Traditional learning: essence, advantages and disadvantages. Introduction

The term " traditional training “implies, first of all, the class-lesson organization of education, which developed in the 17th century on the principles of didactics formulated by J. Comenius, and is still prevalent in schools around the world.

Distinctive features of traditional classroom technology:

1. students of approximately the same age and level of training form a class, which remains largely constant for the entire period of schooling;

2. The class works according to a single annual plan and program according to the schedule. As a consequence, children must come to school at the same time of year and at predetermined times of the day;

3. the main unit of classes is the lesson;

4. a lesson, as a rule, is devoted to one academic subject, topic, due to which students in the class work on the same material;

5. The work of students in the lesson is supervised by the teacher: he evaluates the learning results of each student and at the end of the school year makes a decision on transferring students to the next class;

6. Textbooks are used mainly for homework.

Attributes of the classroom-lesson system: academic year, school day, lesson schedule, school holidays, breaks, homework, grades.

Traditional education, in its philosophical basis, is a pedagogy of coercion.

The main goal of training: the formation of a knowledge system, mastery of the basics of science, which is expressed in the presence of a training standard.

A mass school with traditional technology remains a “school of knowledge”; the main emphasis is on the awareness of the individual, and not on his cultural development.

Knowledge is addressed mainly to the rational principle of the individual, and not to his spirituality and morality. 75% of school subjects are aimed at developing the left hemisphere of the brain; only 3% of the total number of school disciplines is allocated to aesthetic subjects.

The basis of traditional education is the principles formulated by J. Komensky:

1) scientific nature (there can be no false knowledge, only incomplete knowledge);

2) conformity with nature (learning is determined by the student’s development and is not forced);

3) consistency and systematicity (linear logic of the learning process, from particular to general);

4) accessibility (from known to unknown, from easy to difficult);

5) strength (repetition is the mother of learning);

6) consciousness and activity (know the task set by the teacher and be active in executing commands);

7) the principle of visibility;

8) the principle of connection between theory and practice;

9) taking into account age and individual characteristics.

Traditional technology - authoritarian technology, teaching is very weakly connected with the inner life of the student, there are practically no conditions for the manifestation of individual abilities, creative manifestations of personality. The authoritarianism of the learning process is manifested in:

· regulation of activities, compulsory training procedures (“school rapes the individual”);

· centralization of control;

· targeting the average student (“school kills talent”).

Like any learning technology, traditional learning has its strengths and weaknesses. The positive aspects primarily include:

· systematic nature of training;

· ordered, logically correct presentation of material;

· organizational clarity;

· optimal expenditure of resources during mass training.

Currently, there is a problem - the need to increase the efficiency of the educational process, and especially that side of it that is associated with the humanization of education, the development of the student’s personal potential, and the prevention of dead ends in his development.

A decrease in learning motivation, school overload, widespread ill health of schoolchildren, and their rejection from the learning process are associated not only with the imperfect content of education, but also with the difficulties that teachers experience in organizing and conducting the learning process.

The trouble with today's schools is not the lack of an adequate number of new textbooks, teaching aids and programs - an unprecedented number of them have appeared in recent years, and many of them do not stand up to criticism from a didactic point of view.

The problem is to provide the teacher with a selection methodology and a mechanism for implementing the selected content in the educational process.

Individual forms and methods of teaching are being replaced by holistic educational technologies in general and learning technologies in particular.

This path is not so simple and certain difficulties and problems await anyone who embarks on it.

The traditional system remains uniform and non-variable, despite the declaration of freedom of choice and variability. Planning of training content is centralized. Basic curricula are based on uniform standards for the country. Education has an overwhelming priority over education. Academic and educational subjects are not interconnected. In educational work, the pedagogy of events and the negativism of educational influences flourish.
Student position: the student is a subordinate object of teaching influences, the student “must”, the student is not yet a full-fledged personality.
Teacher position: the teacher is the commander, the only initiative person, the judge (“always right”); the elder (parent) teaches; “with a subject for children.”
Methods of knowledge acquisition are based on:

· communication of ready-made knowledge;

· training by example;

· inductive logic from the particular to the general;

· mechanical memory;

· verbal presentation;

· reproductive reproduction.

The learning process is characterized by a lack of independence and weak motivation for the student’s educational work.
As part of the child’s educational activities:

· there is no independent goal setting; learning goals are set by the teacher;

· planning of activities is carried out from the outside, imposed on the student against his wishes;

· the final analysis and assessment of the child’s activities is carried out not by him, but by the teacher or another adult.

Under these conditions, the stage of realizing educational goals turns into work “under pressure” with all its negative consequences.

Traditional learning is still the most common traditional learning option.

It is designed to convey, broadcast tradition, reproduce in space and centuries the traditional mentality (spiritual and mental makeup), traditional worldview, traditional hierarchy of values, folk axiology (value picture of the world).

Traditional teaching has its own content (tradition) and has its own traditional principles and methods, and has its own traditional teaching technology.

The advantage of traditional learning is the ability to convey a large amount of information in a short time. With such training, students acquire knowledge in a ready-made form without revealing ways to prove its truth. In addition, it involves the assimilation and reproduction of knowledge and its application in similar situations. Among the significant disadvantages of this type of learning is its focus more on memory rather than thinking. This training also does little to promote the development of creative abilities, independence, and activity.

8.1. Traditional learning: essence, advantages and disadvantages

• 8.1.2. Advantages and disadvantages of traditional education
• 8.1.3. The main contradictions of traditional education

8.1.1. The essence of traditional learning

In pedagogy, it is customary to distinguish three main types of teaching: traditional (or explanatory-illustrative), problem-based and programmed.

• The distinctive features of traditional classroom technology are as follows:
• students of approximately the same age and level of training form a class, which remains largely constant for the entire period of schooling;
• The class works according to a single annual plan and program according to the schedule. As a consequence, children must come to school at the same time of year and at predetermined times of the day;
• the basic unit of study is the lesson;
• a lesson, as a rule, is devoted to one academic subject, topic, due to which students in the class work on the same material;
• The work of students in the lesson is supervised by the teacher: he evaluates the results of study in his subject, the level of learning of each student individually, and at the end of the school year makes a decision on transferring students to the next grade;
• Educational books (textbooks) are used mainly for homework. Academic year, school day, lesson schedule, school holidays, breaks, or, more precisely, breaks between lessons - attributes class-lesson system(see Media Library).

(http://www.pirao.ru/strukt/lab_gr/l-uchen.html; see the laboratory of the psychology of teaching of PI RAO).

8.1.2. Advantages and disadvantages of traditional education

8.1.3. The main contradictions of traditional education

Principle of individualization , understood as the isolation of students in individual forms of work and according to individual programs, especially in the computer version, excludes the possibility of nurturing a creative individuality, which they become, as we know, not through Robinsonade, but through “another person” in the process of dialogic communication and interaction, where a person performs not just objective actions, but actions(Unt I.E., 1990; abstract).
It is the act (and not the individual objective action) that should be considered as the unit of the student’s activity.
Deed - this is a socially conditioned and morally normalized action, which has both an objective and sociocultural component, presupposing a response from another person, taking this response into account and correcting one’s own behavior. Such an exchange of actions presupposes the subordination of the subjects of communication to certain moral principles and norms of relations between people, mutual consideration of their positions, interests and moral values. Under this condition, the gap between teaching and upbringing is overcome, problem ratios training And education. After all, no matter what a person does, no matter what objective, technological action he performs, he always “acts” because he enters into the fabric of culture and social relations.
Many of the above problems are successfully solved in problem-based learning.

The foundations of traditional education were laid in the middle of the 17th century. at the first stage of development of educational psychology and are described by Ya.A. Comenius in his famous work “The Great Didactics”. The concept of “traditional education” refers to the classroom-lesson organization of education, built on the principles of didactics formulated by Ya.A. Komensky.

Signs of a classroom-lesson teaching system:

a group of students (class) approximately equal in age and level of training, stable in its basic composition throughout the entire period of study at school;

• - teaching children in the classroom according to a unified annual plan and curriculum according to the schedule, when all students must come to school at the same time and during joint classroom hours determined by the schedule;
• - the lesson is the main unit of the lesson;
• - in a lesson, one academic subject is studied, a specific topic, in accordance with which all students in the class work through the same educational material;

The educational activities of students in the lesson are supervised by the teacher, who evaluates the results of educational activities and the level of learning of each student in the subject taught to them, and at the end of the year makes a decision on transferring students to the next grade;

Textbooks are used by students in lessons, but to a greater extent - in independent homework.

The characteristics of the class-lesson system include the concepts of “school year”, “school day”, “lesson schedule”, “school holidays”, “breaks between lessons (recesses)”.

Characterizing the classroom-lesson system, we can highlight the following procedural features:

• - the ability to convey a large amount of information to students in a short period of time;
• - providing students with information in a ready-made form without considering scientific approaches to proving their truth;
• - assimilation of educational knowledge in a certain context of educational activities and the possibility of their application in similar situations;
• - focus on memory and reproduction of knowledge, skills and abilities, rather than on thinking and creative transformation of knowledge, skills and abilities formed in educational activities;
• - the educational and cognitive process is largely reproductive in nature, forming a reproductive level of cognitive activity in students;
• - educational tasks for remembering, reproducing, solving according to a model do not contribute to the development of creative abilities, independence, and activity of the student’s personality;
• - the volume of communicated educational information exceeds the ability of students to assimilate it, which sharpens the contradiction between the content and procedural components of the learning process;
• - the pace of learning is designed for the average student and does not make it possible to fully take into account the individual psychological characteristics of students, which reveals a contradiction between frontal learning and the individual nature of students’ assimilation of knowledge.

The main contradictions of traditional teaching were highlighted at the end of the 20th century. A.A. Verbitsky.

• 1. The contradiction between the orientation of the content of educational activity and, as a consequence, the student himself to the past, to the sign systems of the “fundamentals of sciences,” and the orientation of the subject of learning to the content of his future professional and practical activity and the socioculture of the living environment. The reported true scientific knowledge does not provide the opportunity to enter into a problem situation, the presence and solution of which would contribute to the activation of thinking processes. The distant future, in which the acquired scientific knowledge will be useful, does not yet have a meaningful life intention for the student and does not motivate conscious educational activity.
• 2. The duality of educational information, which simultaneously acts both as a part of culture and as a means of its mastery and development of the student’s personality. Resolution of this contradiction is possible by reducing the importance of the “abstract method of school” and modeling in educational activities conditions close to reality for students to appropriate sociocultural experience that is relevant to them, through which they themselves enrich themselves intellectually, spiritually and actively and themselves create new elements of culture (as in We are currently seeing this in the example of the rapid development of computer technology).
• 3. The contradiction between the integrity of culture and the subject’s mastery of its content through a large number of subject areas within academic disciplines. It is associated with the traditional differentiation of school teachers into subject teachers and the departmental structure of universities. The concept of a particular cultural phenomenon is considered from the point of view of different sciences and does not give the student a holistic idea of ​​the phenomenon being studied. This contradiction is present in both school and university education and can be resolved by using the reserves of active learning by immersion, i.e. long-term, from several days to several weeks, study of a particular phenomenon in various scientific aspects.
• 4. The contradiction between the way culture exists as a process and its presence in learning in the form of static sign systems. The study of cultural phenomena is taken out of the context of modern life, and the child has not developed the motivation to learn them.
• 5. The contradiction between the social form of existence of culture and the individual form of its appropriation by students. The student does not create a product in the form of knowledge jointly with other subjects of education. The need for cooperation with other students in mastering educational knowledge and providing them with assistance is suppressed by indicating the inadmissibility of hints and the need to individually master this or that topic of the academic subject. However, the development of creative individuality is impossible in solitude; a “binom of fantasy” is needed (G. Rodari ), cognition through “another person" (I.E. Unt) in the process of dialogical communication and interaction, manifested in actions. Being a socially conditioned and morally normalized action, an action can only be performed in human society, and mutual consideration of interests, values ​​and positions softens the gap between teaching and upbringing of students, introducing them through action into culturally appropriate forms of interpersonal relationships and joint activities.

More successfully identified contradictions are resolved in the context of problem-based learning.

Introduction

Developmental education is a holistic pedagogical system, an alternative to the traditional school education system. This generalized description of developmental education contains fairly clear guidelines for anyone who would like to determine their attitude towards it.

First of all, it is necessary to keep in mind that we are talking about a holistic education system. As shown above, all the main characteristics of developmental education - its content, methods, type of learning activity of students, features of interaction between participants in the educational process and the nature of the relationships between them, the form of organization of the educational process and the communication unfolding in it - are interconnected and ultimately determined by the goals developmental training. This means that developmental training can only be carried out as an integral system, in the totality of its components.

It is from these positions that one should approach the assessment of attempts to use individual “elements” of developmental education in pedagogical practice. Thus, in recent years, the idea of ​​​​introducing teaching methods “focused on student development” into school practice, in particular elementary schools, has gained wide popularity. But, firstly, developmental teaching methods, which are based on the joint solution of educational problems by the teacher and students, cannot be implemented without a significant change in these tasks themselves, i.e. without a radical restructuring of the content of school education. Secondly, the introduction into practice of some external features of these methods, for example, a more specific definition of the goal that must be achieved when completing each educational task, and on this basis - a more thorough design of the system of these tasks (which is done, for example, by the so-called . “pedagogical technology”), can, at best, somewhat rationalize the traditional learning process, increase its efficiency, but cannot turn it into developmental learning. This fully applies to the not so numerous attempts to include elements of theoretical knowledge in the content of traditional primary education. If these “elements” are chosen successfully, then they can significantly increase the efficiency of developing skills by building more rational and generalized algorithms for solving relevant problems. However, this does not change in any way the typical type of educational activity of students for traditional teaching and the direction and pace of their development determined by them.

Of course, a teacher who has become familiar with the system of developmental education has the right to try to use some of its individual elements in his work. However, he must understand that the results may be very limited. Without taking this circumstance into account, the teacher risks quickly becoming disillusioned with the innovations he used and experiencing only bitterness from the realization of the futility of the efforts expended.

1. Scientific and historical context of the creation of a developmental education system

The main content of the process of human development is his formation as a subject - first, individual elementary actions, then increasingly complex activities and their systems, and finally life in the totality of its manifestations. The goal of developmental education, which is to develop the student as a subject of learning, corresponds to the general pattern of development and in this regard should be considered quite realistic. Moreover, it is much more realistic and “natural” than the goal of traditional education, which is to make the student a competent, disciplined executor of given action programs and other people’s decisions.

Another thing is how acceptable certain educational goals are for society, how much they meet public interests and needs. It is quite obvious, for example, that until recently our society (more precisely, the state, which usurped the right to monopoly express the interests of society) was hardly interested in young people emerging from the walls of a comprehensive public school capable of thinking critically and independently solving their life problems. It is no coincidence that the state (“society”) reacted so aggressively to any attempt to more or less seriously reconsider the goals of education and its content. Indicative in this regard is the fate that befell him in the early 1980s. as a concept of developmental education by D.B. Elkonina - V.V. Davydov, and the system of primary education by L.V. Zankova. However, as soon as the slightest opportunity arose to choose at least the forms of school education (mass school, lyceum, gymnasium, etc.), the reaction of parents and teachers clearly revealed that the educational needs of society are by no means as uniform and uniform as they tried introduce state ideologists. This gives reason to believe that the goal of education, towards which developmental education is aimed, meets the needs of a certain part of modern society and, from this point of view, is also quite realistic. But precisely because we can only talk about a part of society interested in such a goal of education, it would be very reckless to try to force the introduction of a system of developmental education, imposing it on everyone. The scale of such implementation must be sufficient to provide real conditions for choosing one or another educational goal, the results of which will determine the direction of its further development.

Developmental education involves a radical change in the content of school education, the basis of which should be a system of scientific concepts. Since it is advisable to begin developmental education from the moment the child enters school (otherwise it will be faced with quickly developing undesirable educational stereotypes), the question arises about the compliance of the proposed content with the age capabilities of children of primary school age. Even a cursory acquaintance with developmental education programs allows us to establish such a striking difference from the usual elementary school programs that the question naturally arises: are children aged 6-9 years capable of such content? Doesn’t it contradict the generally accepted age characteristics of younger schoolchildren? Without going into a detailed discussion of this issue, we note the following.

Absolutization of repeatedly and in different ways established facts characterizing the psychological characteristics of children of primary school age (in particular, their inherent visual-figurative thinking), and the ensuing criteria for the availability of educational material is hardly justified from the point of view of modern ideas about the patterns of child development. Its characteristics can vary significantly depending on the conditions in which it is carried out, in particular, on the content and methods of school teaching. Therefore, “the chronological framework and psychological characteristics of primary school age as a special link in school childhood... cannot be considered final and unchangeable.”

The validity of this position was convincingly confirmed in the late 50s - early 60s. cycle of experimental studies. Using a variety of material, it was shown that restructuring the content of education and the special organization of children’s activities radically change the picture of their mental development (and, above all, the development of thinking), and thereby significantly expand the possibilities of assimilation. 2) These studies marked the beginning of the development of developmental education programs, many years of testing of which in experimental schools in Moscow and Kharkov led to the conclusion that primary schoolchildren are not only able to master complex theoretical material, but they learn it much easier and more successfully than the traditional “rules” for elementary school . And this is not surprising: in contrast to rules isolated from each other, this material, in the process of its analysis, turns out to be connected into a coherent system, which greatly simplifies its understanding and memorization. Finally, the experience of using developmental education programs in the context of mass secondary schools, accumulated in recent years in a number of regions of Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, and the Baltic countries, quite convincingly indicates the availability of the material provided by these programs for modern primary schoolchildren, including children starting school at the age of six.

But the problem of matching developmental education programs to the age characteristics of students is not limited to the question of their accessibility. An equally significant aspect of this problem is the question of the feasibility of the educational material offered by these programs. As is known, modern schools, including elementary schools, suffer from overload of students, and the oversaturation of programs and textbooks with theoretical material is usually cited as its main source. From this point of view, a program that involves a significant expansion of such material should be perceived as obviously beyond the reach of children and therefore unacceptable.

The paradox, however, is that the inclusion of a system of scientific concepts in teaching, which ensures the meaningfulness of the practical skills that primary schoolchildren have to master, not only does not entail their further overload, but also helps to eliminate it. Firstly, the systematic nature of the educational material makes it possible to significantly reduce the time for studying it, limiting the study load of students in grades 1-3 to 20-24 lessons per week. Secondly, shifting the center of gravity in learning from memorizing individual rules to mastering the general principles of construction - practical actions allows us to significantly reduce the number of exercises necessary to develop the relevant skills, and thereby significantly reduce the amount of homework. Thirdly, no less significant is the fact that the intensive development of educational and cognitive interest as the main motive of educational activity and mastery of methods for its implementation sharply reduce the level of educational anxiety, which is one of the most powerful factors that negatively affect the performance and health of schoolchildren. All this allows us to assert that developmental education programs are quite feasible for students of primary school age and are not associated with any negative consequences for their health. In any case, according to the Kharkov Research Institute for the Health of Children and Adolescents, which conducted a long-term examination of children studying in developmental education programs, the dynamics of the most important indicators characterizing their health and performance are no worse than those of their peers who studied in traditional programs.

Thus, if we evaluate the developmental education system from the standpoint of its compliance with the age characteristics and capabilities of students, then there are no serious obstacles to its implementation. The situation is somewhat more complicated if we evaluate this system from the point of view of the requirements that it places on the teacher.

2. The problem of teacher training in the work of Davydov V.V. "Problems of developmental education"

Developmental education places quite high demands on the level of professional training of teachers. Thus, in order to organize the educational and research activities of students, the teacher must be able to carry out at least the simplest research himself, and this is not at all the same as the ability to clearly explain even the most difficult educational material. Whether the teacher will be able to direct the search activity of students along the right path depends decisively on how much he is able to predict its further course, and this is much more difficult than taking into account the results of assimilation. The fact that in the conditions of developmental education the educational process takes on the character of communication between its participants makes much more stringent demands on the teacher’s communication skills than the situation of exchanging educational information. All this means that the implementation of developmental education requires very serious work to improve the pedagogical qualifications of the teacher. The problem, however, is that this work cannot be carried out in the usual forms (in the form of courses, seminars, etc.).

Developmental education is possible only if a relationship of cooperation and business partnership is established between the teacher and students. But a teacher can see in his student a partner in a common cause only on the condition that he rethinks his role in this matter, that he has completely empty goals that can only be achieved in cooperation with students. In other words, in order for developmental learning to take place, the teacher will have to carry out pedagogical activities of a fundamentally different type than those that unfold in the conditions of traditional education.

But if the teacher’s missing skills and abilities can be taught in courses or seminars, then new activities cannot be taught; nor learn - you can only “get used to it” by getting involved in it and mastering it step by step. This is how a student masters a new educational and research activity, and the teacher also has to master a new type of pedagogical activity. Only as he begins to solve the problems of organizing developmental education; Only to the extent that he manages to analyze and critically evaluate the reasons for his successes and failures will this learning acquire one or another meaning for him, he will have his own goals, i.e. he will begin to act as a pedagogical subject and it is in this capacity that he will interact with his students. In this sense, developmental learning is such for the teacher no less than for his students.

As the teacher “gets used to” his new teaching activity, he will need both the appropriate knowledge and skills and the help of a qualified methodologist. Only relying on this need can one count on the effectiveness of work to improve the pedagogical qualifications of teachers mastering the system of developmental education. The most appropriate form of organizing such work is, apparently, a part-time school of pedagogical skills. Meeting periodically at school training sessions, teachers have the opportunity to collectively, with the participation of a methodologist-instructor, analyze the results of the passed part of the path, find out the reasons for their difficulties and failures, and design the content of their work at the upcoming stage of training. As experience shows, participation in the work of a school of pedagogical excellence during one full cycle of primary education (grades 1-3) allows the teacher to basically master the type of pedagogical activity that is necessary for successful work in developmental education programs.

The task of mastering pedagogical activity, which makes it possible to implement developmental education programs, is, in principle, within the capabilities of any teacher. The only contraindication is, perhaps, an excessive tendency towards authoritarianism. But is it necessary, however, to specifically talk about what efforts this mastery requires from the teacher, how much time and energy he will have to spend, how many painful doubts and sleepless nights to endure in order to become a master of developmental teaching? No one has the right to condemn a teacher to this titanic work except himself. Only enthusiastic teachers can take on the development of the developmental education system. This is the law of history: any serious business has always been, is and will be carried out through the work of enthusiastic ascetics. And since there have always been many people of this type among Russian teachers, one can look at the future of developmental education with optimism. We can and should hope that in the coming years our society will receive a truly functioning alternative school education system. Another thing is that society (and not only the state!) does not have the right to abuse the enthusiasm of pioneer teachers and forget that any enthusiasm needs support, including material support. Thus, there are quite serious reasons to believe that the developmental education system is quite realistic from the point of view of both its compliance with the age characteristics of students and the possibility of mastery by teachers. This means that the main condition for its implementation is the choice of parents, teachers, and school leaders. What results can those who have made a choice in its favor expect from this system?

A more or less clear idea of ​​the possible results of developmental education is extremely important for everyone who is trying to determine their attitude towards this education system. It is even more relevant for a teacher who has already made his choice in favor of developmental education and is implementing its program. What should he expect from this training, and what should he not expect? Is he leading his students in the right direction? Are his and their efforts in vain?

You can try to answer these questions by assessing the knowledge, skills and abilities of students. But even if their level turns out to be higher than that of their peers studying in traditional programs, this hardly gives reason to believe that developmental education was successful and gave the desired results. After all, they must characterize the degree of achievement of the goal for which it was undertaken. Let us remember that it consists in the development of each student as a subject of learning. But knowledge, abilities and skills are, although very important, a “faceless” result of learning, which least of all characterizes the student as a subject (a person can be taught a lot even when he is not a subject at all, for example, in a hypnotic state).

More indicative in this regard is the student’s attitude towards learning. If he does not need to be encouraged to study with seductive promises or the threat of punishment: if, regardless of academic success, he learns with a desire that does not fade over time, but becomes more stable and vibrant; if the student shows increasing independence, not running away from difficulties, but trying to overcome them; if he willingly discusses his successes and failures with his teacher, parents or fellow students, trying to get to the bottom of their reasons, all these are reliable indicators that he is (or is becoming) a subject of teaching. But such educational behavior is possible only if during the learning process a radical restructuring of the student’s inner world occurs, if he develops such personality traits, such psychological mechanisms for regulating behavior that give him the opportunity to be a subject of learning. These changes, covering intelligence, consciousness, abilities, the emotional-volitional sphere, value and semantic orientations, are the most important specific result of developmental training. It is they who characterize the degree of its success, and it is they who must be guided by the teacher carrying out developmental education.

3. The influence of the developmental education system on the process of personality development of a primary school student in the works of D.B. Elkonin “Theory of Developmental Training” and B.D. Elkonina “The crisis of childhood and the basis for designing forms of child development”

During the process of schooling, all areas of the child’s personality are qualitatively changed and restructured. However, this restructuring begins with the intellectual sphere, and above all with thinking. This is due to the fact that in school education a child for the first time encounters a fundamentally new type of knowledge for him - a concept that becomes leading in his educational activities. If a preschool child, solving various practical or play problems, relied on ideas about the sensory properties of things formed in his own experience or on the so-called “everyday concepts” acquired in communication with adults, in which the same properties are reflected in a more general form, then Schoolchildren increasingly have to take into account such properties of things and phenomena that are reflected and recorded in the form of scientific concepts. It is this circumstance that determines the main direction of development of thinking at school age - the transition from concrete - figurative to abstract - logical thinking. Let us emphasize: this transition occurs within the framework of any education, since it confronts schoolchildren with scientific concepts and involves their assimilation. But the real content of this process and its results can be very different depending on how the content of concepts is revealed in teaching and what role they play in the educational activities of schoolchildren.

Behind the same term that schoolchildren learn, two fundamentally different types of knowledge can be hidden: either a formal - abstract idea of ​​​​a certain class of an object that has a set of common characteristics, or a scientific concept that reflects a system of essential properties of an object in their interrelation and interdependence. What significance does this fact have for the development of thinking? To answer this question, we need to find out what mental problems students can solve based on this or that type of knowledge.

Using knowledge of conceptual “features”, the student gets the opportunity to classify the corresponding objects in a certain way: “parse” words according to their composition, determine whether a word belongs to one or another part of speech, etc. It is quite obvious that this is the most important prerequisite for the successful solution of typical problems for a particular rule. In order to select the desired rule and apply it, it is necessary, first of all, to “subsume” a specific object under one or another concept in relation to which the rule is formulated. If we take into account that in most cases the application of a rule requires taking into account a number of features that are interconnected in a certain way, it becomes obvious that solving such problems requires performing a number of mental operations aimed at identifying the features of an object and establishing connections between them.

Significantly different in the means used from the concrete-figurative thinking of a preschooler, such thinking retains its most important feature: it remains the same empirical. Like a preschool child, the student relies on his own practical experience in identifying and applying certain features of a concept specified in its verbal definition or rule. Those of them that do not find practical application cease to exist for a schoolchild in the same way that for a preschooler the properties of things with which he does not directly interact do not exist. Every teacher is well aware, for example, that students very quickly “forget” that “the ending serves to connect words” - this “sign” of the ending is not needed to highlight it in the same way as all the signs of a noun “are not needed”, except the questions it answers. But if the thinking of a preschooler is focused on the real properties of things that are revealed in personal experience, then the thinking of a schoolchild is aimed at searching for signs indicated in the definition of a concept, in a rule, etc. It is the formulation of the concept, the rule, i.e. the form of presentation of knowledge about an object, and not the object itself and the action with it, determines the content of thinking and its possibilities.

Solving a research problem with the help of a learned concept, the student discovers new properties of the object with which he is acting that he had not previously taken into account, links these properties with those that were previously known to him, thereby clarifying the content of the previously learned concept, which becomes more meaningful and specific. It is these operations of analysis (search for new properties of an object), meaningful generalization (“linking” new properties with previously established ones) and concretization of the concept (its restructuring taking into account the newly discovered properties of the object) that characterize the thinking that unfolds in the process of solving educational problems. research tasks.

Such thinking, in contrast to abstract-associative thinking, which remains empirical in its content and comes down to operating with predetermined “signs” of an object, is theoretical thinking, allowing the student to understand the essence of the subject being studied, which determines the patterns of its functioning and transformation and thereby the principles of constructing actions with this item. Based on the concept with the help of which the properties of an object are studied, theoretical thinking leads to clarification and concretization of the concept itself, which thus turns out to be not only the starting point, but also the final result of theoretical thinking. A gradual transition, “ascent” from meaningful abstraction, from an initial, undivided concept to more and more specific knowledge about an object, to an increasingly complete and dissected system of concepts is a characteristic feature of theoretical thinking, which intensively develops among schoolchildren in the process of solving educational and research problems.

The emergence and development of theoretical thinking is one of the first and most important results of developmental education. Of course, such thinking can also develop under traditional learning conditions, in the process of solving standard problems involving the application of rules. But there it appears independently and even contrary to the content and methods of teaching and therefore turns out to be random and unpredictable. Developmental education is specifically designed to develop this type of thinking, so its presence or absence in students is a fairly convincing indicator of whether one of the main goals of developmental education has been achieved.

The differences between abstract-associative and content-theoretical thinking are so obvious and vivid that it is possible to determine the type of thinking of a student almost accurately by observing his daily educational work. But if desired, the teacher can make a more accurate diagnosis. Of course, traditional school tests on the application of the learned rules are not suitable for this. Theoretical thinking is revealed in a situation that requires not so much the application of a rule as its discovery and construction. Such a task should be offered to students if the teacher wants to determine their type of thinking.

Students who have developed abstract-associative thinking will either refuse to solve such a problem (“we haven’t done this yet”), or will try to solve it blindly, at random. It is possible that one of them will be able to “invent” a suitable rule, although it is unlikely that they will be able to substantiate it (just as it is not substantiated in traditional school textbooks).

Developmental education should create the necessary prerequisites and conditions for the development of theoretical thinking, but each student implements them to the best of his ability. Development is a purely individual process, so its results cannot and should not be the same for different students.

The restructuring of thinking caused by the assimilation of scientific concepts inevitably entails a restructuring of other cognitive processes - perception, imagination, memory. But both the direction of this restructuring and its final results turn out to be fundamentally different depending on the type of thinking on the basis of which it occurs. Thus, thinking based on predetermined “signs” of a concept inevitably leads to impoverishment of perception, its schematization: students often ignore and stop “seeing” those real properties of things that do not fit into a given scheme. This, in turn, significantly inhibits the development of perception. On the contrary, thinking aimed at searching for new properties of an object turns out to be a powerful stimulus for the development of perception and observation, and the need to “link” the properties of an object into an integral system gives a tangible impetus to the development of creative imagination. The influence of the type of thinking is especially pronounced in the development of memory in schoolchildren.

Solving problems involving the application of rules presupposes their prior assimilation. Thus, the assimilation of knowledge and its application turn out to be relatively independent stages of learning (which is expressed in the well-known problem of the gap between knowledge and skills). And if in the process of applying knowledge the main role is played by abstract-associative thinking, then the main load in the process of assimilation falls on memory, which, as it were, precedes thinking and practical action, being their original prerequisite. It is this circumstance that predetermines the main direction and nature of the changes that occur in the student’s memory during the process of schooling.

Firstly, the involuntary memory that is most natural for a person in general and typical for a preschool child, which is directly included in the action and is its peculiar “by-product”, is gradually squeezed out of it. In a student’s educational work, deliberate memorization of a variety of material begins to play an increasingly important role. Keeping this circumstance in mind, they say that at school age there is a transition from involuntary memory to voluntary memory. However, the latter is characterized not so much by the intentionality of memorization, but by the ability to reproduce the necessary material at the right time, i.e. purposeful selectivity of reproduction. But it is precisely this quality that is most often absent from the student’s memory.

Secondly, preceding the practical action in which the content of the acquired knowledge is actually manifested, such memory is subordinated to the task of remembering not so much this content as the form in which it is presented. The main object of memorization is not the real properties of things, as is the case in involuntary memory, but the description of these properties in the form of texts, tables, diagrams, etc. Thus, meaningful memory, characteristic of preschoolers, gradually gives way to form memory.

Thirdly, memorizing quite extensive and complex information requires the use of special means that allow you to break down and organize the material being memorized: drawing up plans, diagrams, highlighting key words, etc. A kind of memory is formed, focused not on the logic of things, but on the logic of presentation. It is this circumstance that creates significant difficulties in the selective reproduction of memorized material.

Fourthly, memorized texts turn out to be isolated from each other, which makes it extremely difficult to retrieve them from memory. It is with this, and not with forgetting as such, that the need for periodic “repetition” of memorized material is connected.

Thus, on the basis of abstract-associative thinking, by the end of primary school age, a kind of specifically “school” memory is basically formed, based on the deliberate memorization of the form of presentation of educational material and characterized by extremely limited possibilities for its arbitrary selective reproduction.

Memory develops in a fundamentally different way, based on theoretical thinking.

Firstly, since knowledge is not a prerequisite for search and research activities, but their result, their assimilation is ensured by the mechanisms of involuntary memory, which not only does not leave the student’s life, but, on the contrary, receives a powerful impetus for its development.

Secondly, being aimed at identifying new properties of an object, theoretical thinking presupposes the establishment of their meaningful connections with already known properties, i.e. clarification, concretization of its structure, which is necessarily reflected in external form: in a model, diagram of an object, its description, definition of a concept, etc. Thus, the form of knowledge about a subject turns out to be the carrier of its content. This circumstance allows, at a certain stage of training, to begin theoretical research not with a search for new properties of an object, but with an analysis of a ready-made, given description of these properties, i.e. from text analysis, formulas, rules, etc. Thus, in the activities of students, a mnemonic - cognitive educational task appears, the solution of which is based on an understanding of the connection between the form of presentation of knowledge and its content.

Thirdly, as a result of a thorough analysis of the role played by each element of the presentation of knowledge in revealing its content, students receive at their disposal an extremely disaggregated, holistic, meaningful picture of the form of presentation. This makes it possible not only to reliably retain it in memory, but also to reproduce exactly those fragments of it that turn out to be necessary in the process of solving subsequent problems. At the same time, the inclusion of knowledge stored in memory in all new connections eliminates the possibility of “forgetting” it, practically eliminating the problem of special repetition.

Fourthly, a feature of theoretical thinking is its focus not only outward, on the object of action, but also inward, on itself, on its grounds, means, methods. Born within theoretical thinking, this ability for reflection naturally extends to other cognitive processes, including memory. Students are able not only to remember and reproduce a variety of educational material, but also to realize exactly how they did it, critically evaluate the means and methods of memorization and reproduction, which ultimately gives them the opportunity to choose those that best suit the characteristics of the task at hand. they have a mnemonic task before them. Thus, memory actually acquires the features of genuine arbitrariness, becoming a reflexive-regulated process.

Thus, on the basis of developing theoretical thinking at school age, “cooperation” of two forms of memory is established - involuntary and intensively developing voluntary, providing the student with the opportunity to effectively memorize and selectively reproduce a variety of educational material based on a thorough analysis of the connections between its form and content. It should be emphasized that the formation of memory of this type is one of the important prerequisites for the transition to independent forms of educational activity, which schoolchildren will have to carry out in adolescence.

It is quite obvious that the emergence and intensive development of truly voluntary memory is one of the specific results of developmental education, which is clearly revealed by the end of primary school age and which the teacher, if desired, can easily record and evaluate. To do this, it is enough to invite third-graders to present in writing a narrative text read by the teacher (but the volume is two to three times larger than usual texts for presentation), which includes information of a scientific nature that is new to the students (but, of course, accessible to understanding). This could be, for example, a story about the history of a scientific discovery, containing an explanation of its main provisions. If students refuse to complete such a task (“we didn’t remember anything”) or are able to convey only the plot outline of the text, this will convincingly indicate that they have formed a typical “school” memory, focused on memorizing the form of the material. If they convey at least the basic content of scientific information that is new to them, there is every reason to believe that they are developing a cultural voluntary memory that ensures meaningful assimilation of complex educational material.

From all of the above it follows that the results of developmental education consist not so much in some phenomenal indicators of the mental development of students, but in the general direction of this development. Anyone who expects some miracles from developmental education will be disappointed: such education is not designed for all students to become intellectuals - child prodigies. But it sets the direction for their intellectual development, which ultimately allows each of them to become a genuine subject, first of the teaching, and then of their entire life as a whole. If, on the basis of abstract-associative thinking, rational intelligence begins to form already at primary school age, which ensures successful behavior in standard conditions, but turns out to be untenable when the situation requires an independent search for means and methods of activity, then the content is theoretical thinking, which is intensively formed in the process of developing learning becomes a reliable foundation of intelligence capable of providing a reasonable choice of goals, means and methods of achieving them based on an understanding of the real situation, taking into account objective conditions and one’s capabilities, a critical assessment of one’s own activities and its results. It is this vector of intellectual development, clearly defined already in the first half of primary school age, that should be considered one of the main results of developmental education.

Let us briefly describe those changes in other areas of the student’s personality that occur in the process of developmental education and which should also be considered as its immediate results.

As already noted, the search and research educational task allows the student to realize himself as a subject of learning. It is this circumstance that prompts him from the very beginning to be actively involved in the process of solving educational problems. As the student, thanks to the emerging reflection, begins to meaningfully evaluate the expansion of his abilities to act independently, which leads to the successful solution of educational problems, he develops an interest not only in the process of solving them, but also in its results. By the end of primary school age, this interest acquires a stable and generalized character, beginning to perform the function of not only an incentive, but also a meaning-forming motive for educational activity. It is this that ensures that schoolchildren have a positive attitude towards learning, which turns out to be relatively independent of the degree of success in mastering the educational material. The effectiveness of educational interest is also evidenced by the fact that a school grade actually loses its stimulating functions - students seem to “forget” about its existence. At the same time, a meaningful assessment of the methods and results of educational activities on the part of the teacher and fellow students, and by the end of primary school age, their self-esteem, which becomes more and more objective and critical, is becoming increasingly important for them.

The formation of psychological mechanisms that give learning a personal meaning and thereby ensure a positive attitude towards it is one of the first, but also the most important results of developmental education. Its significance becomes especially clear if we remember that in the context of traditional education, the end of primary school age is marked by a deep motivational crisis. The lack of meaningful motives for learning leads to the fact that students lose interest in it and it turns for them into one of everyday duties, which turns out to be more burdensome the lower the student’s educational success. Unfortunately, not everyone manages to overcome this crisis, which in adolescence becomes a source of deep internal conflict between the student and the school.

It should be emphasized that the formation of meaningful motives for learning is one of the most important events in the history of the development of a student’s personality. It marks the beginning of a qualitative restructuring of the value-semantic sphere of the individual, which determines her life positions, attitude towards the world and towards herself. In the process of this restructuring, the student begins not only to realize, but also to evaluate himself as a subject of activity, which prompts him to change those of his qualities and properties that are perceived as an obstacle to the realization of himself as a subject and therefore do not satisfy him. It is on this basis that in adolescence the need for self-change is formed, the form of satisfaction of which increasingly becomes independent educational activity, self-education, which acquires the meaning of one of the most important areas of life for the individual.

Changes in the intellectual and value-semantic spheres are associated with a radical restructuring of consciousness, which begins at the end of primary school age and covers the entire adolescence period, which is one of the main mechanisms for regulating human behavior.

Firstly, the very picture of the world in the mind changes: freed from elements of subjectivism and randomness, it becomes more and more adequate and holistic, reflecting the objective properties of things and their interconnectedness, interdependence. Secondly, static awareness of the world gives way to a dynamic process of its awareness: as new concepts are learned, the picture of the world is continuously rebuilt and rethought. Thirdly, the regulatory function of consciousness is significantly enhanced. Having realized the objective dependence of the methods of his activity, the student strives to build it in accordance with the picture of the world that opens in his mind. Activity from a conscious process is increasingly turning into a consciously regulated activity. Fourthly, consciousness acquires the features of reflexivity, creating the prerequisites for the transformation of the student from a subject of activity directed outward into a subject of activity aimed at changing oneself, i.e. into a subject of self-change, self-development.

The picture of the development of abilities, which are a complex psychological formation that regulates the executive part of activity, changes significantly in the process of developmental training, i.e. determining the ease and speed of developing skills and abilities, their flexibility and effectiveness. As S.L. noted at one time. Rubinstein, abilities are based on mechanisms of analysis and synthesis (generalization) of objective relations that determine possible ways of acting with things. In the context of traditional learning, as in everyday life, such mechanisms develop spontaneously, so the development of abilities turns out to be a matter of chance. In training specifically aimed at developing methods of meaningful analysis and generalization, the development of relevant abilities (linguistic, mathematical, etc.) turns into a natural process, the course and results of which can be largely regulated through a systematic restructuring of the system of educational tasks and the conditions for their solution . This, of course, does not mean that developmental training guarantees the achievement of a certain, predetermined level of development of a particular ability in each individual case.

It creates only the conditions and prerequisites for the development of abilities, the implementation of which largely depends on a number of factors uncontrollable in learning, and first of all, on what subjective value, what personal meaning this or that area of ​​substantive activity acquires for the student.

Let us finally note that developmental education has a significant impact on the development of the emotional sphere of students. The educational interest itself, which arises as a result of a reflexive assessment of a problem situation, represents a complex emotional experience of dissatisfaction with oneself, one’s incompetence, projected onto the object of action. It is this experience, which causes a state of internal tension, that prompts the student to look for the key to understanding the problem situation, not allowing him to be satisfied with the externally suggested or accidentally found way out of it. Only understanding the reasons that gave rise to the problem relieves internal tension, generating a feeling of satisfaction with the work done. There is hardly any need to specially prove that this feeling turns out to be a much more powerful “reinforcement” for the student than the highest mark given by the teacher. In other words, search and research educational activity is unthinkable without relying on feelings associated with the student’s assessment of himself as a subject of learning. Let us refer once again to L.S. Vygotsky, who, comparing thought with an overhanging cloud, emphasized that the cloud must be driven by the wind and that the wind that moves a person’s thought is his feelings and emotions. Let us emphasize in this regard that reason, based on meaningful thinking, is by no means an antagonist of feelings, as it is sometimes presented. Reason and feelings mutually nourish and strengthen each other. This is another fundamental difference between reason and reason, which is indeed not only dispassionate, but is often hostile to feelings and emotions that push a person to actions that are not consistent with the “rules” of reason.

If the process of solving search and research educational tasks is a powerful stimulus for the development of feelings directed “inward” to the subject of the study himself, then the communication that unfolds in the process of solving these problems turns out to be a source of intensive development of feelings directed “outward” to other people.

It is in the process of educational communication that younger schoolchildren develop and quickly strengthen a sense of respect for another person, for his position, thoughts, which is separated from personal likes and dislikes, as if “rising” above them. The sense of justice so inherent in a child - a preschooler - is filled with new content.

A sense of personal responsibility for a common cause is intensively formed. In other words, teaching, which takes the form of communication, stimulates the development of that set of feelings that ultimately determine the moral character of an individual.

Conclusion

developmental learning schoolchild crisis

Developmental and traditional education are alternative systems. This means that asking which of these systems is “better” is pointless. Of course, you can compare some results obtained with one or another educational system - for example, the quantity and quality of knowledge acquired by students over a certain period of time, or the level of development of their thinking, memory, etc. But the conclusions from such a comparison have approximately the same meaning as the conclusions from the fact that a heavy truck carried a heavier load than a trotter, and the trotter far outpaced the heavy truck at a distance.

Each of these educational systems is designed to achieve very specific educational goals that differ significantly from each other. It is this, and not the abstract criteria of the “effectiveness” of each of them, that should be guided when deciding which one to give preference to. If the organizers of education, the teacher, the parents (unfortunately, the most interested person - the child - is not involved in solving this problem) see the goal of education as preparing the student to be an intelligent performer who successfully functions in one or another area of ​​life, then the traditional system should be chosen - training, improving it whenever possible. If the intended goal of education is to educate each student as a subject of his own life, i.e. a person who is ready to make a conscious choice of life path and bear responsibility for his choice, who is able to independently set himself certain tasks and find the optimal means and methods for solving them, should prefer a system of developmental education. Of course, it does not guarantee that this goal of education will be achieved (“only the individual himself can and should make himself a subject of his own life”), but it creates real prerequisites and conditions for its achievement.

From the above it follows that developmental and traditional education are alternative, but not competing systems. Developmental education is not intended to replace traditional education. As long as the goals of education described above remain relevant, educational systems that correspond to these goals can and should coexist. The question of choosing one or another of them is essentially a question of choosing one or another educational goal. Another thing is that such a choice becomes a real problem only when alternative education systems appear. Before this, the question of changing the goals of education can only be discussed in an abstract philosophical sense. The emergence of a training system that makes qualitatively new educational goals not only desirable, but also actually achievable, translates this problem into practical terms, making it extremely relevant for all those who, in one way or another, are called upon to decide the fate of generations entering life.

It is clear that when solving this problem, it is important to take into account not only the value of certain educational goals, but also the degree of their realism, as well as the realism of the proposed ways to achieve these goals. And if with regard to traditional education these questions are relatively clear - they have been resolved by the centuries-old practice of secondary schools, then the question of the feasibility of the developmental education system requires special discussion.

Bibliography

1.Davydov V.V. Problems of developmental education. - M.: Pedagogy, 1986.

2.Elkonin B.D. The crisis of childhood and the basis for designing forms of child development. - M., 2005

.Elkonin D.B. Developmental learning theory. - M., 2001

Tutoring

Need help studying a topic?

Our specialists will advise or provide tutoring services on topics that interest you.
Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

A characteristic feature of traditional learning is its focus on the past, on those storehouses of social experience where knowledge is stored, organized in a specific type of educational information. Hence the orientation of learning towards memorizing material. It is assumed that as a result of learning as a purely individualized process of appropriating information, the latter acquires the status of knowledge. In this case, information and the sign system act as the beginning and end of the student’s activity, and the future is presented only in the form of an abstract prospect for the application of knowledge.

It is useful to distinguish more strictly between the concepts of “information” and “knowledge”. Information in teaching is a certain sign system (for example, the text of a textbook, a teacher’s speech) that exists objectively, outside of a person. This or that sign as a carrier of information in a certain way replaces real objects, and this is the advantage of using information in teaching. Through substitute signs, the learner can economically and quickly master reality.

However, this is only a possibility. It is necessary for this possibility to turn into reality, for information to become knowledge. To do this, the learner needs to rebuild his past experience taking into account the new content received and make it a means of reasonable behavior in future situations similar to those reflected in this information. Knowledge is a substructure of personality, including not only a reflection of the objects of reality, but also an effective attitude towards them, the personal meaning of what has been learned.

The essence of traditional learning

In pedagogy, it is customary to distinguish three main types of teaching: traditional (or explanatory-illustrative), problem-based and programmed.

Each of these types has both positive and negative sides. However, there are clear supporters of both types of training. Often they absolutize the advantages of their preferred training and do not fully take into account its shortcomings. As practice shows, the best results can be achieved only with an optimal combination of different types of training. Today, the most common option is the traditional training option. The foundations of this type of training were laid almost four centuries ago by Y.A. Comenius (“Great Didactics”).

The term "traditional learning" implies, first of all, the class-lesson organization of education that developed in the 17th century. on the principles of didactics formulated by Ya.A. Comenius, and is still predominant in schools around the world. The distinctive features of traditional classroom technology are as follows:

• students of approximately the same age and level of training form a class, which remains largely constant for the entire period of schooling;
• The class works according to a single annual plan and program according to the schedule. As a consequence, children must come to school at the same time of year and at predetermined times of the day;
• the basic unit of study is the lesson;
• a lesson, as a rule, is devoted to one academic subject, topic, due to which students in the class work on the same material;
• The work of students in the lesson is supervised by the teacher: he evaluates the results of study in his subject, the level of learning of each student individually, and at the end of the school year makes a decision on transferring students to the next grade;
• Educational books are used mainly for homework.

Traditional teaching: postulates and principles, characteristics of methods

Pedagogy of authority. Traditional teaching is based on authority. Traditional education is a pedagogy of authority. The “authority” of traditional education within itself has a complex, composite structure, in which the authority of the content of teaching and upbringing is supported by the authority of the state and the teacher. The authority of the content lies in the indispensable presence of a sample, a standard.

A model is an ideal that unites people; it is a reliable “existential orientation.” Samples include reference knowledge, skills, methods of activity and interaction, values, relationships, experiences. There is a strict, biased selection of sample contents. The samples must be introduced sequentially.

The authority of the Teacher. The teacher, undoubtedly, is the main subject of learning - authority. The teacher’s personality cannot be replaced by any “developmental systems”, “interactive whiteboards”, “Unified State Exam”, “modernizations”. The word “didactics” itself, meaning “a branch of pedagogy that sets out the theory of education and learning,” comes from the Greek word “didaktikos” - teaching. To fulfill the “intermediary” mission, the teacher improves himself.

Directives. The pedagogy of authority is directive pedagogy. The meaning of learning is not in willful choice, but in painstaking comprehension of samples. A traditional teacher guides the child’s development, directs movement in the right direction (gives directives), insures against mistakes, and guarantees the student’s timely arrival at the “destination port” - to a previously known good goal - a model. The modern “traditional” program for raising children in kindergarten, published in 2005, repeats the idea of ​​the famous psychologist and teacher N.N. Poddyakova about two forms of children's activity. The first, “determined by the content offered to adults,” consists in the appropriation of cultural models, and the models “transmitted” by the teacher, naturally, must be “adequate to the period of childhood.” “The adult acts as a mediator between culture and the child and offers various examples of culture.” The second form is the child’s own “experimental, creative activity.” The traditional approach, without detracting from the importance of spontaneous forms of children's activity, places emphasis on the purposeful, organized transmission of a model, on pedagogical activity. Only with this understanding does learning truly lead to development.

Inspiration, high goals. Traditional pedagogy is a pedagogy of inspiration: high goals that are understandable to the child and the teacher. At every step of life, both small and large, an extremely important aspiration makes itself felt, which I.P. Pavlov refers to it as “the instinct to achieve a goal.” Consequently, being deprived of a goal, activity becomes disoriented and disintegrates. The goals of education are undoubtedly culturally and historically conditioned and determined.

The pedagogical system begins with goal setting. A great master of setting “near” and “distant” goals and “prospects” was Anton Semyonovich Makarenko. To properly educate a team means “surrounding it with a complex chain of promising ideas, daily arousing in the team images of tomorrow, joyful images that lift a person and infect him with joy today.”

Example. Traditional pedagogy – pedagogy of examples.

“Pioneer is an example for the Octobrists.” And the teacher is to the students. "Do as I do". Look up to me. Come after me. Look at me. In traditional teaching and upbringing, the teacher is a personification, a living embodiment of a model in attitude to work, in clothing, in thoughts, in actions - in everything. A teacher's personal example has the highest status. “Personal example is a method of moral education and training” (Ya.A. Komensky). “Educate with examples rather than with prescriptions,” Ekaterina Romanovna Dashkova advised teachers.

“Education is acquired by imitation,” wrote the outstanding mathematician and teacher Nikolai Ivanovich Lobachevsky (1792-1856). As is the teacher, so is the class.

In teaching and upbringing, a positive example is inevitably complemented by a negative anti-example. By comparing and contrasting polar meanings - beauty and ugliness, the student understands what is expected of him, what is warned against, how to act and what should be avoided in a given life situation.

Team. Traditional pedagogy is collectivist, communal pedagogy. In the traditional culture of the vast majority of peoples, “we” is unconditionally higher than “I”. The group, family, corporation, people are higher than the individual.

A traditional teacher teaches a child humility before norms, trains and exercises the ability to shorten pride, to subordinate the private, the personal to the general, the public.

The right to be “different from everyone else” is the prerogative of a select few and, in any case, already mature adults. And the highest virtue of young men is not to stand out from the mass of their peers, not to attract special attention to themselves, even demonstrating outstanding personal achievements, to remain modest, equal to those around them, attributing successes and victories to the team, to the mentor.

Knowledge. School is designed to provide knowledge.

The student “first of all must know that something exists (familiarization), then what it is in its properties (understanding), and finally, know how to use his knowledge.”

According to the point of view of Ya.A. Komensky, “the main goal of the school is to transfer to students as much knowledge as possible from various fields of science.

By getting acquainted with one or another subject segment, with the wise structure of the world, a person improves the instrument of cognition - the mind. The subject is valuable in itself, it “shows”, “tells”, “explains”, awakens hitherto hidden intellectual reserves.

To form scientific concepts and a theoretical way of solving problems, a “known level of development of spontaneous concepts” (L.S. Vygotsky), “concepts based on a formal-empirical type of generalization” (V.V. Davydov) is simply necessary. Spontaneous concepts give firmness and certainty to thinking, and constitute its figurative texture and background.

Discipline. Discipline allows the student to “give up whims,” “get the better of his nerves,” and autocratically dispose of “the treasures and hiding places of his own nervous organization” (K.D. Ushinsky). Schedule! Behavior rules. "Unconditional obedience to demands." Know your place in the ranks. “A school without discipline is a mill without water.” In his works, Comenius understands discipline as: “a condition of training and education; the personification of organization is a subject of education, a means of education, a system of disciplinary sanctions.”

The formation of will and character goes hand in hand with the formation of the mind. Emphasizing this connection, I.F. Herbart introduced the concept of “educational teaching”, understanding as such “the combination of discipline with training”, “knowledge with will and feeling”.

Repetition.“Repetition in pedagogical science is usually understood as the reproduction of already covered material, the establishment of an organic connection between old and new material, as well as the systematization, generalization and deepening of known material on a topic, section or the entire course as a whole.” “In pedagogical science, consolidation is usually understood as secondary perception and comprehension of the material.”

Repetition is necessary to transfer information from short-term and working memory to long-term memory. A new period of learning “must necessarily begin with a repetition of what has been learned, and only with this repetition does the student fully master what was previously learned and feel the accumulation of strength within himself, giving him the opportunity to go further.”

The evolution of traditional learning has not avoided repetition. Improving repetition consisted of a decrease in mechanical forms with a corresponding increase in “semantic” repetition. Let us recall that rote memorization is the sequential memorization of individual parts of the material without relying on logical, semantic connections. It is to semantic repetition, repetition, paradoxically, that develops the student’s thinking and creative abilities, to interesting repetition, revealing paradoxes and contradictions, uniting various knowledge in synthesis, building interdisciplinary connections, evoking “distant associations” that outstanding representatives of traditional education strived for . “An educator who understands the nature of memory will constantly resort to repetition, not in order to repair what has fallen apart, but in order to strengthen knowledge and build a new level on it. Understanding that every trace of memory is not only a trace of a past sensation, but at the same time also a force for acquiring new information, the teacher will constantly take care of preserving these forces, since they contain the key to acquiring new information. Every step forward must be based on a repetition of the previous one,” said Ushinsky. Mastering important and complex issues urgently requires not just reproduction, verbatim “reproduction” (although such repetition cannot be written off). Deep and lasting assimilation of knowledge is facilitated by the following methods of activating intellectual activity during repetition: “semantic grouping of material, highlighting semantic strongholds, semantic comparison of what is remembered with something already known”; “incorporating… new things into repeated material, setting new tasks”; “the use of various types and techniques of repetition.”

Traditional learning: essence, advantages and disadvantages. Advantages and disadvantages of traditional education

The undoubted advantage of traditional learning is the ability to convey a large amount of information in a short time. With such training, students acquire knowledge in a ready-made form without revealing ways to prove its truth. In addition, it involves the assimilation and reproduction of knowledge and its application in similar situations. Among the significant disadvantages of this type of learning is its focus more on memory rather than thinking. This training also does little to promote the development of creative abilities, independence, and activity. The most typical tasks are the following: insert, highlight, underline, remember, reproduce, solve by example, etc. The educational and cognitive process is largely reproductive in nature, as a result of which students develop a reproductive style of cognitive activity. Therefore, it is often called the “school of memory.”

The main contradictions of traditional education

A.A. Verbitsky highlighted the contradictions of traditional teaching:

1. The contradiction between the orientation of the content of educational activities to the past. The future appears for the student in the form of an abstract, non-motivating prospect for the application of knowledge, therefore the teaching has no personal meaning for him.
2. The duality of educational information - it acts as a part of culture and at the same time only as a means of its development and personal development. The resolution of this contradiction lies on the path of overcoming the “abstract method of school” and modeling in the educational process such real conditions of life and activity that would allow the student to “return” to the culture enriched intellectually, spiritually and practically, and thereby become the cause of the development of the culture itself.
3. The contradiction between the integrity of culture and its mastery by the subject through many subject areas - academic disciplines as representatives of sciences. This tradition is consolidated by the division of school teachers (into subject teachers) and the departmental structure of the university. As a result, instead of a holistic picture of the world, the student receives fragments of a “broken mirror” that he himself is not able to collect.
4. The contradiction between the way culture exists as a process and its representation in teaching in the form of static sign systems. Training appears as a technology for transmitting ready-made educational material, alienated from the dynamics of cultural development, taken out of the context of both the upcoming independent life and activity, and from the current needs of the individual himself. As a result, not only the individual, but also the culture finds itself outside the development processes.
5. The contradiction between the social form of existence of culture and the individual form of its appropriation by students. In traditional pedagogy, it is not allowed, since the student does not combine his efforts with others to produce a joint product - knowledge. Being close to others in a group of students, each person "dies alone." Moreover, for helping others, the student is punished (by reprimanding the “hint”), which encourages his individualistic behavior.

The principle of individualization, understood as the isolation of students in individual forms of work and according to individual programs, especially in the computer version, excludes the possibility of nurturing creative individuality, which, as is known, is achieved not through Robinsonade, but through “another person” in the process of dialogic communication and interaction, where a person performs not just objective actions, but actions. It is the act, and not the individual objective action, that should be considered as the unit of student activity.

Traditional learning: essence, advantages and disadvantages. Conclusion

Education- part of the process of personality formation. Through this process, society transfers knowledge and skills from one person to another. During the learning process, certain cultural values ​​are imposed on the student; the learning process is aimed at socializing the individual, but sometimes education conflicts with the true interests of the student.

Education is the most important and reliable way to obtain systematic education. Learning is nothing more than a specific process of cognition, controlled by a teacher. It is the guiding role of the teacher that ensures the full assimilation of knowledge, skills and abilities by schoolchildren, the development of their mental strength and creative abilities.

Traditional training– the most common traditional training option so far. The foundations of this type of education were laid almost four centuries ago by J. A. Komensky (“The Great Didactics”).

It is designed to convey, broadcast tradition, reproduce in space and centuries the traditional mentality (spiritual and mental makeup), traditional worldview, traditional hierarchy of values, folk axiology (value picture of the world).

Traditional teaching has its own content (tradition) and has its own traditional principles and methods, and has its own traditional teaching technology.

Where did traditional teaching methods come from? They have been discovered and developed by teachers over thousands of years, through trial and error, mistakes and trials, in teaching practice, in pedagogical work.

Teachers taught and passed on the traditions of their century, their culture. But teachers taught people, and people naturally have differences and, just as naturally, there are traits common to human nature that are common to the entire human race. Actively influencing students during the learning process, experimenting with human consciousness, teachers experimentally and empirically identified features corresponding to human consciousness as such, arising from the very nature of consciousness. The adaptation of teachers to the subject of their work - human consciousness, constant action “following the contours of the subject of their work”, recognition of the fundamental laws, strengths and limitations of consciousness and thinking led teachers to the discovery of a similar teaching methodology - the traditional method.

The advantage of traditional learning is the ability to convey a large amount of information in a short time. With such training, students acquire knowledge in a ready-made form without revealing ways to prove its truth. In addition, it involves the assimilation and reproduction of knowledge and its application in similar situations. Among the significant disadvantages of this type of learning is its focus more on memory rather than thinking. This training also does little to promote the development of creative abilities, independence, and activity.

List of used literature

1. Stepanova, M. A. On the state of pedagogical psychology in the light of the modern social situation / M. A. Stepanova // Questions of psychology. – 2010. - No. 1.
2. Rubtsov, V.V. Psychological and pedagogical training of teachers for a new school / V.V. Rubtsov // Questions of psychology. – 2010. - No. 3.
3. Bandurka, A. M. Fundamentals of psychology and pedagogy: textbook. manual / A. M. Bandurka, V. A. Tyurina, E. I. Fedorenko. – Rostov n/d: Phoenix, 2009.
4. Fominova A.N., Shabanova T.L. Pedagogical psychology. – 2nd ed., revised, additional. M.: Flinta: Nauka, 2011
5. Vygotsky L.S. Pedagogical psychology. M., 1996.
6. Novikov A. M. Foundations of pedagogy. M.: Egves, 2010.
7. Sorokoumova E.A.: Educational psychology. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2009
8. Poddyakov N. N. A new approach to the development of creativity in preschool children. Questions of psychology. – M., 2005

Check yourself!

1. When were the foundations of the traditional type of education laid?

a) More than 100 years ago
b) More than 4th century so-called.
c) In 1932
d) More than the 10th century so-called.

2. Who laid the foundations for the traditional education option?

a) Z.Z. Freud
b) Plato
c) Ya.A. Kamensky
d) A.P. Kuzmich

3. What does the term traditional learning mean?

a) Classroom organization of training
b) Individual training
c) Free choice of subjects
d) There are no correct answers

4. What types of communication exist?

a) formal-empirical
b) verbal
c) abstract
d) fractal

5. The great mathematician, to whom the words “Education is acquired by imitation” belong:

a) N.I. Lobachevsky
b) Rene Descartes
c) D.I. Mendeleev
d) V.M. Bekhterev

6. What does the Greek word “didaktikos” mean?

a) guide
b) rejecting
c) despising
d) receiving

7. Who introduced the concept of “educational teaching”?

a) L.S. Vygodsky
b) E.I. Fedorenko
c) I.F. Herbert
d) V.V. Rubtsov

8. Complete the statement: “A school without discipline is a mill without...”

a) teachers
b) founder
c) water
d) miller

9. Who was one of the great masters of setting “near” and “far” goals in the traditional type of education?

a) L.M. Mitin
b) S.M. Motors
c) A.S. Makarenko
d) S.M. Rubynin

10. Who owns the words “personal example is a method of moral education and training”?

a) I.P. Pavlov
b) Ya.A. Kamensky
c) R.P. Machiavelli
d) V.M. Bekhterev