.
Principles for establishing subject-subject connections.
Scientific researchers (Maralov V.G. and others) have identified several principles for establishing subject-subject relationships:
1. The principle of dialogization of pedagogical interaction - the position of the adult and the child must be equal, i.e. the position of co-learning, co-educating, cooperating people.
2. The principle of problematization - the adult does not educate, does not transmit, but actualizes the child’s tendency towards personal growth, and also actualizes the child’s research activity, creates conditions for improving moral actions, for independently discovering and posing cognitive problems.
3. The principle of personalization is role interaction, i.e. the interaction is not of a person, but of a “role”. In this regard, it is necessary to abandon role masks and include in interaction those elements of personal experience that do not correspond to role expectations and standards.
4. The principle of individualization is the identification and development of the child’s general and special abilities. Selection of age-appropriate and individual capabilities content, forms and methods of education.
Models of “not interfering” in a child’s life correspond to object-subject connections. The child actually acts as the subject, and the adult is assigned a passive role. In this case, the adult’s task is to adapt to the child’s wishes, i.e. creating conditions and prerequisites for its spontaneous development. This type of connection, as a rule, is most characteristic of family education.
Of the three above models of interaction between an adult and a child, the optimal one is person-oriented, built on subject-subject relationships. It is with this model that favorable preconditions are created for overcoming the main contradiction between the goals and objectives set by the adult and the goals and objectives set by the child. That is, within the framework of this model, the personal characteristics of both children and adults (educators) are formed. As a result of the interpenetration of professional and individual personality traits of the educator, a special education is formed - the “educational position of the individual.” Since each social system is characterized by the multiplicity of structures represented in it, the contradictory interests of various social groups, a combination of conservative and innovative tendencies, in each society the conditions arise for the generation of a certain diversity of educational positions.
It is well known that a child develops through activity. And the more complete and varied a child’s activity is, the more significant it is for the child and corresponds to his nature, the more successful his development is. According to the authors of the program, intensive intellectual, emotional and personal development, well-being and social status in the peer group are associated with mastering the position of a subject of children's activities.
DI. Feldstein notes: “Defining our starting positions when building our relationships with children as a subject - subjective, declaring that a child is a subject, in fact, in reality we, adults, treat the child as an object to which our influence is directed, speaking all time is about actions towards the child, and not about interaction.”
NOT. Shchurkova emphasizes that modern pedagogical technology is a scientifically based professional choice the operational impact of the teacher on the child in the context of his interaction with the world in order to foster relationships that harmoniously combine freedom of personal expression and sociocultural norms. The main pedagogical impact is to transfer the child to the position of a subject. Subject-subject relationships contribute to the development in children of the ability to cooperate, initiative, creativity, and the ability to constructively resolve conflicts. The most complex work of cognitive processes is activated, knowledge is activated, the necessary methods for solving problems are selected, and various skills are tested. All activities acquire personal significance for the child, valuable manifestations of activity and independence are formed, which, with a sustainable strengthening of the subject position, can become his personal qualities. A modern person-oriented model of interaction is providing the child with freedom, independence, a larger “field” for independent actions, and communication as equals.
The environment is the most important factor mediating a child’s activity. It provides great opportunities for the education and development of a preschooler, the formation of significant personality qualities: activity, independence, creative expression, and communication skills. However, the full development and upbringing of a child in the environment is possible by creating conditions for his activity in the environment, opportunities for modeling, and building its elements. Interaction with elements of the environment, making changes to the environment, joint activities of the teacher and the child in this direction opens up great opportunities for revealing the personal potential of a preschooler. However, to implement active work organization is important in a child's environment effective interaction, in which the leading role is given to an adult. At the same time, he is a partner for the child, guides him and teaches him. Building effective interaction between teacher and child when constructing elements of the environment is an important condition for using its potential in the upbringing and development of a preschooler.
Subject - subjective connections and relationships that arise between the teacher and children when constructing elements of the subject-developmental environment are characterized by the following features:
Constancy, not situational nature;
Based on taking into account the interests and needs of the parties, including the creation of space;
A partnership type of communication, which involves an active position on both sides, dialogue.
Municipal educational institution “Multidisciplinary language gymnasium No. 4”, Chita
Essay
Subject-subject relations in the educational process
Completed by: Meininger A.V.
Chita – 2007
4. Humane-personal relationships in the classroom as a manifestation of subject-subject relationships 17
5. Conclusion 22
6. Literature 27
7. Application 28
Introduction
At all times, educators have been looking for the best ways to help people use the opportunities given to them by nature, to form moral qualities. For thousands of years they accumulated little by little necessary knowledge, one after another, pedagogical systems were created, tested and rejected, until the most viable, most useful ones remained. The science of education is also developing, the main task of which is to accumulate, systematize scientific knowledge about human upbringing.
The words of the innovative teacher E.N. Ilyin would be appropriate here: “Regardless of our concepts, inclinations, tastes, today we are all “buddies” in a big and urgent matter - to protect and elevate the student with spiritual values...
A new look at personality as the goal of education helps to recognize children’s abilities and identify gifts and talents. Subject-subject relations of an integral pedagogical process, arising in a complex link relationship of aesthetic and moral technological solutions, contribute to the harmony of the development of the child’s intellectual characteristics and such priority qualities as kindness, love, hard work, conscience, dignity, citizenship...
We are talking about the joint activity of teacher and students on a creative basis, spiritual equality and humanistic interpersonal communication. Indicators of this kind represent the teacher’s personal pedagogy as an art that consists of the ability to feel the child’s inner world, his characteristics, needs, and problems. This is the art of putting together a mosaic of a lesson from many different pedagogical grains, combining your idea with the ideas of the students into a single whole. This is the art of selecting the material on which personal communication and the roles of each child are possible, the art of building a motivational-psychological and procedural-methodological creative educational space for the lesson. It is the art of the teacher to be a playwright, director and participant in the lesson-event, to improvise, to share his experience and accept the experience and values of his students, to be free and responsible for trust and to develop the same qualities in children.
Undoubtedly, the problem of education, educational training, humane-personal relationships in the classroom was, is and will be, this problem is eternal and its relevance will most likely never dry up. It is topical even now, in our progressive age of thriving technologies, when a person-oriented approach to the student is at the forefront. In my opinion, it is the subject-subject relationship that will help to carry out this two-way creative pedagogical process with the least mental effort and will help reduce time, which is always so lacking.
After all, a child is always above everyone and everything, he is always at the center of any events: political, economic, social, religious. A child is the basis of our life, this is a person striving to become a full-fledged person, to whom we, in turn, must help with all our strength, give a piece of our soul, if, of course, it is spiritual, pure and beautiful. It is we, teachers, together with parents, who must help the formation of a spiritual, beautiful, intelligent, humane and responsive personality.
Subject-subject relationship between teacher and students in the educational process
The multidimensional ideal of a teacher - ideological, ethical, aesthetic - is realized only in conditions of interaction with children, cooperation and co-creation, these unique situations. In every trace element pedagogical work there is a careful touch on the child’s personality. As V.A. Sukhomlinsky figuratively put it, flowers must be touched so that not a single drop of dew trembling on the petals falls to the ground. In situations of interaction, the broad and multifaceted phenomena that make up the educational process (Upbringing, Enlightenment, Training, Teaching, Development, Self-development, etc.), functioning more or less autonomously from each other, “seem to dissolve.” Sh.A. Amonashvili writes: “...autonomy will disappear, and a qualitatively different pedagogical phenomenon will arise.” N.M. Talanchuk called this integrated interaction a “phenomenon,” which makes it possible to ensure the integrity of the educational process. He embraces the child completely, “with all his nature,” accepts him as he is, and “creates in him a developed, free and educated person.” Collaborative relationships develop as a quality of the child’s personality, acquiring educational, and therefore humane-personal meaning, moral and cognitive value. This helps create internal conditions that realize the child’s creative potential. We know the inner world of a child in situations of teacher inspiration, intuition, creative experience and empathy, insight. Pedagogy requires gradual creativity. Success today does not guarantee success tomorrow, because tomorrow is a new test. Educational relationships, as a subject of special concern for the teacher, are relationships of an “evaluative” orientation, requiring involvement, mutual involvement of the teacher and students. This complex activity requires certain emphasis in technological solutions. A.M. Lobok considers it important not to adjust the world of childhood to the tasks of the adult world, so as not to lose the amazingly important opportunities contained only in childhood. The technology for planning the pedagogical process should not imply a strictly defined scenario. What is important is the child’s inner world and the diversity of his development process. The scientist writes: “We must understand childhood as a single, continuous phenomenon that is not adjusted to the adult future, but creates itself from itself.” Education should be understood as the process of forming a certain personality, intellectual, spiritual, etc. the integrity of the student, and not just immersion in learning, immersion in learning activities. Consequently, the development of humane-personal relationships in the process of the content component of the lesson, its methods and cognitive activity, the form of organization of teaching, the atmosphere of the lesson and the teacher’s personality itself is a certain integrity, where the unifying principle is the open personality of the teacher with all its inherent advantages. This universal human principle (the will of the teacher, his feeling, common joys with children, conscience) is the basis for the unity of the above-mentioned components of the process of technology for the development of subject-subject relations.
The concept of “pedagogical distance” in its previous meaning is becoming obsolete. Today this distance is special - the distance of respect, understanding, the distance of a knowledgeable person. The teacher’s relationship with children is built on the acceptance of the child’s subjective experience and a certain degree of openness of the teacher, on his caring attitude towards the zone of each person’s creative development and individual trajectory.
This problem can be solved with several technological solutions.
1. The content of training is considered as the unity of its substantive and procedural aspects, that is, forms, methods, techniques, means, technologies, the relationship between teaching and learning activities. In this case, the form is represented as the structure of the external expression of the content of learning, the system of its organization. This is not just a “shell”. This is a unifying “framework space” of content, methods, and technology as a whole. The system is open, borders are permeable. A lesson has an “entrance” and an “exit”. The teacher sets the content characteristics of the lesson space. His personality turns out to be a value system of relationships to the world, to himself, to people, activities, a child...
2. Methods, techniques, teaching aids, these tools of the teacher’s work are designed to include children in the educational process through a system of educational interaction situations. The ideas of humanitarization and humanization of the content of education and its integration are being implemented. Interaction presupposes a dialogical nature of education, where the author’s position of the teacher, his ideals, worldview, and culture are manifested. They believe that the main thing is the subjective activity of children, their activity. It occurs in any method, technique, means, to one degree or another. The question is: will humane-personal relationships always (or not always?) develop. After all, the methodology also calls educational situations “non-experienced knowledge” (these are situations-statements, situations-information). In order for relationships to arise, we need situations-experiences and empathy, situations of “getting used to”, “feeling” into what is understood, putting oneself in the place of another. Our core “I” is a complex complex of voices of people, books, etc. that are significant to us. A child’s ability to listen and understand other points of view, notes A.M. Sidorkin, enter into dialogue, doubt his point of view, and conduct an internal dialogue has a nurturing character. The scientist expresses an important thought for teachers and educators: “... morality is a property of the individual, which to the greatest extent depends on the nature of the internal dialogue.” Why? Analyzing a specific life situation, we don’t just apply ready-made moral principles to it. We imagine different voices, opinions, actions and actions of others, many people, heroes of books... A dispute, disagreement arises. And this is the main thing in birth own attitude. Distortion of moral development occurs precisely when internal dispute fails.
3. Pedagogical communication, the emotional and moral atmosphere of the lesson, the learning environment - all this is interconnected with the personality of the teacher. The content of training, methods, techniques, tools seem to be “strung” on communication situations. “The mastermind of the educational process is the teacher,” writes S.A. Amonashvili.
4. Form of organization of training - lesson. And this component of the process of development of humane-personal relationships is determined by the personality of the teacher, who hears the subtle soul of the child, helps him rise to himself, to his dreams (V.A. Sukhomlinsky). A complex dramatic performance, where each question from the teacher is a one-act action. “Thin, fragile lace space” (L.N. Kulikova). “Living through destiny as a child” (Sh.A. Amonashvili). The unit of “human creation”, the moment of essential change in the child, virtual reality (A.M. Lobok). Educational and humane-personal relationships in the lesson contribute to living, personal knowledge. Such knowledge is inseparable from the personality, becoming a belief. This is an eternal feeling, the movement of a child, his response. “The lesson reaches its highest peak at the moment when the student’s moral consciousness, his mood, his tone, as psychologists say, are among the main concerns of the teacher.”
One cannot but agree with the luminaries of Soviet pedagogy, whose thoughts are still relevant and whose ideas are in demand. Similar work was carried out in the 2006-2007 academic year in literature lessons in the 8th grade, united by the common idea of “Tradition and Innovation”. After studying and detailed benchmarking Russian folk tale “The sun is in the forehead, there is a month on the back of the head, there are stars on the sides” and “The Tale of Tsar Saltan, of his glorious and mighty hero Prince Gvidon Saltanovich and beautiful princess Swans" by A.S. Pushkin, students were offered creative work, the meaning of which was to create their own fairy tale. But the heroes of the fairy tale were suggested by the teacher in the same way as the magic object.
Kharchenko Ekaterina suggested “The Tale of the stupid Snake Gorynych, the cunning moth and the self-shaking wallet.”
The Serpent Gorynych lived in the world.
He was a three-headed creature.
He was greedy and stupid
And he was friends with the white moth.
There was a malicious moth
And she continued to weave intrigues.
Many years ago
Mol and Gorynych decided
Defeat a platoon of evil dust.
Dust owned the wallet
Not simple, but by self-shaking.
In a thick wallet
There was a lot of different money.
The brave Gorynych wanted
Snatch the holey wallet
And buy yourself at the market
Real boots.
And in addition -
A yacht, a car, a dacha.
Moth is a malicious old lady,
Scratching his golden belly,
She said a bold word:
Gorynych, don’t rush!
Better look for an idea!
How to distract us from bad dust
And steal the wallet blindly?
And Gorynych answered her
Without saying yes or no,
He himself went into a terrible battle
And a fountain of passionate blood
It poured onto the human land.
At this time, pray quietly,
Having stolen a huge cannon,
She started shooting at everyone.
And while Gorynych fought,
The moth did not creep up in vain.
Having stolen a thick self-shaker,
She jumped up and danced...
The tale ends with a simple moral: “There are devils in still waters.” Perhaps this fairy tale will seem uninteresting and even rude to some, some will not even pay attention to it, but it seems to me that any child’s labor is worthy work, the result of his own thoughts and views on the reality around us, deserving the appreciation of an adult person. Why is this particular work given as an example? The fact is that Katya continued her work on writing humorous fairy tales and attracted 2 more classmates to her: Anastasia Baturina and Ekaterina Belomestnova.
All the girls are distinguished by their extraordinary thinking, they all still occupy leading positions in the class ranking in terms of academic performance, in addition, they are also involved in various sections in after school hours. This kind of work brought them together even more and allowed them to express themselves in a new way, which, of course, is an unconditional confirmation of the existence of subject-subject relationships in the lesson and beyond.
Undoubtedly, subject-subject relationships between teachers and students should be present in every lesson, especially since they are the fundamental beginning of humane-personal relationships and have a beneficial effect on the educational process.
Subject-subject relations and the “situation of success in learning” in the author’s system of E.N. Ilyin
“Each of us has one ideal and one goal - to “become a human being,” as F.M. Dostoevsky said. We simply have no other way to find the foundations and supports of internal well-being, moral stability in the euphoric hum of the negative, in the blurring of criteria and relationships, in the uncertainty of tomorrow... Never before has the mission of a teacher been so significant. The soul of a child truly becomes a battlefield between good and evil... only it is capable of withstanding any cataclysms, not neglecting itself, and therefore not becoming a toy in the hands of those forces that lie outside of it.” (E.N. Ilyin).
E.N. Ilyin is one of those teachers who saw the goal of their work in the education of a highly moral personality and therefore actively used in their work the methodology of subject-subject relations between teacher and student. The author's system of E.N. Ilyin was considered from different points of view, but I would like to present in my work an analysis of the program that was developed by G.K. Selevko. He presented the following characteristics of the author's system of E.N. Ilyin.
On approach to the child: personality-oriented.
According to the prevailing method: explanatory and illustrative with elements of dialogue, problem-solving, and creativity.
In the direction of modernization: humanization and democratization of pedagogical relations.
Moral and emotional education of the individual, during which the necessary training is carried out.
Teaching literature as art.
Mastering the fundamentals of science, which constitute the main content of educational subjects, creates the opportunity for students to develop a scientific worldview, views and beliefs necessary for modern man.
The principle of humanization: the moral potential of books gives rise to a special system of humanistic knowledge and beliefs.
Artisticity: a literature lesson is built according to the laws of art (artistic analysis of a work of art), the law of three ABOUT: O enchant with a book O to be a hero, O to bewitch the writer.
The principle of educational education: education is not a dominant absolute, but an integral part of the education program. In the process of educational activities, schoolchildren can develop such important personality qualities as patriotism, cognitive need, the need for continuous self-education and self-development, emotional sensitivity, aesthetic, moral foundations, respect and readiness to work.
Go to the children not only with the topic of the lesson, but with a burning problem.
The moral categories of communication with a book are more important than educational and theoretical tasks and exercises.
Knowledge through communication and communication through knowledge is a two-pronged process of moral development.
The very personality of teachers, class teachers, school leaders, their moral character, pedagogical skills can have the greatest impact on the formation of the personality of students, on nurturing in them the best qualities of citizens of our homeland.
The pedagogy of a wordsmith is a pedagogy of expression “word + feeling”.
The formula for a personal approach is: love + understand + accept + compassion + help.
Method of spiritual contact.
Democracy: communication with the student as a person spiritually equal to the teacher.
Subject teacher, artist, doctor.
The work and life of a language teacher cannot be separated.
Each work of art, the study of which is included in school curriculum literature course, contains many moral problems that are posed in it one way or another. Teacher Ilyin poses the question-problem, which serves as the core of the lesson, so that:
the question was burning, topical, and personally significant for modern students;
was, if possible, addressed not to students in general, but specifically to schoolchildren of a given class or even to a specific student;
answering it, resolving the problem contained in the question, required a thorough study of the work, textbook and additional literature, familiarization with the history of the work being studied and the biography of the author.
The method of introducing the student into the structure of the material through a “detail” - “question” - “problem” is universal and can be used by all teachers to create problem situations. The answer to the problems posed is organized in the form of a collective search, relaxed discussion, discussions organized or initiated by the teacher.
A literature lesson is:
1. a human-forming process, a lesson is communication, and not just work, it is an art, and not just an educational activity, life, and not hours on a schedule;
2. a unique one-act performance with several phenomena, the co-creation of two moralists - a writer and a teacher;
3. not arguments and facts, but discoveries;
4. joint activity of teacher and student on a creative basis, spiritual equality and interpersonal communication.
Every schoolchild studies in two programs. One of them is offered by the school, and the other, as a rule, is more real - a roommate, friends in the yard, sometimes one’s own father, who has lost his way. The teacher needs to take both of these programs into account.
Ilyin’s “second program” is influenced in every lesson: here there are essays about one’s friends, family and loved ones, and individual influence on the individual with vivid examples from literature, and original home “moral” assignments, heart-to-heart conversations in class and outside the lesson and much more.
In each case, E.N. Ilyin is guided by the goal of helping a teenager believe in himself, awakening in him the best personality traits, and leading him to the heights of humanism and citizenship.
Teaching and educating is like a zipper on a jacket: both sides are fastened simultaneously and tightly with a leisurely movement of the lock - creative thought.
School information, E.N. Ilyin is convinced, while largely saturating the mind, affects the feelings to a lesser extent. High school students, for example, do not keep diaries, read little, and do not write poetry. Everything will be applied to a person who is educated mentally, emotionally, and above all, companionship as the first and most urgent need of a developed soul.
A school teacher, no matter what creative manners and inclinations he professes, no matter how much of an erudite he is and no matter what he teaches: mathematics or physics, chemistry or drawing, is essentially and fundamentally an educator. What can we say about a literature writer, called upon by the morality of literature to form the ethical foundations of the individual, to develop his mental and spiritual potential?
Humane-personal relationships in the classroom as a manifestation of subject-subject relationships
The meaning of a teacher's life is the student! It determines his position and creative principles. E.N. Ilyin writes that for him, a lesson is art, because it is capable of educating a young soul, captivating life, “human affairs.” Therefore, in the analysis of a work of art, it is more rational to use the same means that the writer uses. Therefore, he builds a lesson on the basis of a bright constructive detail, a difficult moral question, or a creative technique.
Undoubtedly, Ilyin is right, because it is precisely through these means that humane-personal relationships can be achieved in the classroom. The desire to see and nurture the best in people is the meaning of our work.
An innovative teacher expresses an interesting idea: there is more in common between the literature classroom and the school workshop than it seems. It is expressed not only in enthusiasm and tension creative work mind and hands, but also in the need here and there to have your own perfect tool and skillfully use it. Such a tool in a literature lesson is the detail. The detail makes everything concrete, teaches you to talk with the guys at your level and theirs, in your own words and theirs. Teaches everyone to say better and more accurately. A detail is not an illustration of a thought, but the thought itself.
How a child’s thought develops in a literature lesson in high school, how a student’s monologue response is constructed, is most clearly visible through their written work. Thus, after an expressive reading of A.S. Pushkin’s poem “Gypsies,” the children were offered creative work on the topic “They don’t go to someone else’s monastery with their own rules.” The works are of a certain interest because the work was not discussed in class, not even an excerpt was analyzed, and no description of the main character was given.
Belomestnova Ekaterina: “...Aleko, who demands freedom for himself, does not want to recognize it for others, especially if this freedom affects his interests, his rights:
I'm not like that. No, I'm not arguing
I will not give up my rights;
Or at least I’ll enjoy revenge...
I believe that Aleko can be considered a hopeless egoist. He introduces into the camp the laws that persecuted him in his past life... And in our time, people want freedom and freedom, not understanding what these words mean. How these words mean a lot to some!”
Sakhnenko Ivan: “...Aleko appears in a gypsy camp, hiding from the law. He wants to find freedom among the gypsies, but it turns out that while he demands freedom for himself, he does not want to recognize it for others. Aleko imposes his rules on others, does the wrong thing... Such a person, with a similar understanding of life, can appear at any time and in any society. But such people will always be misunderstood and rejected.”
Baturina Anastasia: “Such a hero can certainly exist in our time. And in our time, a person who has committed a crime leaves one or another society. If we consider this issue not from the side of exile, but from the side of love, it turns out that Aleko killed his wife in the name of love. I know many similar cases when crazy people, obsessed with betraying a loved one, are ready to kill everyone in their path. Songs are still written based on such events.
They don’t go to someone else’s monastery with their own rules; It’s true, if you start forcing society to live according to your own laws, all this will not end very well for you. The same thing happened with the hero of A.S. Pushkin. Aleko decided to subordinate the gypsy camp to his laws, completely forgetting that gypsies have no laws at all..."
Kozlova Tatyana: “...This proverb expresses the main idea of the work. Aleko used to live in another world. According to other laws. When he came to live with the gypsies, he brought with him what he was used to doing and seeing around him. He left his past life not of his own free will, he was expelled. I thought what kind of murder, because he easily killed even later when he lived in the camp. He killed his rival and, most importantly, his beloved woman. He is an owner and did not accept the customs of the free people. For this he was expelled from the camp. It is unknown what awaits Aleko ahead, but if he does not change his views on life, his principles, he will forever be an exile.”
Davydova Victoria: “Aleko, main character poem - a fugitive from his environment. In a gypsy camp, among the simple free people, he strives to find his happiness. Little is known about the hero’s past: “he is persecuted by the law.” The hero’s accusatory speeches against the entire social order, in which “they are ashamed of love, they drive away thoughts, they trade with their will,” “they ask for money and chains,” and “they bow their heads before idols,” make one think about a possible conflict between Aleko and society. But the passions that controlled his soul could provoke another conflict that had personal reasons.
The love story of the hero and Zemfira ends with the murder of a young gypsy and indicates that Aleko craves freedom only for himself, denying others the right to it...
The poem shows the tragedy of modern individualism, and in the image of Aleko - the character of an extraordinary personality.”
Another work oriented students towards one of A.S. Pushkin’s small tragedies “Mozart and Salieri”; its topic was quite specific “Antipodean Heroes in A.S. Pushkin’s tragedy “Mozart and Salieri”. And again you can see the students’ interest, their desire to draw a parallel with modern times and present their vision of the problem.
Kharchenko Ekaterina: “Before us appear two people whose lives are closely connected with music, but the goals and motives of creativity are different... Salieri treats writing works as hard work, the well-deserved reward for which is success and fame:
Strong, tense constancy
I'm finally in limitless art
Reached a high level. Glory
Smiled at me...
Therefore, he does not understand Mozart’s “frivolous” attitude towards his great talent. For Mozart, music is always the joy of creativity, inner freedom. He is independent of the opinions of others... Mozart is alien to narcissism and pride, he does not elevate, but equates himself with everyone who knows how to feel the “power of harmony.”
I think that it is true talent and inner freedom that puts Mozart above Salieri, who will forever remain a loser after the death of his wonderful friend.”
Artamonov Alexey presented to our attention a work with the following content: “Everyone says: there is no truth on earth. But there is no truth - and there is no higher.” Pushkin begins the work with this phrase, and carries the same thought throughout the entire work. He combines two incompatible things: truth and lies, genius and villainy. “And I’m not a genius? Genius and villainy are two incompatible things. Not true". I don't agree either. Let Salieri be bad, let him be guilty, and I’m not trying to achieve an acquittal. He is guilty, no doubt, but who said that he is not a genius? After all, Mozart accepted him as an equal. He considered him a friend. “For your health, friend, for the sincere union that binds Mozart and Salieri, two sons of harmony.” We are all accustomed to considering them antipodes, two opposing personalities united by music. No. Like yin and yang: there is no pure good, nor is there pure evil. Everything in the world is connected.
“He’s a genius, and genius and villainy are two incompatible things. Isn’t it true?” No. There is only one path, the one you chose. He is yours, and you are neither good nor evil. As long as there is sun, there will always be wind, and it’s good that sometimes it hits you in the face.
“What about Bonarotti? Or is this a tale of a stupid, senseless crowd - and the creator of the Vatican was not the murderer?”
After more than three years of working at the gymnasium, I can say with confidence that each child is interesting in his own way and all child students deserve our attention. To win their attention is to win them themselves. E.N. Ilyin indicates a way out of this situation: “The one who came to the guys, and did not just enter them, will find a way out. The teacher needs to enter the classroom as he was in childhood, only matured and wiser. Look at everything through the eyes of distant childhood and correlate what the children want now with what they need tomorrow. The most difficult thing is to love their age in children, in essence, themselves.” It is necessary to love children, and this can only be done when the teacher goes to “his” children with a positive attitude, with confidence in his strengths and the children’s abilities, and always with a smile on his face. We must show the full depth of our souls, we must learn to love children, understand them, accept them for who they are, although this is often extremely difficult, and most importantly, help. After all, they always expect help from us. You only have to approach the child once, look into his eyes with sympathy and almost in a whisper explain what is now difficult for him to understand, and you can be sure that the child will never forget it. Surprisingly, children always understand everything correctly, especially if something is done for them from the heart.
In my opinion, humane-personal relationships are the basis of trusting, reciprocal relationships between teacher and student. Without them, it is impossible to build a lesson, it is impossible to achieve understanding and friendship, it is impossible to make a child become interested in his subject, it is impossible to learn how to organize your work correctly and competently.
Conclusion
Subject-subject relationships link not only lessons, but also teachers and students with an invisible core. A lesson cannot exist without relationships of this type. Even in a lecture lesson, they are there, because questions will definitely be asked from both the student and the teacher, and vice versa, some problems will definitely be discussed and analyzed.
Subject-subject relations are based on humane-personal ones. In any case, the teacher must keep in mind the personality, the individuality of each individual student in order for subject-subject relationships to be at the head of the pedagogical process. Therefore, I believe that the lesson can be considered successful only when these relationships have already been formed and consciously accepted by both parties.
In my opinion, it would be most appropriate to place it precisely at the conclusion of the lesson plan for the Russian language in grade 5 as evidence that subject-subject relationships take place not only in literature lessons.
Parts of speech in Russian (grade 5)
Methodological goal:
implementation of subject-subject relations in the course of solving educational problems.
Target: deepening students' knowledge of the classification of parts of speech in the Russian language.
Tasks: teach to identify parts of speech based on linguistic features;
develop students’ written and oral monologue speech, develop the ability to identify parts of speech based on linguistic features, and develop spelling vigilance;
to cultivate a sensitive attitude to the native word and the beauty of nature through the poems of A.N. Maykov and a photograph depicting an autumn landscape.
During the classes:
1. Organizational moment
2. Updating students’ knowledge
Vocabulary dictation: equip for the road, rapidly spinning, adorable child, moth, driller and mason, boastful boy.
What spelling patterns do these phrases demonstrate?
No matter what they say, grammar teaches nothing more than the correct use of language, that is, speaking, reading and writing correctly...
V.G. Belinsky.
Read the epigraph carefully and please highlight the key words.
Read this epigraph expressively?
What section of linguistics will we begin to study in today's lesson?
What do we mean by grammar today? (on page 100 you can find the answer to this question)
What does morphology study? Define morphology according to the textbook.
Tell us what you know about parts of speech in Russian?
Quickly review the text of the “Theoretical Information” section and determine which new does it contain information for you?
4. Consolidation of what has been learned
Exercise 267 - oral statement.
Using the diagram, talk about parts of speech in Russian. Illustrate your story with examples from the vocabulary dictation and the “Theoretical Information” section.
Work at the board (spelling analysis, selection of synonyms from the dictionary)
Sh..rina
S..mp..tic..ny ( beautiful, wonderful, attractive, interesting, handsome, charming, pretty, attractive, charming, captivating, charming, bewitching, charming, pretty, pleasant, sweet, nice )
B..sleep..coits..sya ( to worry, worry, be afraid, not know peace, feel anxiety, worry; take care of, care for, take care of)
Fill in and explain the missing spellings.
Find synonyms for the last 2 words; if necessary, seek help from the synonym dictionary on page 33, part 3)
Determine the part of speech of each word.
1 card
Add 3 words for each part of speech.
Nouns: tenderness, chop, silence, ....
Adjectives: fleeting, cheerful, cute, ....
2 card
Eliminate the third superfluous.
Red, cheerful, fun.
Sad, sad, tender.
We arm ourselves, belated, rage.
How did you determine? What helped in your reasoning?
Now let’s see what other linguistic features of a word need to be taken into account when determining the part of speech. (p. 102 “Know and Apply”)
1) - ut (run, guard)
2) –ist (radiant, silvery)
3) -chat (jagged, log)
4) –ovate (grayish, whitish)
5) -t (run, talk)
6) -ost (pity, stupidity)
7) -ami (rays, eyes)
8) -izn-a (whiteness, curvature)
9) -eat (think, reason)
What feature of identifying parts of speech are we currently working on?
What else needs to be considered when determining the part of speech?
Tell us what work you did at home for today's lesson?
Read autumn words - nouns, adjectives and verbs.
Exercise 271 (using material prepared at home, describe what they see in the photograph)
3-4 students read out the work.
What role do adjectives play in creating descriptive text?
What material from today's lesson did you already know?
What did you learn about for the first time?
What did you find more interesting?
What parts of speech did we work with today?
Which group do they belong to?
List the remaining parts of speech included in the group independent parts speeches?
Name other groups of parts of speech in Russian.
10. Homework
pp. 100-102 – theory
exercise 274 (write a short excerpt from your favorite poem, write the names of the parts of speech above the verbs, nouns and adjectives)
Literature
Amonashvili Sh.A. School of Life. – M., 1998.
Akhmetova M.N. Fundamentals of educational discipline modeling.-Chita.-1995.
Akhmetova M.N. Pedagogy of new times. Education.Part 1.-Chita.-2002.
Akhmetova M.N. Teacher and students: interaction, cooperative attitude. - Chita. - 1993.
Zelentsova A. Responsibility for trust.//Public education.-1998.
Ilyin E.N. The hero of our lesson.-M.-1991.
8. Podlasy I.P. Pedagogy.-M.-1999.
9. Selevko G.K. Modern educational technologies.-M.-1998.
10. Sidorkin A.M. Dialogue in education.//Public education.-1995.-No. 8-9.
Application
Russian language lesson in 7th grade
Subject
:
“Let's review what we learned in grades 5-7” (2005-2006 academic year).
Target : updating students' knowledge about alternating vowels in the root, about morphemic analysis of independent parts of speech, about syntactic analysis of a complicated simple sentence.
Tasks : repeat the spelling of words with alternating vowels at the root through vocabulary dictation; consolidate the ability to distinguish participial and participial phrases in a sentence; repeat morphemic analysis of changeable and unchangeable parts of speech;
promote the development of creative thinking of students and the development of written monologue speech;
contribute to the education of patriotism through the text of free dictation.
During the classes:
1. Organizational moment
2. Vocabulary dictation (working with the spelling “Alternating vowels”). Neotl O gentle, adj A adjective, adjective A become, nar A washing, washing O valued, m A whip, oz A to fuss, to rebel O survivability, ug A r, open A bow down, bow down O nyayamy, bl e stet, zap And fight, break up And fight, part e pour.
3. Checking homework
(read the words, following the pronunciation of sounds)
Was it interesting to complete the task?
What dictionaries did you work with?
Exercise 505 (copy the text, indicating participial and participial phrases, highlight roots with alternating vowels in words, perform morphemic analysis and syntactic analysis of a simple sentence with a complication)
2, the student copies the sentence at the board, placing punctuation marks, and performs a complete syntactic analysis. I admired the thunderstorm, sitting in a dark library, constantly deafened by thunder and blinded by some kind of tin green-white flame that illuminated the room with incredible light.
The rest of the children work on the exercise independently at this time.
Exercise 508 – reserve (parse an “artificial” sentence into sentence members, indicating how each of them is expressed, based on your knowledge of morphology)
5. Free dictation (preparatory stage for the final test)
The homeland is like a huge tree on which you can’t count the leaves. And everything we do good adds strength to him. But every tree has roots. Without roots, even a slight wind would have knocked it down. Roots nourish the tree and connect it to the earth. Roots are what we lived with yesterday, a year ago, a hundred, a thousand years ago. This is our story. These are our grandfathers and great-grandfathers, our ancestors. These are their works, silently living with us in the steppe stone women, in carved frames, in wooden toys and outlandish temples, in amazing songs and fairy tales. These are the glorious names of commanders, poets and fighters for the people's cause. A people without such deep roots is a poor people, no matter how fast its planes are, no matter how tall its buildings of aluminum and glass.
6. Summarizing the lesson through generalization
7. Homework (Using supporting material, write down nouns in the genitive plural form).
Russian language lesson in 8th grade
Subject:
“Another meeting with I.A. Krylov” (2006-2007 academic year).
Target: consolidation of students’ knowledge on the topic “The meaning of particles not and neither” using the example of I.A. Krylov’s fables.
Tasks: consolidate the ability to correctly use particles in writing; by analyzing fables, repeat and consolidate the meaning of the particles not and neither; identify the frequency of use of particles not and nor in fables and determine their role in literary texts;
promote the development of creative thinking of students and the development of oral monologue speech; introduce to reading Russian classical literature;
identifying the moral of the fable, foster a positive attitude towards positive qualities human character and a negative attitude towards human vices.
During the classes:
Krylov’s fables, of course... fables, but, moreover, something more...
V.G. Belinsky.
1. Organizational moment
2. Spelling work (insert the missing particles, explaining their spelling).
Krylov's fables - Not just fables: this is a story, a comedy, a humorous essay, an evil satire, in a word, whatever you want, just Not just a fable. (V.G. Belinsky)
Krylov is not in the best fables neither bears, neither foxes, although these animals seem to act in them, there are people, and Russian people at that. (V.G. Belinsky)
Write down your favorite statement in your notebook.
What can we, readers, according to the critic, see in I.A. Krylov’s fables?
We will see that the fabulist teaches a person to be a Man.
“Demyanov’s ear” (note in which episode the particles neither and nor are used more often).
2. Working with a passage that uses negative particles.
3. Designation of particles with a different meaning.
4. Working with morality (which particle is used?)
5. Write down this episode and highlight the particles not and nor in it, pay attention to the repeating particles nor.
6. How did you understand the meaning of the fable? What is her moral?
"The Cat and the Nightingale"
2. Which particles are used more often in the fable than others? Why?
4. Do not all particles give the same meaning to sentences?
5. What syntactic feature of particles can be illustrated with examples from this fable?
6. Write out any sentence from the fable and prove that the particle is not part of the sentence.
4. Independent work (Write down sentences with particles not and neither from the fable “The Pig under the Oak Tree”, highlight the particles and determine their meaning. Reveal the meaning of the fable, that is, the moral.)
5. Generalization
Reading and analyzing the fables of I.A. Krylov, we became convinced that the fabulist very often uses the particles not and nor in his texts, mainly using them in negative, affirmative and intensifying meanings. Thus, Krylov points out and exposes human shortcomings and vices, and calls on readers to sound reasoning.
What now, after studying 3 fables, can you say about the words of the critic V.G. Belinsky?
7. Homework (analysis of your favorite fable)
Self-analysis of the Russian language lesson in grade 5 “Parts of speech in Russian”
This lesson is an introductory one to the topic “Morphology”, which takes 6 hours to study.
During the lesson, I tried to show the possibility of establishing subject-subject relationships in the course of implementing educational tasks (methodological goal). Subject-subject relationships are established in the classroom to reveal the inner potential of students, which involves the use of an educational and methodological complex in the Russian language for the 5th grade of a comprehensive school, edited by S.I. Lvova.
The purpose of the lesson is to deepen students’ knowledge of the classification of parts of speech in the Russian language. Objectives: to teach how to identify a part of speech based on linguistic features; develop students’ written and oral monologue speech, develop the ability to identify parts of speech based on linguistic features, and develop spelling vigilance; to cultivate a sensitive attitude to the native word and the beauty of nature through the poems of A.N. Maykov and a photograph depicting an autumn landscape.
To establish subject-subject relationships in the classroom, children need to be prepared to perceive new material through updating previously acquired knowledge. This stage is necessary not only for determining the topic and setting the task for students, but also for the development of their cognitive activity.
During the frontal conversation, they recalled what was already known about the parts of speech, after which they turned to the “Theoretical information” section. After quickly looking through the material, the children determined which new information he contains.
Then, through an oral statement (exercise 267), work at the board with spelling analysis and selection of synonyms for the words cute and worry, and through exercise 272, where students, based on the presence of typical suffixes and endings in the word model, proved that the word belongs to a noun, adjective or verb, the acquired knowledge was being developed.
For implementation feedback subject-subject relationships, like developmental learning, presuppose creative task. Using material prepared at home, children write a miniature essay based on a photograph. After listening to several student works, we determined the role of adjectives in creating a descriptive text.
At the stage of reflection, each child, answering questions, realizes the new addition that he received to old knowledge. Homework involves continuing to work on the topic studied (in an excerpt from a favorite poem, children will find and write the names of the parts of speech above the verbs, nouns and adjectives).
Methods and methodological techniques of the lesson: miniature essay, oral statement; work with text ( expressive reading, fluent text reading), work with a dictionary of synonyms, spelling analysis of words... were achieved using the following forms: frontal survey, individual work, dialogue.
1. Broad and narrow definition of communication.
2. Dialogue as a characteristic of subject-subject relations.
3. Levels of communication analysis.
4. Structure of communication.
5. Types of communication.
6. Communication functions.
1. Kagan M.S.. World of communication. M., 1988, pp. 3-62 (the problem of communication in the history of culture); p.199-251 (types and varieties of communication); p.283-313 (functions of communication).
2. Kagan M.S., Etkind A.M. Communication as a value and as creativity // Questions of psychology,
3. Krizhanskaya Yu.S., Tretyakov V.P. Grammar of communication. L., 1990.
4. Lomov B.F. Methodological and theoretical problems of psychology. M., 1984, pp. 242-248 (communication as a basic category of psychology).
5. Sosnin V.A., Lunev P.A. Learning to communicate: mutual understanding, interaction, negotiations, training. M., 1993, pp. 12-50 (types of purposeful communication).
1. Bakhtin M.M.. Problems of Dostoevsky's poetics. M., 1972, p. 433-460 (dialogue with Dostoevsky)
1. Broad and narrow definition of communication
A person becomes an individual in the society of other people. This is due primarily to the fact that human activity is inherently social, collective, and distributed among people. In the process of communication, there is a mutual exchange of activities, their methods and results, as well as ideas, ideas, and feelings. Communication acts as an independent and specific form of activity of the subject. Unlike objective activity, the result of communication is not the transformation of an object, but a change in relationships between people. If objective activity can be described by the “subject-object” scheme (a person acts on an object), then communication covers a special class of relationships - subject-subject relationships, which are not influence, but interaction.
Communication- a complex, multifaceted process of establishing and developing contacts between people, generated by the needs of joint activities and including the exchange of information, the development of a unified interaction strategy, perception and understanding of another person(Concise Psychological Dictionary, 1985).
“Communication acts as the most important determinant of the entire mental system, its structure, dynamics and development” (B.F. Lomov), because:
1. In the process of communication, there is a mutual exchange of activities, their methods and results, ideas, ideas, and feelings.
2. Communication acts as an independent and specific form of activity of the subject; its result is not a transformed object, but relationship.
Therefore, for general psychology, it is of paramount importance to study the role of communication in the formation and development of various forms and levels of mental reflection, in mental development individual, in the formation individual consciousness, the psychological makeup of the individual, especially how individuals master historically established means and methods of communication and what impact it has on mental processes, states and properties.
Communication and psyche are internally connected. In acts of communication, a presentation of the subject’s “inner world” to other subjects takes place, and at the same time this very act presupposes the presence of such an “inner world.”
Communication is such a joint activity of people, the participants of which relate to each other and to themselves as subjects. In psychological terms, from this understanding of communication follows a complex of its cognitive, emotional and behavioral parameters:
Perception uniqueness partner;
Reliving it values;
Giving him freedom.
These are the determining factors of communication; their absence leads to a different type of communication. interpersonal interaction: management, service, communication (M.S. Kagan, Etkind).
Dialogue as a characteristic of subject-subject relations
The main characteristic of subject-subject relations is their dialogical .
The concept of “dialogue” was introduced by M. Bakhtin when analyzing Dostoevsky’s work. Dostoevsky's main achievement, according to Bakhtin, is a polyphonic novel, the peculiarity of which is that the ideological material is presented in a number of independent and contradictory philosophical constructs defended by its heroes. Among them, far from being in first place are the philosophical views of the author himself.
The dialogical method is a special way of presenting the inner world of heroes, which allows their personal contents to interact freely. The process of this interaction itself is a dialogue, and the forms of interaction are different kinds dialogical relationships.
Dialogue - free interaction of personal contents.
The unity of thought and attitude towards it is that indivisible unit between which interaction is possible.
Expressing one’s attitude towards an object means determining one’s position in the system of socially significant relations in relation to other people, and therefore presupposes a communicative attitude. Outside of a communicative situation, expressing one’s attitude towards any object has no meaning.
S.L. Bratchenko(Interpersonal dialogue and its main attributes/Psychology with a human face): dialogue, the dialogic principle is one of the most important elements of humanistic psychology, the humanitarian paradigm in psychology. Highlights the following main attributes of interpersonal dialogue:
Freedom of interlocutors;
Equality (mutual recognition of each other's freedom);
Personal contact based on empathy and mutual understanding.
“According to the humanistic tradition, the most important attribute of personality, one of the “existentials of human existence” (Frankl) is freedom. Accordingly, the initial definition at the interpersonal level: dialogue is free communication between free people, communicative form of existence of freedom. Dialogue “at the highest level” takes place where and insofar as people enter into communication as free sovereign individuals” (S. Bratchenko).
Liberty from external, extrapersonal goals, pragmatic interests, tasks of persuasion, which are oriented by leadership, education, rhetoric and other methods impact. Interpersonal dialogue does not have a specific goal at all, it is centered on the process, there is no “Dale Carnegie complex”, it is not the goal that is important, but consequences.
Equality. To operationalize this concept in the context of communication problems, a construct is proposed communicative rights of the individual(KPL). Among main ones:
To your value system;
To self-determination (to be a responsible subject, co-author of communication);
To dignity and its respect;
On individuality and originality, on difference from the interlocutor;
For independence and sovereignty;
To free, unregulated thought;
To thaw out your rights.
More private:
The right to a position, point of view;
To freely express one’s position (the right to vote);
To uphold and defend your position;
Trust on the part of the interlocutor (presumption of sincerity);
To understand the interlocutor, to clarify for oneself his position, point of view;
To a question to your interlocutor;
To doubt any judgments;
To disagree with the position of the interlocutor;
To express doubt or disagreement;
To change, develop your position, point of view;
To sincere delusion and error;
To feelings and experiences and their open expression;
To the intimate, non-public sphere;
Build communication on the principles of equality, regardless of the status of the interlocutor;
To end the conversation.
Levels of communication analysis
A specific psychological study of communication requires the development of ideas about its structure and dynamics. When examining the structure of communication, we can talk about three levels of analysis (Lomov):
I. Macro level- analysis of an individual’s communication is considered as the most important aspect of his lifestyle. This level involves the study of the development of communication in time intervals comparable to the duration of a person’s life.
Communication at this level can be viewed as a complex, evolving network of relationships. If we consider any such line, the first thing that will appear is discontinuity communication, change in its intensity.
Social institutions, class, family, and national relations determine who communicates with whom and for what reason. Here psychology merges with sociology. This level is fundamental in studies of personality, motivational sphere and interpersonal relationships. The range of psychological problems at this level:
Problems of development of forms of communication;
Their dependence on the norms, traditions and rules of behavior existing in a given society (group);
The relationship between communication and individual consciousness;
Age-related mental characteristics;
Development of character, abilities, needs and motives, formation of life plans, etc.
II. Mesa level refers to the study of individual contacts that people make. We are talking about those moments in their lives when they solve a particular problem together. In this complex process, we can highlight those moments that truly act as communication, as interaction. Each such moment can be called period of communication. The point here is not the duration, but the content, V topic.
At this level it is important to reveal dynamics communication, development of its topic, identify the means used, i.e. consider communication as a process during which the exchange of ideas, ideas, experiences, etc. takes place.
III. Micro level- the study of individual conjugate acts of communication, which act as its unique elementary units. The elementary unit of communication is precisely conjugate Act. It includes not only the action of one of the individuals, but also the associated co-action (or reaction) of the partner. Analysis of speech communication allows us to distinguish 3 main simple types of cycles:
message - attitude towards it
question answer
motivation to action - execution
These cycles can form complex shapes interactions, alternating in time, including each other, “intersecting”.
Communication structure
In any act of communication, three sides, or three interrelated aspects, can be distinguished. In the real process of communication, they are not separated from each other, but each of them has its own content and its own means of implementation:
Types of communication
The complexity and diversity of the communication process does not make it possible to classify types of communication on one basis. Depending on what is accepted as the basis for classification, the following types of communication can be imagined.
1. The basis for classification is subject-subjective scheme ( M.S. Kagan). Then the following stand out:
A. Communication with a real partner (with a real subject), which includes:
1) interpersonal communication;
2) representative communication (subjects act primarily as representatives of certain groups);
3) intergroup communication;
4) communication of cultures.
B. Communication with an illusory partner (with a subjectified object):
a) with animals;
b) with things;
c) with natural phenomena.
B. Communication with an imaginary partner (with a quasi-subject):
a) communication with yourself, with your second “I”;
b) with mythological and artistic images and their creators;
c) with the image of an absent real person.
©2015-2019 site
All rights belong to their authors. This site does not claim authorship, but provides free use.
Page creation date: 2016-08-20
480 rub. | 150 UAH | $7.5 ", MOUSEOFF, FGCOLOR, "#FFFFCC",BGCOLOR, "#393939");" onMouseOut="return nd();"> Dissertation - 480 RUR, delivery 10 minutes, around the clock, seven days a week and holidays
Altukhova Anna Anatolyevna. Formation of subject-subject relations between teacher and students in the educational process of a comprehensive school: Dis. ...cand. ped. Sciences: 13.00.01: Barnaul, 2004 203 p. RSL OD, 61:04-13/2671
Introduction
CHAPTER 1 Theoretical basis formation of subject-subject relations between teacher and students in the educational process of a comprehensive school
1.1 The problem of forming pedagogical communication 15
1.2. The essence of subject-subject relations in pedagogical interaction between teacher and students 42
1.3. Modeling the process of formation of subject-subject relations between teacher and students in the educational process of school 71
Conclusions on the first chapter 84
CHAPTER 2. Experimental work to identify the effectiveness of the model and program for the formation of subject-subject relations between teachers and students in the educational process
2.2. Analysis of the results of experimental work to identify the effectiveness of the model and program for the formation of subject-subject relations between teachers and students 131
Conclusions on the second chapter 157
CONCLUSION 159
REFERENCES 165
APPLICATIONS I85
Introduction to the work
Relevance of the topic dissertation is related to the fact that the problem of relationships in the educational process of school is becoming increasingly important and pressing for pedagogical science and general educational practice. This is determined primarily by the social essence of man as fundamentally intersubjective, the essence of which is that people live and act only in real connections and relationships with each other. Accordingly, the methodological basis for studying student relationships is to approach the student as a member of a team of adults and children, and not as an isolated individual, i.e. in the totality of the relationships into which he enters.
In this regard, the teacher faces important task formation of students’ value-based attitude towards the world around them, activities, people and themselves. According to the fair statement of A.S. Makarenko, when carrying out education, “we always deal with attitude, and it is attitude that constitutes the object of our pedagogical work.”
The category “attitude” is the most general “abstraction of the world”, which is used by philosophers, mathematicians, sociologists, linguists, psychologists and other researchers. Thus, the philosophical problem of relationships was touched upon in their works by G. Hegel, I. Kant, K. Marx, L. Feuerbach and others; a detailed idea of psychological relationships is given by the concept of V.N. Myasishchev, based on the ideas of A.F. Lazursky and developed in the works of B.G. Ananyeva, A.A. Bodaleva, A.G. Kovaleva, A.N. Leontyeva, M.I. Smirnova and others. The problem of a person’s relationship to another person and to himself was solved by V.A. Kan-Kalikom, Ya.L. Kolominsky, N.D. Nikandrov, N.N. Obozov, V.N. Panferov, A.V. Petrovsky, V.A. Rakhmatshaeva, M.V. Rudneva, R.Kh. Shakurov and others.
Pedagogical consideration of the problem in domestic science is presented in the works of N.K. Krupskaya, A.S. Makarenko, V.A. Sukhomlinsky, who
Some saw collective creative collaboration as the basis for communication between teachers and students. Innovative teachers (Sh.A. Amonashvili, I.P. Volkov, E.N. Ilyin, S.N. Lysenkova, etc.) made a significant contribution to the development of relationship pedagogy.
Currently, quite a large number of works are devoted to the relationship between teacher and students (A.Yu. Gordin, V.V. Gorshkova, Ya.L. Kolominsky, S.V. Kondratyeva, N.Yu. Popikova, G.I. Shchukina, N. E. Shchurkova and others). The teacher and student interact with each other during a rather crucial period in the development and formation of the student’s personality. In the educational process, the effectiveness of the formation depends on the relationships that develop between the teacher and students. personal formations students (A.A. Andreev, L.P. Aristova, V.S. Merlin, L.I. Bozhovich, G.I. Shchukina), academic success (L JT Bozhovich), a person’s character, his temperament (B.G. Ananyev) , the qualitative aspect of the activity performed (Sh.A. Amonashvili, V.N. Myasishchev), attitude to study (A.K. Markova), work (A.A. Ershov), the subject being studied (A.N. Leontyev) .
New target emphases require a significant change in the relationship in the pedagogical interaction between teacher and students, built on trust, respect, business cooperation and dialogue. The main guideline in the work of teachers with children should be such relationships in which each student, as well as the teacher, could realize their internal goals and needs. However, an analysis of the work of schools indicates a significant number of problems in the formation of humane relationships between teachers and students. Insufficient level of development of motives for interaction and communication, lack of emotional closeness and personal contacts between teacher and students, rare reference to the life experience of students, unclear understanding of each other and the meaning of the requirements - these are just a number of reasons.
complicating relationships in pedagogical interaction in a comprehensive school.
The unfavorable nature of the relationship is often generated by the traditional orientation of teachers towards the unilateral transfer of a system of knowledge, skills and abilities when solving educational and cognitive problems. Teaching continues to remain monological, the child solves the teacher’s problems, and his personal motives and learning goals remain outside the boundaries of pedagogical communication. At school, the authoritarian position of the teacher in relations with students is maintained, who are still perceived as students, and not as subjects of the educational process.
Building an alternative to traditional pedagogy, based on the principles of a humanistically oriented approach, where the main goal is the personal development of the child, and the main values are his freedom, creativity, initiative, activity and individuality in learning and expressing himself, brings to the fore questions about the formation of new subject-subject relations and the development of the child as a subject of educational and cognitive activity.
In this context, the search for a system of means that helps develop the student’s active subject position in the educational process seems to be one of the important steps towards the formation of subject-subject relations in a secondary school. According to the subject-activity approach, personality development occurs in the process of one’s own activity through understanding this activity and oneself in it in dialogical emotional contact with another person. The problem of educational activity and its subject is presented in the theory of educational activity by D.B. El-konina and V.V. Davydov, in the works of V.A. Vedinyapina, I.A. Zimnyaya, N.V. Zotikova, G.A. Tsukerman, V.I. Slobodchikova and others.
System-activity analysis of the relationship between teacher and students made it possible to identify dialogue as the basis of subject-subject relations. The basis for this was general methodological approaches to dialogue (M.M. Bakhtin, V.S. Bibler, L.S. Vygotsky, A.N. Leontiev, S.L. Rubinstein); consideration of dialogue in line with communication (I.I. Vasilyeva, T.A. Florenskaya, A.U. Kharash); study of dialogue in the context of student-centered education (N.A. Alekseev, V.V. Serikov, A.B. Orlov, I.S. Yakimanskaya, etc.) and the communicative approach in teaching a foreign language (I.A. Zimnyaya, A.A. Leontyev, E.I. Dialogue is based on the equality of communication partners, emotional openness and trust in the other person, accepting him as a value into one’s inner world. Interest in a significant other, in his knowledge, experience, bright qualities, positive assessment and respect contributes to the involvement of schoolchildren in the process of dialogic communication, during which subject-subject relationships are established.
However, the problem of the purposeful process of forming subject-subject relations, taking into account their specifics, conditions and principles of formation in a comprehensive school, remains poorly studied. In addition, the analysis of school practice indicated the insufficient effectiveness of the work being carried out to form subject-subject relationships in the educational process. As a rule, relationships between teachers and students most often develop spontaneously, without purpose. organized process from the teacher. main reason- this is the lack of sufficient systematic knowledge among teachers about the nature of relationships, about the ways and means of their formation.
In this regard, there is a contradiction between the need to form a new type of relationship between teacher and students and the insufficient development of this problem in the theory and practice of secondary schools.
The problem of the research is to determine the pedagogical conditions for the formation of subject-subject relationships between teachers and students in a secondary school.
Social significance And the pedagogical relevance of the problem, its insufficient theoretical development, as well as the need for practice determined the choice of the research topic: “Formation of subject-subject relations between teachers and students in the educational process of a comprehensive school.”
Target The research consists of developing a model and program for the formation of subject-subject relations between teachers and students in the educational process of a comprehensive school.
Object research is the pedagogical interaction between teacher and students in the educational process of a comprehensive school.
The subject of the study is the process of formation of subject-subject relations between teacher and students in the educational process of a comprehensive school.
The research hypothesis is that the process of forming subject-subject relationships between teacher and students in the educational process of a comprehensive school will be more effective if:
Formation of subject-subject relations between teachers and students
is seen as one of the specific goals of the educational process, I need
contained in special content and procedural support;
Design tool this process acts structurally
functional model that performs normative and criterion functions
tions and including target, organizational, content and results
ny blocks;
in the activities of a teacher, a democratic style of relations prevails, and the dominant form of communication between teachers and students is dialogue;
the formation of subject-subject relationships is carried out in the process of personality-oriented pedagogical interaction, organized in the unity of need-motivational, emotional, communicative-activity and evaluative-reflective components;
the system of means, forms and methods of teaching used corresponds to the general logic, conditions and principles of the formation of subject-subject relations and ensures the student’s subjective position in educational activities.
To test the hypothesis and achieve the goal, the following research objectives were set:
To study the theoretical and methodological foundations of the problem of pedagogical interaction between teacher and students in the educational process of a comprehensive school.
Based on system analysis, clarify the didactic essence of the concept of “subject-subject relationship between teacher and students”, identify criteria, indicators and levels of their formation.
To substantiate a set of pedagogical conditions, forms and methods of teaching that ensure the formation of subject-subject relationships between teachers and students, and in accordance with this, develop a teacher activity program for the formation of subject-subject relationships in the educational process.
To experimentally test the effectiveness of the model and program of organizational and pedagogical activities of the teacher in the formation of subject-subject relations between the teacher and students in the educational process of a comprehensive school.
The theoretical and methodological basis of the study was the general theory of relations formulated by A.F. Lazursky, V.N. Myasishchev and others, the theory of interpersonal relationships in psychology and pedagogy (A.A. Bodalev, V.V. Gorshkova, D.S. Grasmane, M.S. Kagan, N.N. Obozov, etc.), general theoretical provisions of domestic psychologists about personality as an active subject of life and relationships (B.G. Ananyev, G.S. Arefieva, I.A. Zimnyaya, Ya.L. Kolominsky, S.L. Rubinshtein, D.I. Feldshtein, etc.), about the problems of subjectivity (K. A. Slavskaya, L. I. Antsyferova, A. V. Brushlinsky, V. A. Petrovsky, V. I. Slobodchikov, A. K. Osnitsky, etc.), provisions of the theory of subject-activity approach to training and education (V.V. Davydov, L.I. Bozhovich, A.N. Leontyev, V.S. Merlin, V.I. Slobodchikov, G.A. Tsukerman, D.B. Elkonin, G.I. Shchukina etc.), ideas of a person-oriented approach (N.A. Alekseev, E.V. Bondarevskaya, K. Rogers, V.V. Serikov, E.F. Shirokova, P.A. Sheptenko, N.E. Shchurkova , I.S. Yakimanskaya, etc.).
In addition, the theoretical understanding of the problem posed was facilitated by studies devoted to dialogue communication (M.M. Bakhtin, M. Buber, V.S. Bibler, S.Yu. Kurganov, V.D. Shadrikov, etc.); the basics of psychology of adolescence (L.I. Bozhovich, L.S. Vygotsky, A.N. Leontiev, D.B. Elkonin, etc.), the communicative activity approach in the process of teaching a foreign language (I.A. Zimnyaya, G A. Kitaygorodskaya, V.P. Kuzovlev, E.I. Passov, etc.
Research methods. The complexity of the processes being studied required the use of a set of methods corresponding to certain stages of the study; theoretical analysis of philosophical and psychological-pedagogical literature on the research problem, study and generalization of pedagogical
experience, modeling the process of forming subject-subject relationships between teachers and students, experimental work, including ascertaining, formative and control experiments, pedagogical observation, sociological methods (survey, questionnaire, testing), analysis of the products of students’ activities (creative works, drawings, essays), method expert assessments, mathematical and statistical processing of experimental data.
The experimental base of the study was secondary schools No. 80, No. 41, No. 102 in Barnaul.
A number of interrelated stages can be distinguished in the study:
At the first stage (1999-2001) - search and theoretical - an analysis of the state of the problem was carried out, the initial theoretical and methodological basis research, the purpose, objectives and general hypothesis of the study were formulated, the content and course of the experimental work were determined, diagnostic methods were modified, a confirmatory experiment was carried out and the data obtained were analyzed.
At the second (2001-2002) stage - experimental - a model and program for the formation of subject-subject relationships in the pedagogical interaction between teacher and students was developed; a formative experiment was conducted, during which the model and program of organizational and pedagogical activity of a teacher in the formation of subject-subject relations in school was tested.
At the third stage (2001-2003) - final and generalizing - the systematization and interpretation of experimental materials was carried out, the results of the study were determined; methodological recommendations have been developed for the formation of subject-subject relationships in the process of learning a foreign language, completed literary design dissertations.
Credibility And validity The obtained results and conclusions are provided by the initial methodological positions of the study, the integrated use of theoretical and empirical methods adequate to the purpose, object, tasks and logic of the work, practical confirmation of the main provisions of the study, quantitative and qualitative processing of the data obtained.
The most significant results obtained personally by the applicant, their scientific novelty and theoretical significance:
A structural-functional model of the formation of subject-subject relations between teachers and students in the educational process of a comprehensive school has been constructed, which performs normative and criterion functions and includes target, organizational, and content And effective blocks, through which focus is ensured And integrity of the process of formation of subject-subject relations;
The principles (subjectivity, dialogicity, coordination and diatropism) and organizational and pedagogical conditions for the formation of subject-subject relations of the teacher are substantiated And students (definition and awareness by the teacher of goals, objectives and ways to solve the identified problem; study of the specifics, structure and mechanisms of formation of subject-subject relations; creation and implementation in practice of technologies that contribute to the formation of subject-subject relations; teacher’s choice of methods and methods for diagnosing levels of subject formation -subjective relations between teacher and students; systematic approach to the organization of pedagogical interaction).
The process of formation of subject-subject relations in the pedagogical interaction between teacher and students through the unity of need-motivational, emotional, communicative-activity and evaluative-reflective components is revealed:
a) the need-motivational component is focused on training
students to joint activities and communication with the teacher in the educational process
se. The criterion formed by subject-subject relations on a given
stage, the personality is directed towards another, corresponding in
indicators are: students’ conscious readiness to cooperate and
dialogue with the teacher, having a positive attitude towards another person,
showing interest in the personality of the teacher, subject, training sessions, etc.
b) the emotional component is based on the experiences that come with
there is a qualitative originality in the relationship of the individual to the teacher, activity, to
to yourself. The main criterion for the formation of subject-subject relations
is satisfaction with the relationship with the teacher, and positive
the nature of emotional and moral manifestations and the presence of such qualities and abilities
abilities, such as the openness of partners in communication, the desire to achieve
mutual understanding, non-judgment, trust, ability to empathize
Vania, emotional support, respect, etc. - main indicators.
c) the communicative-activity component is expressed in communication
tive, learning and interactive activities of students. Formation
subjective position of students, equivalence of positions of teacher and students,
development communication skills actualize the manifestation of such methods
qualities and qualities such as initiative, contact, tolerance, uniqueness
creativity, creative attitude towards mastering subject knowledge, method
passion for free choice of tasks and communication partners, mutual assistance,
independence, self-confidence, mutual understanding through dialogue, etc.
d) the evaluative-reflective component functions on the basis of reflection
these behavioral reactions and analysis of the relationships that determine them in the pedagogy
ogical interaction between teacher and students (self-esteem, self-attitude
tion, self-control).
4. Forms and methods of teaching have been identified that ensure the systematic, purposeful formation of subject-subject relations and, as a result, a gradual transition from formal-role (subject-object) relations between teacher and students to equal personal-business relations of subjects of the educational process.
Practical significance of the study consists in the development and use in the educational process of a comprehensive program for the formation of subject-subject relations between the teacher and students. The work identifies criteria and indicators of the formation of subject-subject relationships, and presents diagnostic techniques that allow one to determine the level of their formation. Theoretical provisions and conclusions are brought to specific methodological recommendations “Formation of subject-subject relations in the pedagogical interaction of teachers and students of secondary schools.”
The following main provisions are submitted for defense:
Subject-subject relations are internal characteristic and the result of pedagogical interaction organized With taking into account the laws of the educational process, the conditions for the implementation of personality-oriented and subject-activity approaches to learning and the principles of the formation of subject-subject relationships (dialogical, subjectivity, diatropicity and coordination).
The means for designing the purposeful process of forming subject-subject relationships between teachers and students is a structural-functional model that performs normative and criterial functions and includes target, organizational, content and effective components.
The leading factors influencing the process of formation of subject-subject relations in the educational process are personal-
oriented pedagogical interaction, developed subjective position of students, dialogical style of communication between teacher and students.
The main structural elements of educational interaction aimed at the formation of subject-subject relationships are: need-motivational, emotional, communicative-activity and evaluative-reflective.
The purposefulness and consistency of the process of forming subject-subject relations between teachers and students are determined by organizational and pedagogical conditions And a set of dialogic tasks aimed at organizing educational dialogue (polylogue), development and self-realization of students as subjects of educational activity.
Testing and implementation of results research was carried out through publications and presentations at all-Russian (Barnaul - 2000, Tver - 2001, Birsk - 2002) and interregional (Bisk - 2000, Shadrinsk - 2002) scientific and practical conferences, as well as at meetings of the Department of Pedagogy of Barnaul State Pedagogical University and pedagogical councils of secondary schools No. 80 and No. 41 in Barnaul.
Structure and scope of the dissertation. The dissertation consists of an introduction, two chapters, a conclusion, a list of references and appendices. The total volume of the dissertation is 203 pages. The work contains 12 tables, 4 figures, and a diagram. The list of sources used includes 254 titles, 10 of them in a foreign language.
The problem of forming pedagogical communication
In psychological and pedagogical research, the category of “relationships” is fundamental, along with such categories as personality, subject, activity, interaction and communication. Adhering to the objectives of the study, we will focus on considering the relationship between these concepts. Recently, the problem of interaction between teacher and students and the problem of relationships in the educational process have been most intensively developed in line with the theory of communication. And this is not accidental, because... Pedagogical communication can be called any interaction between a teacher and students, carried out for the purpose of his upbringing, education and development. On the other hand, pedagogical interaction is realized through pedagogical cooperation and communication. Both the first and second are specific types of interaction. Existing separately, communication is an integral part of interaction, creating a psychological atmosphere for it. So, I.A. Zimnyaya defines pedagogical communication as “a form of implementation of educational interaction, cooperation of subjects - teachers and students.” The ever-increasing interest in the problem of communication in general, social and educational psychology is due to the active formation of new expanding connections and relationships between people. Accordingly, the category of communication in its broad sense includes the joint activity of communicating people, interaction and Let us dwell on the most basic thing that determines communication as a whole, and then move on to the features of pedagogical communication, the formulation of the problem and the study of which are most comprehensively presented in the works of A.A. . Leontyeva, V.A. Kan-Kalika, V.V. Ryzhova, SV. Kondratieva and others.
When analyzing various approaches to the problem of communication, a main contradiction was discovered between the understanding of communication as one of the types of human activity (M.S. Kagan, A.A. Leontiev, M.I. Lisina), as one of the parts of activity (A.N. Leontiev , V.V. Ryzhov) and as a side of human existence separate from activity, i.e. as an independent and specific form of social activity of the subject (B.F. Lomov).
Definitions of the essence of communication were proposed depending on its correlation with the concept of activity. The nature of this relationship is understood ambiguously by different authors. So, A.N. Leontyev considers communication as an aspect of activity that is included in any of its types and is its element. The activity itself is considered as a condition of communication. M.S. Kagan also suggests not artificially separating communication and activity, presenting them in the form of a single system of subject-object-subject relationships. A.V. Mudrik, considering this problem from a pedagogical perspective, comes to the conclusion that it is advisable to highlight free communication as special type activities. Another point of view is presented by B.F. Lomov, who considers activity and communication as two aspects of human social existence, classifying them as independent but interconnected forms of human activity: “subject-object”, “subject-subject”. Following B.F. Lomov, we believe that communication and activity are independent, specific forms of social activity of the subject, which in the real process of life are closely connected with each other and are in a state of dialectical mutual influence. And therefore, both the identification of these concepts, the reduction of communication to a type of activity, and their absolute opposition, which ignores the really existing connections in the process of an individual’s life, are incorrect.
Different opinions of scientists on the problem of correlating the concepts of communication and activity bring them together in the main thing - the study of communication is impossible outside the context of the joint activity of people, their cooperation. B.F. Lomov notes in this regard that “further development of general psychological theory requires a transition to the analysis of the joint activities of individuals, which takes place in conditions of communication with each other.” And the discussion here should not be about the motive of one of the subjects, but about the “relationship of the motives of communicating individuals,” not about a system of partners’ actions alternately directed at each other, not about “adding, superimposing parallel developing activities on one another, but about the interaction of subjects.” . According to J. Janousek, the category of communication includes “the internal connection of joint activity, interaction and mutual relations, and thus expresses the procedural aspect of social relations.”
relationships. This can be represented schematically as follows:
The essence of subject-subject relations in the pedagogical interaction between teacher and students
The category “attitude” is the most general “abstraction of the world”, which is used by philosophers, mathematicians, sociologists, linguists, psychologists and other researchers. IN various sources There are many approaches to defining the concept of “attitude”.
Thus, a relationship (in philosophy) is a moment of interconnection between phenomena or elements of a certain system (L. Hegel, K. Marx, L. Feuerbach). A necessary condition for this relationship is interaction. Being endowed with activity and consciousness, the subject, establishing relationships with the objective world and with other people, always acts as a partial being, since emotions are organically included in the structure of consciousness (L.S. Vygotsky, A.N. Leontiev, S.L. Rubinstein ). Accordingly, a relationship is not only a moment of interconnection between elements, but also a method (genus) of cognition 151, p. 177.
In psychology, an individual’s attitude to others and the world is considered from different positions: 1) as “connection, dependence,” for example: “Attitude is the objective and subjective connections that exist between people in social groups” (A.V. Petrovsky); “A relationship is a really active connection within the framework of “subject - object” and “subject - subject” (D.N. Uznadze);
2) as “opinion, assessment, emotional perception, understanding of something or someone.” Thus, in a series of studies conducted under the leadership of A.A. Bodalev, the subject of the study of interpersonal relations is ideas about the other (about his social and personal qualities), arising as a result of interpersonal perception and cognition. “Personal relationships are a subjectively significant emotional-cognitive personal reflection of a person by a person” (Ya.L. Kolominsky).
3) as “attitude, expression internal position person to reality" (D.N. Uznadze, L.I. Bozhovich, O.S. Ulyanova).
From our point of view, the presented approaches to understanding the phenomenon of relationship can be generalized in the definition given by A.A. Bodalev: “Attitude is understood as a psychological phenomenon, the essence of which is the emergence in a person of a mental formation that accumulates the results of cognition of a specific object of reality (in communication this is another person or a community of people), the integration of all emotional responses to this object, as well as behavioral responses on him" .
Modern concept personality relations is based on the ideas of A.F. Lazursky. The scientist showed that a person’s mental life does not exist without relationships, that the subject of relationships is the personality as a whole, and the object is reality. “Each relationship is characterized by how he (the person) loves and hates, what he is interested in and what he is indifferent to.” Having a subjective-emotional orientation, relationships thus represent a person’s emotional reactions to specific objects of reality. It is generally accepted that A.F. Lazursky introduced the concept of personal relationships and identified 15 groups of relationships, which are based on the most significant objects of reality for a person: relationships to nature, to people, social groups, family, work, etc. Subsequently, this typology was concretized and refined.
The psychological theory of personality relations in Russian science was continued and developed by V.N. Myasishchev. In his works, the scientist substantiates the significance of a person’s relationship to reality, defining through it personality “as a system of a person’s relationship to the surrounding reality, which is formed in interaction with various aspects and objects of this reality.” The close relationship between a person and the world has two sides: external and internal. The internal, conscious, experience-based side of a person’s relationship with himself, others and the world is the direct relationship that is expressed in the actions, reactions and experiences of the subject, the external side of this connection is interaction. The author substantiates the closeness of the analyzed concepts and at the same time shows their irreducibility to each other. “Relationship plays a significant role in the nature of the interaction process and, in turn, represents the outcome of the interaction. Those experiences that arise in the process of interaction destroy or reorganize relationships." However, “although there is a close connection between the process of interaction between people and their relationships, both of these concepts are not identical and do not replace each other.
Content and organization of experimental work on the formation of subject-subject relationships between teacher and students in the educational process (using the example of learning a foreign language)
In experimental work, we sought to implement the conditions for the formation of subject-subject relations laid down in the hypothesis and presented in the model.
So, we needed to test the developed model of the formation of subject-subject relationships in the pedagogical interaction of a teacher and students of a secondary school.
In general, the strategy and methodology of the experiment lead us to the development of a holistic program for organizing and implementing the process of forming subject-subject relationships, which requires targeted, substantive and methodological support. Considering that the research is stage-by-stage, each of them solves its own problems.
The materials of the first chapter made it possible, in theoretical terms, to clearly document the existence of a contradiction between the need to solve didactic tasks recorded in S-85, and the unpreparedness of the majority of teachers for such activities.
At the same time, it was very important to confirm the presence of this contradiction in the practice of secondary schools. For this purpose, we conducted a confirmatory experiment, the main objectives of which were:
1. to prove, through a mass survey of teachers and students of secondary schools, the relevance and significance for respondents of the problem considered in our study;
2. determine the degree of readiness of teachers and students to solve this problem;
3. find out to what extent the pedagogical conditions of the generally accepted education system ensure the formation of subject-subject relationships in school;
4. compare the results obtained in solving the above problems and find out whether the aforementioned contradiction exists in the modern practice of secondary schools;
5. identify teachers’ and students’ vision of ways to resolve the contradiction.
The ascertaining stage of the study was carried out over a year in secondary secondary schools No. 80, 41, 102 Barnaul. The respondents were students of the fifth, seventh and eleventh grades and subject teachers. A total of 256 people (184 students and 72 teachers) took part in the study.
Basic diagnostic methods: questioning of teachers and students, experimental conversation, observation of the behavior of children and teachers during lessons and breaks; verbal portrait method - students writing an essay on the topic “The teacher through my eyes”; ranking of teacher's value qualities.
At the ascertaining stage of the experimental study, in order to get acquainted with opinions on the state of relationships between teachers and students, we conducted a survey. The texts of the questionnaires for students and teachers are given in the appendix (Appendices 1, 2). Let's analyze the data obtained.
Assessing the existing nature of the relationship between the teacher and students at school, 71% of all students we surveyed noted that the teacher and students are mainly connected by functional relationships (teacher teaches - students learn). Only 17.5% of students indicated the presence of cooperative relationships. Therefore, more than half of the students believe that the teacher pays them as much attention and time as his position requires. 37.5% of schoolchildren believe that the teacher does not care how they feel, and only 10.3% think that the teacher understands and empathizes with them. As a result, only 15.1% of students believe that their relationships with teachers are what they imagine them to be, and 59.4% of students are not satisfied with the existing relationships at school and would like to change them. At the same time, 2/3 of respondents claim that the nature of the relationship between the teacher and students and the process of their formation depends on the personality of the teacher himself. To assess the professional and personal qualities of a teacher necessary for the formation of subject-subject relationships, students were offered an appropriate methodology (Appendix 3).
N.V. Nasurova, Chelyabinsk
SUBJECT-TO-SUBJECT INTERACTION IN THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS AT PRESCHOOL ORGANIZATION N. V. Nasurova
The article is devoted to the problem of the relationship between teacher and student. The author examines the features of subject-subject interaction between participants in the educational process; analyzes the main elements of humane subject-subject relations between teacher and student.
The article is dedicated to the problem of relations between a teacher and a student. The author deals with features of the subject-to-subject interaction among participants of training and research activities; analyzes some basic elements of humane subject-to-subject relations between a teacher and a student.
Keywords:
subject-subject interaction in the system "teacher-pupil" , humane subject-subject relations.
Keywords:
subject-to-subject interaction in the theme “teacher – student”, humane subject-to-subject relations.
The main goal of subject-subject interaction is the development of the student’s personality, which is the main value of the educational process in a preschool educational institution. The function of the teacher is to organize the learning environment and create conditions for personal development. Subject-subject relations between participants in the educational process have the following characteristic features:
- active position of the student in the process of activity
- joint problem solving as ways of interaction
- game, dialogue, work in small groups, as the main organizational forms, realizing humanistic relations
- the permissibility of the coexistence of opposing points of view.
The advantages of subject-subject interaction were experimentally proven by V. V. Davydov, L. V. Zankov, D. B. Elkonin within the framework of developmental education systems and identified empirically by innovative teachers Sh. A. Amonashvili, E. N. Ilyin and others .
Subject-subject interaction presupposes:
- the desire of students to develop a problematic vision
- encouraging students to ask questions
- establishing similarities between different phenomena or hidden differences between the original phenomena.
Having analyzed the materials of E. V. Bondarevskaya, E. N. Krolevetskaya, O. S. Ulyanova , we came to the conclusion that subject-subject interaction presupposes the development of humanistic relations between teacher and student in a holistic educational process.
Trusting relationships between teacher and student play an important role in building humane relationships. Trusting relationships are relationships of mutual respect, naturalness and openness. The criterion for ensuring trust between teacher and student is "relational harmony" .
Trusting relationships between participants in the educational process contribute to the full development of the student and the implementation of the research skills of each individual.
Cooperation in the language of psychological science is the organization of subject-subject relations in joint activities. Its most important features are:
- awareness of a common goal, which mobilizes the teacher and student
- high organization of joint activities of participants in the educational process, their common efforts
- mutual trust, goodwill, mutual assistance in case of difficulties.
- interaction of students with each other, their business communication and collective responsibility for the result of common activities.
Cooperation is not an end in itself; it is established so that the student gains knowledge and skills, experience in communication and social activity.
One of the tasks of the teacher is to intensify the activities of students and manage their activity. In other words, the teacher must constantly encourage students to energetic and purposeful learning, using various ways to activate motivational resources. Scientists (A. A. Petrusevich, M. N. Shabarova, I. Yu. Serousov ) highlight incentives for intensifying educational activities of students: encouragement and their desire for new achievements.
One of the strong motives of the educational process is interest. In his studies, L. S. Vygotsky notes that the interest of pupils should not be associated only with praise, fear, the desire to please, etc. The interest of pupils, in his opinion, arises and is maintained if the educational system is built “in close proximity to life, teaches children what interests them, begins with what is familiar to them and naturally arouses interest” .
It is fundamentally important that every time the student experiences the joy of discovery, so that he develops faith in his own strengths and cognitive interest. The interest of students is related to the level and quality of acquired knowledge, the level of developed methods of mental activity.
Personal attitudes of the teacher that are most adequate to humanistic teaching. We highlight the following as the main personal attitudes of a teacher:
"Openness" the teacher’s own thoughts, feelings, experiences and the ability to freely express them in interpersonal communication with students. As V. A. Petrovsky emphasizes , “behind the professional role of “educator” a universal relation of man to man emerges, which consists in the fact that by their actions, sometimes against their will, people change each other’s living conditions, revealing their ideal representation and continuation in the life of another”; expression of the teacher’s inner confidence in the capabilities and abilities of each student.
"Empathetic Understanding" , i.e., the teacher’s vision of the student’s behavior, assessment of his reactions, actions, and actions from the point of view of the student himself. "Empathetic Understanding" allows the teacher, according to the American scientist K. Rogers, "stand in someone else's shoes" , look at everything around you, including yourself, through the eyes of children . In situations in which the teacher understands and accepts the inner world of the students, behaves naturally and, in accordance with his inner experiences, treats them kindly, he creates all the necessary conditions for humanistic communication.
With humane subject-subject relations, the educational process acquires personal significance for the student and is colored by vivid experiences: surprise at own discoveries, the joy of self-promotion, satisfaction with your results.
Bibliography:
- Bondarevskaya E.V. Humanistic paradigm of personality-oriented education // Pedagogy. 1997. No. 4. pp. 11–17.
- Borzenko I. M., Kuvakin V. A., Kudishina A. A. Fundamentals of modern humanism. M.: Ross. humanist. o-vo, 2002. 350 p.
- Petrova V. Pedagogical cooperation, or When you like to learn and teach. M.: September, 1999. 128 pp.; Tatenko V. O. Subject of mental activity: search new paradigm// Psychol. magazine 1995. T. 16. No. 3. P. 23–34.
- Petrusevich A. A., Shabarova M. N. Pedagogical conditions for enhancing vocational training // Specialist. M., 2000. No. 8; Serousov I. Yu. Activation of cognitive activity of students // Ibid. 2001. No. 4.
- Vygotsky L. S. Pedagogical psychology / pod. ed. V.V. Davydova. M.: Pedagogika, 1991. 480 p.
- Petrovsky V. A., Kalinenko V. K., Kotova I. B. Personal development interaction. Rostov n/d.: Tsvet. print, 1995. 88 p.
- Rogers K. R. Client-centered psychotherapy: theory, modern practice and application. M.: April-Press, Eksmo-Press, 2002. 512 p.