Continuity of mythologized representations of future and practical teachers
Abstract
The article presents the theoretical foundations and results of an experimental study of the peculiarities of the professional consciousness of teachers (future and already working), expressed in their ideas (including mythologized ones) about teaching, the teacher and students as its subjects, and in many respects determining the effectiveness their professional activities. The dynamics and continuity of such ideas at different stages of the professional path are revealed.
The purpose of the study – the study of the professional consciousness of teachers, including its mythological component. The purpose of the article is to present the results of psychologic-based methods and methods of research of mythologized ideas of future and practicing teachers as part of their professional consciousness.
The theoretical foundations of the study are psycholinguistic theories, revealing the peculiarities of speech production at the textual and pretext levels; psychological theories and empirical studies of the mythological component of the personality consciousness; studies of the teacher’s professional consciousness; the main provisions of pedagogical mythological studies.
The results of the empirical research have shown that in the professional consciousness of both practicing teachers and future teachers there are mythologized ideas about the pedagogical reality (about yourself, the profession, students, the pedagogical process, parents, etc.). However, the content (set) and the degree of prevalence of such ideas among students and practicing teachers are different. More similarities are observed among graduate students and practicing teachers: they are characterized by the idealization of the teacher’s image (“A good teacher hides his real feelings from schoolchildren”, “A good teacher answers any question”), an exaggeration of the significance of the methodology (“omnipotent”). Mythological constructs of first-year students and practicing teachers differ significantly: first-year students are characterized by negative perceptions of the profession (“Teacher’s work is continuous hassle, martyrdom”), students (“Modern children don’t want to learn”), practically not occurring in practicing educators and much less common in graduate students.
The results obtained allow us to understand how scientific and pedagogical knowledge is comprehended by a teacher, why certain scientific theories do not find practical application, what else, in addition to scientific knowledge, is the teacher guided, designing pedagogical interaction, why he chooses certain strategies of pedagogical education? whether strategies based on extra-scientific knowledge or on a complex of scientific and extra-scientific knowledge can be effective, how and why attitudes to future pedagogical reality, beginners and Mature teachers, like the teacher himself or the teacher of a higher educational institution, mentor, or methodologist can strengthen the constructive and reduce the destructive influence of myths on the teacher’s professional consciousness.
Downloads
References
Belyaeva, L.A. (1994). Germenevticheskoe izmerenie pedagogicheskoy deyatelnosti [Hermeneutical dimension of pedagogical activity]. Ekaterinburg: Izdatelstvo Uralskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta [in Russian].
Borodulkina, T.А. (2017). Psikhosemanticheskiy analiz otnosheniya roditeley eksperimentalnogo uchebnogo uchrezhdeniya k valdorfskoy pedagogike [Psychosemantic analysis of the parents’ attitude of the experimental educational institution to Waldorf pedagogy]. Psikholingvistika – Psycholinguistics, 21(1), 41–64 [in Russian].
Brudnyy, A.A. (1998). Psikhologicheskaya germenevtika [Psychological hermeneutics]. Moscow: Labirint [in Russian].
Dubnova, M.B. (2003). Socialnaya mifologiya sovremennosti v otrazhenii SMI i populyarnyh pes 1990-h gg. [The social mythology of modern times in the reflection of the media and popular plays of the 1990 s.]. Candidate’s thesis. Moscow [in Russian].
Yelgina, S.V. (2014). Intellektualnyye osobennosti lichnosti podrostkov, proyavlyayushchiyesya v kognitivnom komponente ikh rechevykh deystviy [Intellectual features of the personality of adolescents, manifested in the cognitive component of their speech actions]. Psikholingvistika – Psycholinguistics, 15, 48–61 [in Russian].
Elfimova, M.M. (2011). Teoretiko-metodicheskie osnovy mifokommunikatsionnogo treninga v rabote s uchitelyami [Teoretiko-methodical bases of myth-communication training in work with teachers]. Proceedings from International Scientific Conference ’14: XIV Mezhdunarodnaya konferentsiya molodykh uchenykh “Chelovek v mire. Mir v cheloveke: aktualnye problemy filosofii, sotsiologii, politologii i psikhologii” – XIV International Conference of Young Scientists “Man in the world. Peace in Man: Actual Problems of Philosophy, Sociology, Political Science and Psychology”. URL http://dogmon.org/teoretiko-metodicheskie-osnovi-mifokommunikacionnogo-treninga.html [in Russian].
Efremova, O.I. (2013). Mifologizirovannye komponenty professionalnogo soznaniya budushchikh psikhologov obrazovaniya i ikh korrektsiya [Mythologized components of professional consciousness of future psychologists of education and their correction]. Kontsept – The concept, 5, 26–30 [in Russian].
Zakirova, A.F. (2004). Germenevticheskaya interpretatsiya pedagogicheskogo znaniya [Hermeneutic interpretation of pedagogical knowledge]. Pedagogika – Pedagogy, 1, 32–42 [in Russian].
Zinchenko, V.P. (1992). Obrazovaniye. Kultura. Soznaniye [Education. Culture Consciousness]. Filosofiya obrazovaniya dlya XXI veka – Philosophy of education for the XXI century. Moscow: Prosveshcheniye [in Russian].
Ivushkina, E.B. (1999). Sovremennaya mifologiya: soderzhanie i mesto v razlichnykh oblastyakh kultury [Modern mythology: the content and place in various fields of culture]. Candidate’s thesis. Rostov-na-Donu [in Russian].
Illich, I. (2006). Osvobozhdeniye ot shkol. Proportsionalnost i sovremennyy mir (frag-menty iz rabot raznykh let) [Liberation from Schools. Proportionality and the modern world (fragments of works from different years)]. T. Shanina (Ed.). Moscow: Prosveshcheniye [in Russian].
Lobok, A.M. (1997). Antropologiya mifa [Anthropology of myth]. Yekaterinburg: Bank kulturnoy informatsii [in Russian].
Maznichenko, M.A., & Tyunnikov, Yu.S. (2004). Pedagogicheskiye fobii i manii: klassifikatsiya i preodoleniye [Pedagogical phobias and mania: classification and overcoming]. Narodnoye obrazovaniye – Public education, 7, 233 [in Russian].
Meletinskij, E.M. (2000). Poehtika mifa [Poetics of the myth]. Moscow: Publishing Company of the Russian Academy of Sciences «Vostochnaya literature» [in Russian].
Meleshko, V.I. (2015). Lyubov k detyam – vranye. Uvazhenie k pedagogam – mif [Love of children is a lie. Respect for teachers is a myth]. Uchitelskaya gazeta – Teacher’s newspaper, 46. Retrieved from https://proshkolu.ru/user/moderato/blog/533357 [in Russian].
Mogutina, T.Yu. (1998). O pedagogicheskih stereotipah kak barerah tvorcheskoj aktivnosti uchitelya [On pedagogical stereotypes as barriers to the creative activity of teachers]. Psihologiya pedagogicheskogo myshleniya: teoriya i ehksperiment – Psychology of pedagogical thinking: theory and experiment (pp. 100–109). Moscow: Institut pedagogiki Rossijskoj akademii nauk [in Russian].
Morozova, V.Ye. (2000). Uchet osobennostey pedagogicheskogo myshleniya pri povyshenii professionalno kompetentnosti vospitateley doshkolnykh obrazovatelnykh uchrezhdeniy (v usloviyakh IPK) [Taking into account the peculiarities of pedagogical thinking with increasing the professional competence of pre-school educational establishments]. Candidate’s thesis. Barnaul [in Russian].
Mynbayeva, A.K., & Kurmanova, I.Sh. (2012). Pedagogicheskiye stereotipy v professionalnoy deyatelnosti: za i protiv [Pedagogical stereotypes in professional activity: for and against]. Vestnik KazNU – Veschitnik Kazan State University, 2(36), 33–44 [in Russian].
Potebnya, A.A. (1989). Slovo i mif [Word and myth]. Moscow: Pravda [in Russian].
Raff, S.Ye. (1994). Pedagogicheskoye vzaimodeystviye kak obyekt diagnostiki i korrektsii [Pedagogical interaction as an object of diagnosis and correction]. Candidate’s thesis. Kazan [in Russian].
Ricoeur, P. (1996). Germenevtika i psihoanaliz. Religiya i vera [Hermeneutics and psychoanalysis. Religion and faith]. Moscow: Iskusstvo [in Russian].
Rogov, Ye.I. (1998). Uchitel kak obyekt psikhologicheskogo issledovaniya [Teacher as an object of psychological research]. Moscow: VLADOS [in Russian].
Rumyantseva, T.V. (2006). Psikhologicheskoye konsultirovaniye: diagnostika otnosheniy v pare [Psychological Counseling: Diagnosis of Relationships in a Couple]. Sankt-Peterburg: Rech [in Russian].
Sapogova, Ye.Ye. (2003). Zhizn i sudba: postroyeniye individualnoy mifologii, samoproyektirovaniye i subkultura lichnosti [Life and Fate: Building Individual Mythology, Self-Projecting and Personality Subculture]. Izvestiya TulGU – Proceedings of Tula State University (Vols. 3), (pp. 195–214). Tula: TulGU [in Russian].
Sulima, I.I. (2004). Bytiynyy status obrazovaniya: Germenevticheskaya kontseptsiya [The Genetic Status of Education: The Hermeneutic Concept]. Doctor’s thesis. Nizhniy Novgorod [in Russian].
Sutyrina, T.A. (2006). Vzaimodeystvie pedagogicheskoy publitsistiki i pedagogicheskoy mifologemy [Interaction of Pedagogical Journalism and Pedagogical Mythology]. Obrazovanie i nauka – Education and Science, 4, 123–130 [in Russian].
Tyunnikov, Yu.S., & Maznichenko, M.A. (2004). Pedagogicheskaya mifologiya kak oblast teoreticheskogo znaniya: nekotoryye aktualnyye problem [Pedagogical mythology as an area of theoretical knowledge: some pressing problems]. Nauka i shkola – Science and school, 5, 16 [in Russian].
Utkin, A.V. (2012). Missiya uchitelya v mezhdistsiplinarnoy problematike issledovaniy [Teacher’s mission in interdisciplinary research issues]. Prepodavatel’ ХХI vek – Teacher of the 21st century, 1(1), 46-56 [in Russian].
Ushakov, K.M., & Fishbeyn, D.E. (2005). Bazovye predstavleniya pedagogicheskogo soobshchestva [Basic representations of the pedagogical community]. Direktor shkoly – Head teacher, 2, 10–13 [in Russian].
Fomina, N.A., & Leeva, A.N. (2013). Proyavleniya individualnyih osobennostey lichnosti v rechevoy produktsii na predtekstovom urovne [Manifestations of individual characteristics of a person in speech production at the pre-text level]. Psiholingvistika – Psycholinguistics, 12, 140–147 [in Russian].
Fomina, N.A., & Poshekhonova, A.N. (2016). Otrazheniye osobennostey lichnosti uchiteley-logopedov v produktivnom komponente ikh rechevykh deystviy [Reflection of personality peculiarities of speech-therapy teachers in the productive component of their speech actions]. Psikholingvistika – Psycholinguistics, 19(1), 174–182 [in Russian].
Hyubner, K. (1996). Istina mifa [The truth of the myth]. Moscow: Respublika [in Russian].
Chudova, N.V. (1999). Mifologicheskaya sostavlyayushchaya obraza «Ya» [Mythological component of the image of “I”]. Psikhologicheskiy zhurnal – Psychological journal, 5(20), 45–50 [in Russian].
Shurukhina, T.N. (2000). Soderzhaniye i sredstva formirovaniya tselostnosti pedagogicheskogo soznaniya u budushchikh uchiteley v protsesse vuzovskoy professionalnoy podgotovki [Тhe content and means of forming the integrity of the pedagogical consciousness of future teachers in the process of university vocational training]. Candidate’s thesis. Sankt-Peterburg [in Russian].
Shcherbinina, Yu.V. (2010). Pedagogicheskiy diskurs: myslit – govorit – deystvovat [Pedagogical discourse: think – speak – act]. Moscow: Flinta; Nauka [in Russian].
Eliade, M. (2010). Aspekty mifa [Aspects of the myth]. Moscow: Akademicheskiy proyekt [in Russian].
Yatsenko, T.S. (2012). Vizualizatsiya psikhicheskogo v tselyakh yego glubinnogo poznaniya [Visualization of the psychic for the purpose of its deep knowledge]. Psikholingvistika – Psycholinguistics, 11, 142–160 [in Russian].
Akopova, M., & Chernyavskaya, V. (2014). Evaluation of Academic Science: Perspectives and Challenges. Zeitschrift fur Evaluation, 2, 348–357.
Brophy, J.E., & Good T.L. (1974). Teacher Student Relationships: Causes and Consequences. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Bylieva, D., Lobatyuk, V., Nikiforova N., & Petrova, M. (2017). The Problem of “Sign Field” Creation for the Russian National Technology Initiative. 4th International Multidisciplinary Scientific Conference on Social Sciences and Arts SGEM2017 (Vols. 1), (pp. 117–124). doi: 10.5593/SGEMSOCIAL2017/HB61/S7.14
Cook, J. (2017). How to Effectively Debunk Myths About Aging and Other Misconceptions. Public Policy & Aging Report, 27(1), 13–17. https://doi.org/10.1093/ppar/prw034
Furhammar, L., & Isaksson, F. (1971). Politics and film. New York: Praeger Publishers.
Lenzen, D. (2000). Mythos, Metapher und Simulation. Zeitschrift fur Padagogik, 33(1), 57–58.
Moreno, J.A., & Hellín, M.G. (2014). Yel interés del alumnado de Yedutsatsión Setsundaria Obligatoria khatsia la Yedutsatsión Físitsa. Revista Mexicana Investigacion Educativa, 9(2), 1–20.
Murphy, M.C., Richeson, J.A., Shelton, J.N., Rheinschmidt, M. L., & Bergsieker, H.B. (2013). Cognitive costs of contemporary prejudice. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 16, 560–571. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430212468170
Osgood, Ch.Е., May, W.H., & Miron, M.S. (1975). Cross cultural universals of affective meaning. Urbanа: University of Illinois Press.
Pozdeeva, E.G., Trostinskaya, I.R., Evseeva, L.I., & Ivanova R.A. (2017). Problems of Personality Type Transformation in Current Conditions of Russian. Society RPTSS 2017: International Conference on Research Paradigms Transformation in Social Sciences, The European Proceedings of Social & Behavioural Sciences EpSBS (Vols. XXXV), (pp. 1092–1099). doi: 10.15405/epsbs.2018.02.128
Toosi, N.R., Babbitt, L.G., Ambady, N., & Sommers, S.R. (2012). Dyadic interracial interactions: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 138, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025767
Abstract views: 532 PDF Downloads: 274
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
International Conference Website
