Session Information
22 SES 12 B, Training Teachers and Medical Doctors
Paper Session
Contribution
Rapid changes in various spheres of social life set new parameters for the functioning of the education system and at the same time pose new challenges for it. According to the opinions of many sociologists, economists and futurists, all developed countries have taken a course towards the formation of a knowledge economy. In these conditions, it becomes more obvious that the main value is not material wealth, but intelligence.
Society makes new demands on the professional training of teachers. So, along with the formation of such competencies in future teachers as the readiness to master new information in the shortest possible time, to study independently and to find effective ways to solve non-standard professional tasks, there is the need to develop their cognitive abilities, namely, of research thinking.
Attention should be paid to a number of existing contradictions related to the requirements for the training of future teachers in the VUCA-world: 1) at the socio-pedagogical level: between an increasingly complex society that needs teachers with highly developed cognitive competencies, capable of scientifically based professional activity, and the insufficient readiness of the pedagogical education system to satisfy this need; 2) at the scientific and theoretical level: between the modern system of future teachers' training and the lack of a holistic model of future teachers' research thinking development.
A research problem arises: what should be the process of preparing future teachers, focused on the development of their research thinking? The purpose of this study is to develop, theoretically substantiate and test a model for the development of future teachers' research thinking in the process of teaching pedagogical disciplines.
The analysis of psychological and pedagogical literature showed that the development of a model of research thinking development, which makes it possible systematizing knowledge about research thinking and trace the connections between its components, will contribute to the development of future teachers' research thinking.
The structure of the model of future teachers' research thinking development includes the following blocks. The organizational-target block, reflecting:
- the social order to higher educational institutions (future teachers training with a high level of research thinking development);
- the goal of the modeled process (development of future teachers' research thinking);
- priority tasks: teaching, developmental and educational.
The methodological block contains:
- the definition of approaches, the leading of which are the system-activity and research approaches;
- principles of the research thinking development process (cultural, synthesis of intelligence, affect and action; the right to make a mistake; simplicity and optimality; etc.);
- psychological and didactic conditions of future teachers' research thinking development (psychological: determining the leading types of activity, related to the sensitive characteristics of student age, formation of motivation for research activities; didactic: formation of students' research skills and research culture, activization of mental operations.
Technological block containing the stages of future teachers' research thinking development: (‘sensitization’; ‘comprehension’; ‘reflection’). Each stage is filled with its own specific content, which is determined by the logic of the development of research thinking;
The evaluative-effective block of the model provides the assessment and determination of the actually achieved levels of research thinking development.
The model we have developed allows us to determine the target guidelines and the algorithm for the actions of university teachers, the approximate content of their activities to develop future teachers' research thinking and ways to determine the actually achieved levels.
It can serve as the basis for the teacher's choice of the optimal strategy for organizing the process of developing research thinking in future teachers, taking into account their sensitive characteristics and intellectual capabilities in the process of studying at a university.
Method
The experimental work took place in several stages. According to the developed model, at the preparatory stage, a questionnaire was developed to determine the levels of students’ (bachelors) research thinking development. The ascertaining experiment involved 412 future teachers of 1st and 2nd year studied the discipline ‘Theory of Education’ in: Elabuga Institute and Institute of Psychology and Education of Kazan Federal University, Naberezhnye Chelny State Pedagogical University, South Ural State Humanitarian Pedagogical University, Southern Federal University, Adyghe State University, Nizhny Novgorod State Pedagogical University, Glazov State Pedagogical Institute, Altai State Pedagogical University. As a result of the ascertaining experiment (the questionnaire ‘Methodology for determining the levels of future teachers’ (bachelors) research thinking’), it was revealed that 32.8% of the surveyed students can be attributed to the critically low level of research thinking development; 35.2% of respondents refer to a low level; the optimal level is possessed by 24% of students; 8% of the surveyed respondents belong to the metacognitive level of research thinking development. Thus, more than 68% of the surveyed students have a low level of research thinking development, which confirms the relevance of its development. At the formative stage of the experiment, we developed and tested a program of future teachers’ research thinking development on the basis of such pedagogical disciplines as ‘Theory of Education’ and ‘Theory of Learning’. The experimental group consisted of 1st year students (40 students) of the Foreign Languages Department, studying the discipline ‘Theory of Education’ (January-June 2021); 2nd year students (42 students) of the same department, studying the discipline ‘Theory of Learning’ (September-December 2021). The experiment base was the Elabuga Institute of Kazan Federal University. The duration of the experiment covered 2 academic semesters. The principal task at this stage of experimental work in the process of developing students' research thinking was the development and activation of as many mental operations at students as possible, as well as the formation of a reflexive culture in them in the process of creating situations that encourage the implementation of educational reflection. Research assignments were also aimed at developing the ability to highlight the main and secondary facts, and at students' critical analysis of the research problems being solved, etc. The control stage of the formative experiment consisted in the final diagnostics of the levels of students’ research thinking development as a result of studying the disciplines ‘Theory of Education’ and ‘Theory of Learning’.
Expected Outcomes
After the first stage of the formative experiment, the students’ number with a critically low level became equal to 25%; the optimal level of development of research thinking began to have 32.5% of students; 10.5% of the surveyed students were assigned to the creative level of research thinking development. As the difficulties that the students faced while completing the assignments, they noted: ‘lack of understanding of the essence of the issue’, ‘lack of knowledge, inability to apply them’, ‘difficulty in understanding the issue’, ‘inability to formulate thoughts’, etc. After the second stage of the formative experiment, students’ number with a critically low level of research thinking decreased by 18.7%; students with a low level decreased by 3.4%, and their number was 26.6%; there was an increase of almost twofold in students, who can be attributed to the optimal level of development of research thinking, which amounted to 54.8%; the number of students of the metacognitive level was 12.3%. Difficulties faced by students in completing assignments have changed significantly. In contrast to 1st stage of the experiment, they paid more attention to their fatigue: “everyone is tired, the brain is not working, lack of sleep”, “the brain is just tired and everything seems heavy”, "because of the session, the head doesn’t work. " It can be assumed that students are not aware of the level of development of their research thinking, insufficient for them to complete tasks, and try to justify its state by other reasons. The results of the formative experiment testify to the effectiveness of the model for the future teachers’ research thinking development in the process of mastering pedagogical disciplines. The positive dynamics of changes in the levels of research thinking is the result of introducing a model of development of students’ research thinking into the educational process.
References
Clarke, A. Erickson, J. (2006). Teacher inquiry: What is old is new again! BC Educational Leadership Researc. 1, pp. 44–68. Dakhin, A.N. (2003). Pedagogicheskoye modelirovaniye: sushchnost', effektivnost' i neopredelennost' [Pedagogical modeling: essence, efficiency and uncertainty]. Pedagogy. №. 4. p. 22. Davydov, V.V. (2000). Vidy obobshcheniya v obuchenii: logiko-psikhologicheskiye problemy postroyeniya uchebnykh predmetov. [Types of generalization in training: logical and psychological problems of building educational subjects]. M.: Pedagnogicheskoye soobshchestvo Rossii. p. 379. Gardner, H. (2006). Multiple intelligence. Basic Books. NY.p 300. Gardner, H. (2006). Five minds for the future. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. p. 196. Luksha, P., Cubista, J., Laszlo, A., Popovich, M., Ninenko, I. (2018). Educational ecosystems for societal transformation. Global Education Futures. p. 132. Kincheloe, J. (2003). Teachers as researchers: Qualitative inquiry as a path to empowerment. 2nd ed. London: Routledge, p. 296. Lemoine, P.A., Hackett, P.T, Richardson, M.D. (2017) Global Higher Education and VUCA – Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity. Ambiguity Handbook of Research on Administration, Policy, and Leadership in Higher Education. IGI Global, pp. 549-569. Peim, N. (2018). Thinking in Education Research: Applying Philosophy and Theory. Bloomsbury Publishing. p. 296. Ponte, J. P., Mata-Pereira, J., Henriques, A. C., & Quaresma, M. (2013). Designing and using exploratory tasks. In C. Margolinas (Ed.), Task design in mathematics education: Proceedings of ICMI Study 22 (pp. 9 – 15). (Vol. 1). Oxford. Silander, Т., Valijarvi, J. (2013). The Theory and Practice of Building Pedagogical Skill in Finnish Teacher Education. PISA, Power, and Policy: the emergence of global educational governance Heinz-Dieter Meyer, Aaron Benavot Symposium Books Ltd. pp. 85-86. Taylor, R. (2013). Creativity at Work: Supercharge Your Brain and Make Your Ideas Stick. Кogan Page Publishers. p. 208. Zagvyazinsky, V.I., Atakhanov, R. (2005). Metodologiya i metody psikhologo-pedagogicheskogo issledovaniya: Ucheb. posobiye dlya stud. vyssh. ped. ucheb. zavedeniy. [Methodology and methods of psychological and pedagogical research: Textbook. manual for stud. higher. ped. study. institutions]. M.: Publishing Center Academy. p. 208.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.