CC BY
28«Cisco Webex Meetings» показали свою эффективность. В соответствии со сложившейся ситуацией возникла необходимость формирования и дальнейшего совершенствования отечественных электронных образовательных платформ и ресурсов в соответствии с требованиями перевода образования на дистанционное обучение в Республике Казахстан.
2. При обучении естествознания тестирование, составленное с помощью электронных онлайн тестирований в системе Google и «ISpring Quiz Maker», показало эффективность использования полученных знаний учащимися в качестве инструмента при суммативном оценивании результатов обучения.
3. В соответствии с требованиями государственной Программы «Цифровой Казахстан» учителя-предметники показали, что использование интерактивных видеоматериалов с использованием программ «Camtasia Studio», Freemake Video Converter» позволяет повысить профессиональную квалификацию учителей географии.
Список литературы
1. Государственная программа «Цифровой Казахстан», утвежденное Постановление Правительства Республики Казахстан от 12 декабря 2017 года № 827.
2. Ибрагимов И.М. Информационные технологии и средства дистанционного обучения. М. ACADEMA. 2015. -300с.
3. Зайнутдинова Л.Х. Создание и применение электронных учебников. Астрахань, ООО «ЦНТЭП», 2009.- 364 с.
4. Григорьев С.Г., Гриншкун В.В., Макаров С.И. Методико-технологические основы создания электронных средств обучения. // Научное издание. / Самара: Издательство Самарской государственной экономической академии. - 2012. -200 с.
5. Куценко С.М., Косулин В.В. Электронные образовательные ресурсы как инструмент обучения и повышения качества образования //Вестник Казанского государственного энергетического уни-верситета2017. № 3. С. 56-61.
6. Суворова Т.Н. Использование дидактических возможностей электронных ресурсов для повышения качества образования // Информатика и образование. 2014. № 6. С. 43-48.
7. Ветчанова Т.В. Значение электронных образовательных ресурсов при организации и проведении уроков в дистанционной форме
8. Боброва, И. И. Методика использования электронных учебно-методических комплексов как способ перехода к дистанционному обучению // Информатика и образование. - 2009 - N 11 - С. 124125.
9. Слободчикова А. А. Проблемы внедрения разработанных электронных учебных средств в образовательный процесс // Дистанционное и виртуальное обучение. - 2008 - N 8 - С. 41-46.
ENGLISH AS A MEDIUM FOR INSTRUCTION IN TEACHING RUSSIAN TO HUNGARIAN STUDENTS: ANALYSIS OF MULTILINGUAL EDUCATION
Makarova E.
Don State Technical University, Rostov-on-Don, Russian Federation
Doctor of Psychology, Professor Makarova E.
Southern Federal University, Taganrog, Russian Federation,
Ph.D., Associate professor Marchenko S.
Don State Technical University, Rostov-on-Don, Russian Federation,
Ph.D., Associate professor
Abstract
The article is justifying the significance of multilingualism. It presents the researchers' views on bilingualism and multilingualism problem, defines features of teaching Russian to speakers of other languages in the limited language environment. As a result practical recommendations for teaching students are made. Our aim is to identify English language application usefulness and conditions for teaching Russian to speakers of other languages. In the context of international cooperation and trade in Europe, the role of Russian keeps growing. Although time ago Russian was widely spoken in Europe, it is neglected in school education nowadays. On the contrary, English is widely used in European Universities; visiting professors deliver lectures and speakers at International conferences present in English making it an internationally approved academic means of communication. Development of tourism strengthens the position of English in Europe and in the world. The aim of our work is to systematically promote the study of other foreign languages in addition to English that can serve a useful tool in overcoming communication difficulties between a teacher and students, for example, in Hungary, taking into consideration the linguistic fact that Hungarian is one of the most difficult languages in the world along with Chinese, Arabic and Japanese.
Keywords: Interference, Cultural Studies, Challenge, Bilingual, Multilingual, Multilingualism, Bilingualism, Globalization, Internationalization, Intercultural Communication, Social Culture
1. Introduction
Since the middle of the 20th century, interest in bilingualism and the phenomena that accompany interlingual contacts has been so high and has generated so many research works that on the threshold of the 21st century, the scientific community has erroneously sensed the complete and finished study of this topic. However, reality gives a good reason to doubt this, giving the issues of bilingualism and multilingualism special importance in the prevailing global multicultural and multilingual environment. Interest in multilingual research and the formation of natural bilingualism as a result of mixed marriages and migration processes increase nowadays, somewhat pushed the study of artificial (educational) bilingualism to the background, although the significance of both phenomena is obvious, as well as their fundamental difference: if natural bilin-gualism formed in the language environment due to constant contact with the target language and its carriers, the formation of artificial bilingualism occurs in the classroom, as a result of conscious actions aimed at mastering a foreign language and a foreign culture. Artificial, or educational, bilingualism (multilingualism) understood in a broad sense - as co-learning several foreign languages along with the mother tongue - poses new questions and challenges to all the participants of the educational process in the modern world.
Traditionally, the starting point of bilingual research is considered to be two major works published in 1953 - "Language Contacts" by U. Weinreich [1] and "Norwegian Language in America" by E. Haugen [2]. With the translation of these works into Russian and the subsequent development of the concepts reflected in them, Russian linguistics adopted new terms - "bilingualism" (as the term "bilingualism" was originally translated in the Russian translation of the work of U. Weinreich [3] in 1979), "diglossia", "bilingualism", "trilingualism", 'multilingualism'. At different times, bilingualism was studied from the standpoint of linguistics in the context of cognitive and functional approaches - from the point of view of language skills and their functions, as well as from the standpoint of a so-ciolinguistic approach, if the social interaction of linguistic communities was studied. Questions of terminology, definitions and typology of the concept of bi-lingualism, consideration of specific cases of interlanguage interaction in the conditions of natural and artificial educational bilingualism, including the phenomena of interference and transfer - all these questions really seem to be sufficiently studied. It has been suggested that bilinguals learn additional languages 'better' than monolinguals [4:14]. Nevertheless, we'll try and prove that the legacy of bilingual research can be applied to modern realities and point out new perspectives and advantages in teaching foreign languages. Since knowledge of one foreign language (even if this language is English) does not seem sufficient in the modern world, situations of artificial bilingualism in the broad sense, especially trilingualism, are becoming more common. Because English is globally used for purposes of reaching multitudes, then it is assumed that it is the most viable option to be used to present issues
of international development. There is also the presumption, which P. Bourdieu [5] calls "linguistic capital" based on the belief that the possession of certain linguistic resources can lead to improved social opportunities - that possession of English in some instances can lead to economic or academic advancement.
Many Russian researchers wrote about the features of teaching a second foreign language (B. A. Lap-idus [6], N.V. Bagramova [7], N.V. Baryshnikov[8] and others) - however, in many respects their development, in particular, the concepts of trilingualism, still have not found the widespread application in the theory and practice of teaching a foreign language as they deserve.
The main argument in favor of the fact that teaching the second (the third and more) foreign language is performed differently than teaching the first foreign language is that while learning several languages a linguistic personality of a special type is formed - in its most general form it can be described as a bilingual and bicultural personality owning several linguistic and cultural schemas and several images of the world from the perspective of this new knowledge [9: 68]. The existing concepts of a linguistic personality are quite numerous - from a secondary linguistic personality to a multicultural personality - and offer various interpretations of the characteristic features of the personality types being developed by G.I. Bogin [10], Y.N. Karaulov [11], I.I. Khaleeva [12], L.P. Khalyapina [13], etc. At each development stage of the linguistic personality concepts the observation that the new society determines a new type of personality is valid. It seems that in the second decade of the twenty-first century, we again have the right to talk about the need to identify and study the characteristics of a new type of a linguistic personality, incorporating many parameters formulated earlier, but differing in new features caused by the new reality.
Since the 1990s, when the phenomena of globalization have become especially noticeable and interesting to study, the term "multilingualism" has been formed in Western European studies, which have formed a whole scientific school of multilingual research around. The basis of this research layer is the extensive experience of European countries and the North American continent in the study of linguistic and socio-cultural characteristics for speakers of several languages and cultures. On the one hand, we can talk about natural multilinguals, whose use of several languages is determined by the various social functions of these languages in a multilingual society. On the other hand, this study is about people with a migratory past, speakers of languages and cultures that are different from the primary linguo-culture of the studied society, but who join this primary linguo-culture in its natural environment. The territory of the former Soviet republics, as well as many regions of the Russian Federation, population of which was traditionally bilingual, also provided a wealth of material for studying interlingual and intercultural interactions.
Interest in multilingual research and the development of natural bilingualism because of increased migration and adaptation of migrants in their new countries during this period somewhat pushed the study of
educational bilingualism to the background, although the significance of both phenomena is obvious. The need to distinguish between multilingualism and our area of interest - teaching Russian to Hungarian students using English as a mediator (or means) assuming that major communication skills in English has already been acquired at school and the university, the development and interaction of several linguistic cultures in an artificial (educational) environment - leads us to the term "plurilingualism", formulated in the Council of Europe documents at the turn of the 21st century and due to the need for the authors to formulate the competencies that distinguish a multilingual personality functioning in a multilingual society The concepts of pluri-lingualism and plurilingual personality are not adequately reflected in Russian scientific resources, however, it seems that the terms "multilingualism" and "multilingual personality", which are to be further clarified and studied, can serve as adequate analogues. The Latin prefixes "pluri-" and "multi-" used by Western scholars to formulate the terms have their own nuances of meaning: if "pluri-" indicates a variety of forms, "multi-" indicates the multiplicity of described phenomena. Anyway, we use the term "multilingual" in our study as it was used in many articles on the problem that we have used as the basis for our study.
The relevance of the issues of a multilingual personality development and the processes of the multilin-gualism construction is connected with the main postulate of the concept of multilingualism that an individual who studies several languages and cultures does not keep them separate from each other in the mind, but on the basis of multiple knowledge forms communication skills and abilities, acquired communicative competence, summarizing all the cultural and linguistic experience that this individual owns. Of course, the principles of the development and successful functioning of a multilinguistic and multicultural personality, identified by researchers in previous decades and combining not only knowledge of a foreign language (or languages) at a level that makes intercultural interaction possible and adequate, but also personal positive attitudes towards productive contact with representatives of foreign language and culture does not lose its relevance. "We [...] find that bilinguals appear to learn the new language more quickly than monolinguals," explains Prof. Grey, "Now, with this study, we have novel brain-based data that points toward a distinct language-learning benefit for people who grew up bilingual" [14:993]. However, the dynamically developing globalized society in which we are living today presents new requirements for those who study foreign languages and who, to some degree, acquire several cultural schemas [15: 114].
The realities of today bring to the forefront not only the ability to socialize in a different culture through various stages of the acculturation process, but also require the development of a number of competencies related to the adequate and productive coordination and use of several language and cultural schemas in order not to violate principles of multicultural interaction, but also to maintain their identity regardless of the com-
munication situation. That is why the concepts of multilingualism and multilingual personality seem to be a promising and logical development of the concepts of bilingualism. Over the last decade, research on multi-lingualism has grown and has provided researchers with new insights into the mechanisms at work in the multilingual brain. While some studies of multilinguals have shown similar results to what has been seen in studies of bilinguals, certain unique properties of multilinguals are beginning to be noticed, particularly regarding early language representation, and speed of lexical retrieval. In addition, research on cognitive control, language switching, working memory, and certain consequences of multilingualism (advantages and disadvantages) are reviewed in terms of their effects on the brains of multilinguals [16: 69].
2. The History of the Russian Language Teaching and Learning
Russian language is rightfully considered the most complex, but also the most beautiful, rich and sonorous language in the world. Despite the difficulty in learning the language, every year the number of people who want to learn how to speak and write competently in Russian becomes more and more impressive. The history of teaching Russian as a foreign language has a long history, although its development in the form of an independent scientific discipline took place only in the 40-s of the XX century, at the end of World War II. Russian started to be taught as a foreign language in the beginning of the XXI century and continues to this day.
In the modern world, the position of any of the languages is determined by its place in the educational system. For a long time, the Russian language was one of the most studied world languages due to the enforced teaching of Russian as a second language in all the Eastern and Central European countries. The dark side of this process was the lack of free choice as to what second language to study at school or at the university. The bright side of such education was and still is the fact that many old-aged and middle-aged people from Europe can still communicate in Russian no matter how much they hated the process. It means that they can discuss business matters with their partners from Russia and the CIS countries; they can also travel to Russia without additional help of an interpreter and an English-speaking tour guide. Young people in Europe do not speak much Russian because after the collapse of the Soviet Union in the 1990s there followed the fall in interest in the Russian language and Russian culture as considered connected with the oppression and the Communist threat, the scope of its study abroad fell sharply. There was a kind of confrontation since the Russian language was associated with the Soviet Union represented as the Empire of Evil. Nevertheless, the Russian language remains an optional or compulsory discipline in many foreign universities. In recent years, an interesting trend has been observed: the motivation for learning Russian is increasing, just like the quality of training and, consequently, effectiveness. [17: 5] Teaching Russian can be found in approximately 100 countries. In 79 countries, it is included in the academic university program, and in 54 - in the school program.
In Armenia, for example, in order to enter a leading university, an applicant must be fluent in Russian. In the Baltic countries, knowledge of the Russian language provides life prospects for the indigenous people. In Bulgaria, the Russian language is the second after English in terms of the number of students, although recently it was not in the top ten. In Poland, it occupies a position between English and German. At the resorts of Egypt, Indonesia, Turkey, Thailand, Russian tourists certainly speak Russian, so it is a must for all those involved in Tourism and Catering. In Cyprus, one out of eight people speaks Russian. [18]
Despite the fact that a general analysis of the state of studying Russian as a compulsory subject in the educational system of European countries shows a decrease in interest, in some of them an increase in the number of students studying Russian can be noted (for example, in schools in Belgium, Cyprus, Norway, Sweden, etc.) In addition, in Finland and Sweden, it is possible to learn Russian as a mother tongue (for example, according to Swedish law, when recruiting a group of 5 people, not necessarily of the same age, whose parents want their children to learn Russian as their mother tongue, municipal authorities should provide a teacher who may not always have a philological or pedagogical education, but should be a native speaker). Russian as a foreign language in most countries of Western Europe is studied in high school, which stands out on average two hours a week. [19]
It should be noted that in the countries of Western Europe the Russian language is also studied in various language programs, for example, at the Russian centers of language and culture. Unfortunately, such centers exist in less than half of European countries, and the number of listeners is getting smaller every year. Those who wish can also learn Russian at short-term courses at friendship societies and various cooperation associations, as well as individually with private tutors. [20: 62]
According to the teachers of Russian as a foreign language in Europe, they have certain difficulties with professional retraining and advanced training. As a rule, there is no general system of advanced training for those teaching Russian, and teachers have to engage in self-training and self-education, relying only on their strengths and capabilities [21: 61].
Students of educational institutions in Europe and the United States of America study Russian literature and culture. The names of Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Chekhov, Solzhenitsyn are familiar to many of them. Students have to read their novels and plays in translation as there are no public schools with instruction in Russian in Western Europe and North America, but in Italy, Austria, Germany, Belgium, Sweden, Switzerland, Great Britain, and France there are private schools, in which mainly children from recently emigrated Russian-speaking families study. There are about 150 such schools, most of them concentrated in Germany. The initiators for such school system or for educational centers, courses and short-term programs development are Russian-speaking parents and teachers (mostly emigrants from the USSR, Russia and the CIS) [22: 752].
The Russian Orthodox Church Abroad makes its
feasible assistance in teaching the Russian language and promoting Russian culture. In most European countries, there are parochial schools where students are taught the Russian language, the Russian literature and culture. [23] Those attending the services in Russian Orthodox cathedrals can also practice their oral skills.
Several Russian cultural centers in Europe are now busy promoting Russian language, literature and culture not by enforcing Russian, but by inviting young people to share the treasures of Russian cultural heritage. Literature, music and cinematography are the means of revealing the secrets of "the mysterious Russian soul", communicating effectively multinational and multiethnic treasures of the country's folklore. Russia is the country where different nationalities and cultures have coexisted and enriched each other's heritage for years.
There is a slight increase in the number of Western European students who annually come to study in Russia (primarily to universities). So, from 2004 to 2010, the number of Western Europeans studying full-time at higher education institutions in Russia increased by 1.5 times as a whole, and now more than one thousand young people study the Russian language as a major. [24: 275]
In this situation of global interest in the Russian language it is necessary to provide methods of teaching Russian to speakers of other languages. In our study we consider teaching Russian to Hungarian students at a University level. The main problem is that teachers of Russian who can and would like to teach Russian do not speak Hungarian which is one of the most difficult languages in the world, along with Chinese, Arabic and Japanese.
3. Materials and Methods
For problem solution the following research methods were used with in-depth study of the research subject: analysis of Russian and foreign scientific resources on the research topic (linguistic, scientific, methodological, pedagogical, psychological, cultural studies, literature, educational materials in Russian and English); observation of the teaching process; questioning of teachers and students; interviewing and talking with native speakers; student testing; quantitative and qualitative processing of results; modeling; experiment. The methodological basis of our study contains: a) a communicative approach in teaching Russian as a foreign language, b) linguistic and sociocultural approach,
c) content and language integrated learning (CLIL), and
d) English as the means of instruction (EMI).
Language teaching is currently influenced by a number of factors, including globalization processes, the digital revolution, global innovative economy, as well as changes in the nature of knowledge and ways of obtaining it. Among world trends, one can name the mass appearance of the so-called "multicultural communities", which, in turn, makes education multilingual and multicultural. In this regard, a need arises in society for the development of foreign communicative and intercultural competencies among future specialists. English as the main language of instruction (EMI) is ac-
tively used throughout the world in the form of a number of models, such as theme-based courses, linked courses, sheltered subject matter instruction, etc. [25] In the studies of recent years, the so-called integrated bilingual education, which completely changes the role of a foreign language in the education system, has gained popularity. One of the ways to implement it is integrated teaching of foreign languages and professional disciplines, the origins of which lie in the European experience of subject-language integrated learning (content and language integrated learning - CLIL). The term "subject-language integrated learning" was proposed by the European scientist D. Marsh [26] in 1994 who worked on multilingualism and bilingual education. Integrated approaches started in 2001, the approach was rethought and for the first time D. Marsh proposed the idea of considering a foreign language not as a goal, but as a means of acquiring knowledge in another subject. Finally, D. Coyle [27] suggested that the goal of CLIL be considered twofold - the study of the content of the discipline and the simultaneous study of a foreign language. The theoretical foundations of subject-language integrated teaching have also been studied by different scholars [28, 29] In a joint work with D. Marsh and F. Hood, D. Coyle identified four fundamental principles of CLIL - 4C, which are reflected both in theory and in practice of CLIL [30: 495]. T. Ting studied the differences between popular language immersion programs in North America and subject-language integration. She found that the main difference in CLIL is the educational support, without which it is impossible to achieve the progress of the student in subject content in a foreign language. To conclude ...'CLIL can educate towards pluriliteracy...across languages and disciplines [31:12].' Over the past decades content and language integrated learning (CLIL) research has predominantly focused on the language proficiency of learners. The results have been very promising and show that working language skills in learners can be improved through a CLIL programme [32:41]. In our research we are raising challenging questions and problems concerning teaching a foreign language competence using another foreign language. Teaching Russian to Hungarian students is very challenging as Hungarian belongs to the Uralic language family and is unrelated to most of the languages spoken in the neighboring nations. It is one of the most spoken Uralic languages and the only one of this family that is spoken in Central Europe. Hungarian does not resemble any of the European languages and is extremely difficult for foreigners to learn. So it is hard to assume that teachers of Russian could easily use Hungarian to help explain grammar or vocabulary to their students. On the contrary, English is widely spoken in Russia and in Europe, as per the census, 16% of the Hungarian population, accounting for 1,589,180 speakers, speak English as a foreign language. German is spoken by 1,111,997 speakers, accounting for 11.2% of the Hungarian population. Russian is in the fourth place after Hungarian, English and German, so probably, its teaching needs some boost.
So, what we suggest is to use English as an intermediary in teaching Russian to Hungarian students.
Definitely, special textbooks and teaching materials are necessary. Russian as a foreign language is one of the sections of linguistic didactics (a scientific and practical field of pedagogical activity engaged in teaching people natural languages), which is engaged in the study of the Russian language in order to develop methods, techniques, technologies for describing it for teaching Russian to native speakers at schools, and especially as a foreign language at the University level.
Researchers distinguish teaching of Russian as a foreign language from teaching Russian as a second language which usually takes place within Russian-speaking community in those regions and localities where the native (first) languages of a significant part of the population are other than Russian. In this particular case, immersion always takes place making teaching and learning easy. In our case, there is no Russian-speaking community (or there is a very limited one), so the Russian language teaching abroad is mostly devoted to the issues of teaching Russian Culture and Russian Literature, but not communication in Russian.
The subject area or the content of Russian teaching is closely related to a number of scientific disciplines: linguistics, the psychology of learning and activity, pedagogy, cultural studies and linguistic cultural studies, ethnic psychology, Russian history and general history. The methodology of teaching the Russian language to foreigners, special textbooks and grammars are compiled that describe the language from the point of view of a native speaker of another language. What we suggest is that these methodologies, textbooks and grammars be written in English. In this case both the teacher and a student would understand the material easily.
The principle of integrity is understood as integration of three types: linguistic and sociocultural aspects, professional subjects and language content, integration of CLIL (English Content and Language Integrated Learning) of the traditional approach to learning a foreign language, co-study of two foreign languages in the educational process. English as a medium of instruction (EMI) is a growing trend to teach university courses in English and is especially useful for the purposes of our project.
As a result of our study we have found out that currently bilingualism is defined completely differently than before. At this stage, we have come up with a multi-component, flexible definition: despite the fact that bilinguals may not speak two languages equally fluently, they should be connected to the linguistic and cultural minimum of both language systems. Besides, bilingualism leads to multilingualism which is a trend of modern times and a bare necessity in the context of globalization and cooperation of nations in different fields of human activity. Thanks to multilingualism, a person opens up the highest degree of cultural identity. Studying history, cultural traditions and customs is an integral part of any language learning process. A high level of language proficiency and knowledge of the cultural values of the language being studied allows a person to become proficient in various fields. In this aspect, multilingualism is considered a tool for understanding the world. In the age of rapid globalization,
people who own a large amount of communication tools to express their views and ideas and to understand other people's viewpoint will be successful. The uniqueness and originality of each culture is created and revealed through language. To preserve world culture, it is important to respect both universal values and the values of each individual culture. The preservation of linguistic diversity and the tolerant, consistent spread of multilingualism are the main components of a stable, conflict-free society. Thus, knowledge of several languages opens up an opportunity for an individual to immerse in the new environment of values and traditions of different "linguistic worlds". Our current project focuses particularly on literacy practices using more than one language, which are 'enmeshed and rely upon multiple modes of communication and semiotic systems' [33:220] within the context of the formal learning of languages.
Also the target to emphasize 'literacy practices in sociocultural contexts, the hybridity of literacy practices afforded by new technologies and the increasing interrelationship between semiotic systems' [33:217] is achieved. Literacy practices known as multiliteracies take account of multimodalities far beyond the printed word including technological developments as well as the growing diversity of languages and cultures within an increasingly global community. 'Continua of biliter-acy' create an integrated way of analyzing complex phenomena, including the contexts, development, media and content of text 'integral to the nature of participants' interactions and their interpretative processes' in a multilingual context [34: xiii].
We consider completely new approaches to integrated teaching of foreign languages which combine currently popular subject-language instruction (CLIL), as well as the theory and methodology of teaching academic discipline in English (EMI). First of all, the authors turn to consideration of external factors that influence the development of the indicated approaches in Russian language teaching methods. Among them, the internationalization of higher education is of paramount importance which occurs under the influence of universal internationalization and globalization of social processes and cannot but include issues of international and intercultural activity in the goals and objectives of higher education. Another factor is associated with the growing requirements of international standards and the increasing complexity of culturally oriented content of language educational materials which is a definite problem for methodological science and makes instructors turn to the search for new approaches and teaching methods.
As mentioned above, it is necessary to write textbooks, educational and teaching aids in English, but as modern conditions require quick solutions to problems using new methods, we suggest creating an electronic platform that would be accessible to everyone.
This Internet platform would allow the accumulation of information and methodological support for distance learning technologies in individual disciplines and their mastery by students.
To do this an instructor must:
- select and adapt a hardware-software complex to
support distance learning technologies;
- form the content of this Internet platform with hardware of the required level;
- instruct a group of teachers who own information, communication and distance technologies in education, to promote innovative technologies.
E-learning involves:
• implementation of educational programs using exclusively e-learning and distance learning technologies, organizing training sessions in the form of online courses developed by teachers;
• remote access to teaching materials from anywhere in the world with Internet access;
• a free training schedule and independent work of the student with educational material;
• obtaining advice from a geographically remote teacher, the possibility of remote interaction;
• remote holding of certification activities;
• infinitely large number of students at the same time; accessibility of education for people with special needs.
MOOC (massive open online courses) is an actual form of distance learning, which is based on the idea of making education widespread and accessible to all. This form of providing education makes it possible to remotely study the discipline at a convenient time and at a comfortable pace for many students from around the world, to get acquainted with the lectures of leading teachers.
Such open access courses are available on the Internet, accompanied by other training and certification materials.
The use of MOOC provides students with:
- remote independent development of educational material and passing intermediate control measures with tests on the passed material;
- access to lectures, both on-line and video courses, textbooks, teaching aids, training materials (exercises).
The use of MOOC provides teachers with:
• possibility of implementing a progressive hightech form of training: conducting training and assessing knowledge online using distance learning technologies;
• increasing students' motivation to self-study;
• presentation of their best educational practices at world educational sites;
• cost optimization for the implementation of educational programs and the saving of material and technical resources.
4. Discussion
It is not surprising that the communicative method that combines both CLIL and EMI approaches has become most widespread in our country. In Russia, as well as in the USA and England, it is considered by its supporters as the main method, the purpose of which is to develop the student's ability to diversify actively in a foreign language. The communicative method is aimed at the simultaneous development of basic language skills (oral and written speech, grammar, reading and listening) in a process of lively, easy communication. The vocabulary, grammatical structures, syntax and intonations of a foreign language are presented to the student in the context of a real, emotionally colored
situation that contributes to the quick and lasting memorization of the material. Over the past decades content and language integrated learning (CLIL) research has predominantly focused on the language proficiency of learners. The results are very promising and show that working language skills in learners, especially reading and listening skills, can be improved through such a program. Studies focusing on Russian language learners are still few but they indicate that learners maintain or under certain conditions can improve their Russian language learning while compared to learning English. However, more recent studies have raised challenging questions concerning language competence which indicate that CLIL instruction alone may not be reaching its full potential. Unraveling the integrated approach and the inherent interrelationship of using language for progressing knowledge construction and meaning-making needs to be addressed, drawing together linguistic and pedagogic theoretical underpinnings, this study posits that CLIL and EMI put together can pragmatically address the growing educational challenge of teaching Russian to Hungarian students. We reason that progression along the knowledge pathway towards deeper understanding requires a greater command of secondary and tertiary discourse, and mastery of a specific literacy. We suggest that if 'literacy' were at the centre of the learning agenda, regardless of linguistic disciplines, a fundamental shift towards deeper learning would occur. Therefore, the article addresses two fundamental issues: (i) the role of a subject-specific literacy in CLIL and (ii) the iteration of a model building on the existing EMI framework, which maps literacy and language progression in CLIL contexts and serves as a guide for evolving classroom practices. It is interesting that the authors consider the mutual influence of three languages - Russian, Hungarian perceived as native, English as a foreign language and the language of instruction.
The question of how and to what degree two foreign language skills constitute the concept of communication skills and whether or not their integration produces synergetic effects and/or added language benefits, still remains unanswered. Moreover, it is important to emphasize that the essence of integrated or interconnected teaching of a foreign language and professional disciplines at a university (CLIL) is not just teaching a discipline in a foreign language (English as a medium of instruction - EMI), but learning it with and through the language.
The Russian language is difficult to learn and pronounce, and like any language of a state with a large territory, it has many dialects. This is a serious threat to its worldwide spread. In modern life, communications tend to simplify as much as possible, and when choosing the language of international communication more often, for pragmatic reasons, preference is given to English. Therefore, modern methods of teaching the Russian language are necessary, and the scientific and practical basis for the development of the Russian language in Europe deserves more attention. Russia should conduct a more active campaign to popularize and disseminate the Russian language. Russian cultural centers are not organized in all European countries, but
Germany and Hungary have an effective network structure in the form of non-governmental organizations funded from various sources.
For the study of the Russian language in Hungary promoting the Russian Center for Science and Culture was founded in Budapest in1973. It brings together teachers from Russia who teach Russian as a foreign language, heads of schools and other educational institutions where Russian is taught or Russian is studied as a foreign language, Russian teachers from leading universities in Hungary. According to the head of the Centre, the main goal of many events remains to popularize the Russian language in European countries, to strengthen international cooperation in the field of education. It is also noted that it is necessary to maintain interest in the Russian language that exists among Hungarian students. Although there are problems that the Russian language instructors in Hungary face in teaching Russian as a foreign language, attention is focused on possible solutions. One of them is the continuing education of teaching staff in Hungary according to Svet-lana Khamshovski, the head of the Hungarian Russian Language Association. Another possible solution is teaching Russian using EMI technology as the popularity of the language of Pushkin, Tolstoy and Dostoevsky in the country is constantly increasing; the number of students who choose it for study is growing, and the Russian language teachers are becoming more and more in demand.
5. Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, we can conclude that the need for bilingualism (and multilingualism) arose in education due to: a) globalization and the strengthening of the "dialogue of cultures"; b) the creation of a single educational space; c) the development of distance learning; d) development of the global information space; e) the need for knowledge of languages for competitiveness in the labor market [35]. Bilingual training is carried out within the framework of the following European Union programs: Erasmus Mundus, Socrates, Leonardo da Vinci, Tempus, "Academic Year in France, Spain or Germany", IAESTE, DAAD and supported by the number of universities.
The importance of bilingualism as a socio-cultural phenomenon of modern society is undeniable, since the development of bilingualism contributes to the rapprochement of peoples, the peaceful resolution of issues of coexistence, the development of skills to respect the culture and language, traditions and customs of other peoples, the formation of common tasks and goals in the integration process. In this context, bilingualism as a trend in the linguistic development of modern society gives a person the opportunity to realize their place and their culture in the dialogue of cultures and civilizations in the process of cooperation and cooperation with other people. At present, multicultural bilingual education by means of studying several foreign languages is an important component of the modernization of the goals and content of national educational systems in Europe (including Russia). In the context of globalization, economic integration and the creation of a single European labor market, they strive to provide training for European-level specialists who are able to
work on a pan-European labor market and become active in modern society. All this, undoubtedly, helps to expand the possibilities of intercultural communication between people in various spheres of human life.
The need for more effective teaching of the Russian language in Hungary, the formation of communicative competence in several foreign languages - require the use of such a model of training for Hungarian students, which provides for solving problems in the framework of the EMI strategy. The application of this model, in which English as used as a means of instruction in teaching Russian makes it possible to ensure the greatest efficiency of the learning process. This model allows creating the necessary balance among two foreign languages without the superiority or favoritization of one of them. The CLIL technology and EMI framework contribute to the activation of the process of mastering foreign language competencies through the active integration of a foreign language with the learning process of professionally significant disciplines. Students who already have an idea of the basic concepts of one language, since it is part of the curriculum, more easily perceive another foreign language. This reduces the uncertainty about using a foreign language to convey content and professional opinion. In addition, the attention of students is distracted from problems associated with the fear of making language errors, since their main efforts are aimed at the subject content of the discipline. To form the communicative competence in Russian, it is important to provide students with the opportunity to think in a foreign language, solve any problems that give rise to thought in a foreign language, which acts in its direct function of the formation and formulation of these thoughts.
That is why the use of the CLIL format training for Hungarian students seems to be one of the factors that increase their motivation and stimulate educational and cognitive activity. It contributes significantly to motivation as the main mechanism for enhancing the process of teaching foreign languages to students of universities, since their attention is involuntarily held on the ability to communicate in a linguistically and culturally limited environment on issues of their competence.
Each of the approaches proposed in this article is aimed at eliminating the difficulties that arise due to the integration of basic and gradually formed knowledge, skills in the areas of: 1) academic discourse in the native language (Hungarian), 2) general and academic discourse in English (a foreign language), 3) general and academic discourse in Russian (a second foreign language). It is such integration that is able to provide more effective training for graduates of a university for successful professional implementation in the conditions of transnational corporations of a globalizing world.
Of course, the principles of development and functioning of a secondary linguistic and multicultural personality, identified by researchers in previous decades and combining not only knowledge of a foreign language (or languages) at a level that makes intercultural interaction possible and adequate, but also personal
positive attitudes towards productive contact with representatives of foreign-language culture does not lose its relevance. However, the dynamically developing globalized society in which we live today presents new requirements for those who study foreign languages and who (to one degree or another) acquire several linguistic cultures.
The realities of today's world bring to the forefront not only the ability to socialize in a different culture through various stages of the acculturation process, but also require the development of a number of competencies related to the adequate and productive coordination and use of several language and cultural systems so as not only to violate principles of multicultural interaction, but also maintain their identity regardless of the communication situation. That is why the concepts of multilingualism and multilingual personality seem to be a promising and logical development of the concepts of bilingualism, which over the past decades have proved their productivity and directing research thought in line with a whole range of scientific interests.
References
1. U. Weinreich. Language Contacts. New York, 1953. 212.
2. E. Haugen. The Norwegian language in America: A study in bilingual behavior. Vol. 1: The bilingual community; Vol. II. The American dialects of Norwegian. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. 1953.
3. U. Weinreich. Language contacts: State and problems of research. Kiev: Vishcha school, 1979. 263.
4. J. Mweri. Sustainable Development Goals: Reaching People through Their Mother Tongue. Linguistics and Literature Studies 8(1). 2020. 14-25.
5. P. Bourdieu. Language and symbolic power; Ed. a. introd. by John B. Thompson; Transl. by Gino Raymond a. Matthew Adamson. - Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard univ. press. 1991. - IX, 302.
6. B.A. Lapidus. Intensification of the process of teaching foreign speech (ways and techniques). M. 1970. 54-62.
7. N.V. Bagramova. Linguodidactic fundamentals of teaching a second foreign language. St. Petersburg: Publishing House of the Russian State Pedagogical University named after A.I. Herzen. 2005. 221.
8. N.V. Baryshnikov. Methods of teaching a second foreign language at school. M. Education. 2003. 159.
9. E.A. Makarova. The use of schema theory for students' cultural knowledge development of and its use in teaching foreign languages. Moscow. INFRA-M. 2017. 104.
10. G. I. Bogin. Tver hermeneutic school // Bulletin of Tver State University, No. 1 (7), 2005. 187-192.
11. Y.N. Karaulov. Russian language and language personality. Libroc. 2016. 264.
12. I.I. Khaleeva. Some problems of intercultural communication based on a cognitive approach. M.: USSR Academy of Sciences, Institute of Linguistics. 1991.
13. L.P. Khalyapina. Modern trends in teaching foreign languages based on CLIL ideas. Questions of
teaching methods in high school. 2017.V.6. No. 20. 4652.
14. S. Grey, et al. Bilingual and monolingual adults learning an additional language: ERPs reveal differences in syntactic processing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition Cambridge University Press. 21 (5). 2018. 970-994.
15. E.A. Makarova. Schema and cultural background in semiotic space. LAP Lambert Academic Publishing, Germany. 2011, 200.
16. E. Higby, J. Kim and L.K. Obler. Multilin-gualism and the Brain. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics. 33. 2013. 68-101.
17. V. Nikonov. Information portal of the Russian World Foundation. On the status of the Russian language in the world, 2011. Online available from http://russkiymir.ru/publications/85858.
18. S. I. Lebedinsky, L. F. Herbik Methods of teaching Russian as a foreign language. Textbook. Mn. 2011. 309.
19. A.L. Arefiev. The "face" of the Russian language abroad should not be officials, but Pushkin Institutes. Interview to the site "Dialogues" // Site "Dialogs". Discussions. Online available from http://www.dialogi.su/discussions/22.html
20. A.L. Berdichevsky. Modern trends in teaching a foreign language in Europe. Russian language abroad. 2. 2002. 61-63.
21. E.V. Denisova-Schmidt. Russian language in Germany. Russian language abroad. 6. 2009. 61-62.
22. D. Veselinov. Foreign language education in Europe- characteristics and trends. Teaching foreign languages. 5. 2013. 750-754.
23. N. Vlasova-Kurits, S. Kurits About the program for preserving the Russian language in children of Russian-speaking parents living outside Russia. Slovo. Word magazine. 48/49. 2005.
24. M.I. Lobacheva. Problems of teaching the Russian language in the countries of Western Europe. Scientific community of students of the XXI century. Humanities: proceedings of XL Int. Stud. scientific-practical conf. 3 (40). 275-277.
25. M. Duenas. A description of prototype models for content-based language instruction in higher education. 2003. Online available from http://www.public
acions.ub.edu/revistes/ bells 12/PDF/art04.pdf
26. A. Maljers, D. Marsh, D. Wolff, F. Genesee, M. Frigols-Martin, P. Mehisto Contexts - Converging Goals: CLIL in Europe. Peter Lang: Frankfurt. 2010.
27. D. Coyle, P. Hood, D. Marsh CLIL. Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge University Press, 2010.
28. C. Dalton-Puffer, A. Llinares, F.Lorenzo & T. Nikula. You can stand under my umbrella: Immersion, clil and bilingual education. A response to Cenoz, Genesee & Gorter (2013)". Applied Linguistics. 35 (2). 2014. 213-218.
29. J. Cenoz, F. Gennessee & D. Gorter. Critical analysis of CLIL: Taking stock and looking forward. Applied Linguistics. 35 (3). 2014. 243-262.
30. S. I. Georgiou. Reviewing the puzzle of CLIL. ELT Journal. 66 (4). October 2012. 495-504.
31. T. Ting. CLIL: Towards brain-compatible science-education. In D. Marsh & O. Meyer (Eds.), Quality interfaces: Examining evidence & exploring solutions in CLIL. Eichstaett: Eichstaett Academic Press. 2012. 12-25.
32. O. Meyer, D. Coyle, A. Halbach; K. Schuck & T. Ting. A pluriliteracies approach to content and language integrated learning - mapping learner progressions in knowledge construction and meaning-making. Language, Culture and Curriculum. 28(1). 2015. 41-57.
33. O. García, L. Bartlett, & J. A. Kleifgen. From biliteracy to pluriliteracies. In P. Auer & L. Wei (Eds.), Handbook of applied linguistics, vol. 5: Multilingual-ism. Berlin: Mouton-De Gruyter. 2007. 207-228.
34. N. Hornberger. Continua of biliteracy: An ecological framework for educational policy, research and practice in multilingual settings. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. 2003.
35. E.A. Makarova, E.L. Makarova, R.E. Hjaltadottir. Analysis of the satisfaction degree of students participating in international educational projects. Trends in the Development of Psycho-Pedagogical Education in the Conditions of Transitional Society (ICTDPP-2019), SHS Web of Conferences. 70. 02014. 2019. Online available from https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20197002014
РАЗВИТИЕ ЦЕЛОСТНО-СИСТЕМНЫХ ЗАКОНОМЕРНОСТЕЙ В УСЛОВИЯХ ДИСТАНЦИОННОГО ОБУЧЕНИЯ
Мищик С.А.
доцент, кандидат педагогических наук, член-корреспондент Международной академии психологических наук,
академик Международной академии ТПН, член Немецкого физического общества, профессор Российской Академии Естествознания, доцент кафедры «Высшей математики и физики», Государственный морской университет имени адмирала Ф. Ф. Ушакова
