Authors
- Lugovaya Tatyana V. PhD in Pedagogy
- Nechaev Mikhail P. Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences, Associate Professor
Annotation
Researchers and practitioners have revealed a decrease in the social competence of schoolchildren, an increase in non-constructive forms of communication and behavior
when it is necessary to resolve the simplest conflicts. In this regard, the issue of creating conditions for direct communication and joint activity in small groups of 11–15 years old students, whose age is a particularly sensitive period for the formation of competencies of social interaction of a person with other people and a group, acquires particular importance. The solution to this problem is possible by looking for new approaches to organizing the interaction of students in small groups that integrate the scientific achievements of sociology, psychology and pedagogy. The theoretical basis of the research is formed by the approaches of the humanistic paradigm of education; pedagogical and socio-psychological group theories. The study used theoretical and empirical methods. The results of the study are that the perspective of the idea of the priority of group forms of educational activity in the basic school in the formation of the competence of cooperation of students has been proved; introduced socio-pedagogical typological characteristics of students; the provisions on the need to expand pedagogical knowledge about a small group, the introduction of an additional parameter — the level of development of the group subject; disclosed the possibilities of the intragroup environment in the formation and development
of the competence of cooperation; the modernization of the approach used in traditional educational practice to the process of organizing the interaction of students in small groups was carried out, while the grounds for differentiation are academic characteristics, socio-psychological differences of students and the level of development of small groups; developed and implemented a methodology for assessing the competence of students’ cooperation, which is a component of the system for assessing metasubject and personal educational results, as well as a criterion-level complex for assessing the development of small groups; additional professional advanced training programs for teachers were created and implemented, aimed at improving the psychological, pedagogical and methodological competence of teachers in organizing group interaction of students.
How to link insert
Lugovaya, T. V. & Nechaev, M. P. (2022). INTERACTION OF STUDENTS IN SMALL GROUPS: ORGANIZATION BASED ON A DIFFERENTIATED APPROACH Bulletin of the Moscow City Pedagogical University. Series "Pedagogy and Psychology", 16(1), 134. https://doi.org/10.25688/2076-9121.2022.16.1.07
References
1.
1. Asmolov, A. G. (2015). Optics of education: socio-cultural perspectives. Moscow: Education. (In Russ.).
2.
2. Ilyin, E. P. (2011). Psychology of communication and interpersonal relations. St. Petersburg: Peter. (In Russ.).
3.
3. Zhuravlev, A. L. (2006). Socio-psychological analysis of performing activities in the labor collective. Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie, 2, 136–148. (In Russ.) URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/sotsialno-psihologicheskiy-analiz-ispolnitelskoy-deyatelnosti-vtrudovom-kollektive
4.
4. Kolominskii, Ia. L. (2014). Motivation of sociometric elections. Pedagogicheskaia nauka i obrazovanie, 2(7), 10–13. (In Russ.). URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=41855628
5.
5. Korotaeva, E. V. (2016). Pedagogy of interaction in educational space: scientific school of E. V. Korotaeva. Pedagogical education in Russia, 2, 195–199. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.26170/po16-02-30
6.
6. Korotaeva, E. V. (2016). Organization of interactions in the educational process of the school: monograph. Moscow: National Book Center, IF September. (In Russ.).
7.
7. Dubovitskaya, T. A., & Shcherbakova, O. I. (2012). The problem of psychological preparedness of the individual to cooperate. Modern Problems of Science and Education. Surgery, 3. (In Russ.). URL: https://science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id=6418
8.
8. Johnson, D. (2014). Using technology to revolutionize learning: an opin-ion. Educational Psychology, 5. URL: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4195269
9.
9. Zimniaia, I. A. (2004). Key competencies as an effective-target basis for a competence-based approach in education. Author’s version. Moscow: Research Center for the Problems of the Quality of Training of Specialists. (In Russ.). URL: http://212.112.113.247/wpcontent/uploads/2018/09/Kluchevye_kompetent.pdf
10.
10. Raven, Dzh. (2002). Competence in modern society: identification, development and implementation. Moscow: Kogito-Center. (In Russ.).
11.
11. Petrovskii, A. V. (1998). Foundations of theoretical psychology. Moscow: INFRA M. (In Russ.).
12.
12. Dontsov, A. I., Dontsov, D. A. (2018). Scientific and methodological basis for understanding the context of socialization and socio-psychological development of a person. Shkol’nye tekhnologii, 4, 10–17. (In Russ.).
13.
13. Kondratyev, M. I. (2008). Social psychology in education. Moscow: PER SE. (In Russ.) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=20242122
14.
14. Levin, K. (2000). Field theory in the social sciences. St. Petersburg: Sensor. (In Russ.).
15.
15. Verderber, R. (2003). Psychology of communication. St. Petersburg: PRIME EVROZNAK. (In Russ.).
16.
16. Brown, R., & Pehrson, S. (2019). Group Processes — Dynamics within and Between Groups. Wiley-Blackwell. http://doi.org/10.1002/9781118719244
17.
17. Iasvin, V. A. (2019). The school environment as a subject of measurement: expertise, design, management. Moscow: Public education. (In Russ.).
18.
18. Nechaev, M. P. (2020). Existing and necessary conditions for the development of the educational environment of the educational organization. Vospitanie shkol’nikov, 2, 15–19. (In Russ.). URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=42618706
19.
19. Lugovaia, T. V. (2019). Conditions forming the competence of cooperation of students in the educational process. Pedagogical Journal, 9(4A), 95–103. (In Russ.). http://doi.org/10.34670/AR.2019.45.4.010
20.
20. Novikov, D. A. (2008). Statistical methods in pedagogical research (typical cases). Moscow: MZ-Press. (In Russ.).
21.
21. Alper, A. (2021). The evaluation of collaborative synchronous learning environment within the framework of interaction and community of inquiry: An experimental study. Pedagogical Research, 5, 2, 72–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.33902/JPR.2021269326
22.
22. Back, H. M. (2010). The Effects of Communication Disorders on Social Development. CMC Senior Theses. URL: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/cmc_theses/77
23.
23. Chen, C. M., & Kuo, C. H. (2019). An optimized group formation scheme to promote collaborative problem-based learning. Computers & Education, 133, 94–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.01.011
24.
24. Keengwe, J., Adjei-Boateng, E., & Diteeyont, W. (2013). Facilitating active social presence and meaningful interactions in online learning. Education and Information Technologies, 18(4), 597–607. URL: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10639-012-9197-9
25.
25. Matsuo, M., Arai, K., & Matsuo, T. (2019). Empowering leadership and meaningful work: the mediating role of learning goal orientation. International Journal of Training and Development, 23(4), 328–338. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijtd.12165
26.
26. Turgut, Y., & Karal, H. (2015). Factors affecting interaction in a distance education via video conferencing. Journal of Instructional Technologies & Teacher Education, 4(1), 1–12. URL: https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/231327
27.
27. Yang, F., Huang, X., & Wu, L. (2019). Experiencing meaningfulness climate in teams: How spiritual leadership enhances team effectiveness when facing uncertain tasks. Human Resource Management, 58(2), 155–168. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21943