CC BY
9PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCES
OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE FORMATION OF COGNITIVE METASUBJECT COMPETENCIES IN
PRIMARY SCHOOL
Zak A.
Leading Researcher, Psychological Institute RAE, Moscow, Russia
Abstract
The aim of the study is to determine the conditions for the formation of cognitive actions in fourth-graders, associated with the construction of methods for solving problems and with reflection when solving problems. It was assumed that the mastering by children of the basic educational program and the author's program "Intellec-tica" contributes to the formation of cognitive actions to a greater extent than the development of the basic educational program alone. This is due to the fact that the program includes non-educational search tasks of various kinds, each genus - several species, each species - several options. Moreover, each lesson according to the program includes the analysis of the teacher with the students of the sample problem, the independent solution of problems, the analysis with the students of correct and incorrect solutions. The study involved 117 pupils of the 4th grade (46 - the experimental group, 71 - the control group), 46 children were engaged in the program "Intellectica" for the entire academic year (32 classes). The initial and final diagnostics were carried out with pupils of both groups on the material of two tasks of the author's methodology "Substitution": the first task is intended to determine a method for solving search problems (general or particular method), the second task is to determine the type of reflection when solving problems (meaningful or formal reflection ). The final diagnostics showed: 63.1% of children in the experimental group solved the problems in a general way, 42.3% in the control group (the difference in results is statistically significant at p <0.01); carried out meaningful reflection, respectively, 26.1% and 12.7% (the difference is significant at p <0.05). Research has shown for the first time that the "Intellectica" program is an effective condition the formation of cognitive metasubject competences in primary school.
Keywords: junior schoolchildren, cognitive meta-subject competences, methods of solving problems, types of cognitive reflection, the program "Intellectica".
Introduction
The requirements of the Federal State Educational Standard of Primary General Education [13] indicate the connection between cognitive metasubject competencies and the formation (in the process of mastering the basic educational program of elementary school) universal educational activities, including cognitive ones. These include actions associated, in particular, with the construction of methods for solving problems of a search nature and with cognitive reflection aimed at considering the methods and conditions of actions in solving problems.
The Standard also notes that a program for the formation of universal educational actions should be included in the basic educational program of primary general education should include a program for the formation of universal educational actions, which should contain, in particular, typical tasks for the formation of universal educational actions, including cognitive ones. This means that such tasks should be developed based on the material of academic subjects.
In addition, according to the Standard, the curriculum should include time for extracurricular activities, aimed, in particular, at the general intellectual development of the personality of the younger student. Taking into account the noted provisions of the Standard, we have developed the program "Intellectica" [4], intended for the formation of cognitive meta-subject competences in younger students. The development of the program can be carried out in a group and individual form, during work hours and after school hours. The
content of the program consists of search tasks of various kinds and types, built on non-educational material.
Materials and methods
The purpose of this study was to determine the nature of the influence of the "Intellectica" program [5] on the formation of cognitive metasubject competences in fourth-graders. The study involved 117 students, 46 of them made up the experimental group, 71 - the control group. Pupils of the experimental group studied according to the program "Intellectica" for one academic year (once a week for one hour, a total of 32 lessons).
The study was based on the assumption that the mastering by children of the basic educational program of the fourth grade in class time and the "Intellectica" program outside class time will contribute to the formation of cognitive metasubject competencies to a greater extent than the mastering only the basic educational program. The stated hypothesis was based on two main points. The first of them is associated with the diversity of the content of the Intellectic program: in 32 classes, children solve problems of four genera, each of which includes several types of problems, and each type is given in several versions.
The second basis of the hypothesis is associated with the peculiarities of classes in the "Intellectica" program. Each lesson consists of three parts. In the first part, the teacher, together with the students, analyzes the solution of the sample problem, i.e. tasks typical of the type that is mastered in this lesson. Such a discussion is necessary so that children understand what needs to be found in problems of a given type and how it can be done. Children are given means of parsing
tasks (this contributes to the formation of cognitive action associated with the construction of methods for solving problems of a search nature) and methods of managing the search for a solution and controlling their actions (this contributes to the formation of a cognitive action associated with the reflection of methods of action to solve problems).
In the second part, children independently solve 12-15 problems of this type. Here, favorable conditions are created for the use of the means of analyzing the conditions of the problem and the methods of finding a solution presented in the first part.
In the third part, the teacher and students check the solved problems. Wrong decisions and their reasons are analyzed, which is useful for all children, both for those who made a mistake and for those who made the right decision: the children are once again explained the methods of analyzing the conditions and analyzing the solution of problems. This creates favorable conditions for the development of cognitive actions by children associated with the construction of methods for solving search problems and with reflection on the methods of action to solve problems.
Before and after 32 lessons with children of both groups, a group diagnostic lesson was conducted based on the "Substitution" methodology, which includes two tasks. Task 1 is intended to determine the formation of a cognitive action associated with the construction of methods for solving search problems, task 2 - to determine the formation of a cognitive action associated with the reflection of methods of action when solving problems.
The construction of task 1 was based on those presented in the works of S.L. Rubinstein [11] and V.V. Davydov [2] provisions on two ways of solving search problems: theoretical, general, and empirical, particular. In accordance with these ideas, an experimental situation was developed [3], where it is proposed to solve a series of problems based on a single principle. In our studies, this experimental situation was modified and implemented on a different specific material [6; 7; 8].
The correct solution to all four tasks of this task testifies to the implementation of the general method, the successful completion of task 1 and the formation of a cognitive action associated with the construction of methods for solving search problems. The correct solution of only three, two or one task indicates the implementation of a particular method, the unsuccessful performance of task 1 and the lack of formation of this cognitive action. The lack of a solution to all tasks also indicates the unsuccessful performance of task 1 and the lack of formation of this cognitive action.
Task 2 was based on the provisions on two types of cognitive reflection in solving problems (substantive and formal), presented in the works of V.V. Davydov [2]. In accordance with these provisions, we developed a two-part experimental situation [7], a modification of which was used in works on non-educational [10] and educational material [1; 12].
In its first part, it was proposed to solve three problems of two classes (the first and third problems were built and solved on the basis of one principle, the second problem - on the basis of another principle). In the
second part, with the correct solution of all problems, it was proposed to group them. If the grouping was based on the external features of the conditions of the tasks, then it was assumed that formal reflection was carried out in solving problems.
If the grouping was based on the internal kinship of tasks (a single principle of their construction and solution), then this testified to the implementation of meaningful reflection. In this task, at first it was necessary to solve three problems: two of them (tasks 7 and 9) were built according to the same principle, one (task 8) - according to another. Then it was required to choose one opinion on these three problems out of five proposed.
With the correct solution of problems, the choice of the fourth opinion ("Katya's opinion") characterizes the implementation of meaningful reflection and indicates the sufficient (in relation to the proposed tasks) formation of this cognitive action. In this case, task 2 is considered successful.
With the correct solution of problems, the choice of any opinion, except for the fourth, characterizes the implementation of formal reflection and indicates the insufficient formation of this cognitive action. In this case, the task is considered unsuccessful. The incorrect solution of at least one task of this task characterizes the absence of reflection of any kind and indicates the insufficient formation of this cognitive action and the unsuccessful performance of the task.
At the beginning of the lesson, the teacher wrote down on the blackboard the conditions for a simple task of the Substitution methodology, for example: TM + P = TS. Then he analyzed it together with his students: he explained that in this problem it is necessary, firstly, that different letters are replaced with different numbers, and the same letters - with the same numbers, and, secondly, that after the replacement a correct arithmetic example is obtained. After discussing the correct and incorrect solutions proposed by the students, one of the proposed options was written down: 23 + 4 = 27. Then each student was given a form with problems and a blank sheet for answers.
TASK 1 Training problems 1) FM + N = FF 2) R + PS = PP Main problems
3) P M H 4) C B C r C 5) B T R T B T R 6) B L B V B L B F
+ N M R + S G S V S + R T V T R T V + B F B L B V B L
M K M R S R S R T N T N T N T U B U B U B U B TASK 2
7) EU + O = EE 8) FF + F = FN 9) XY+ W = XX
Opinions about problems
Several 4th grade students solved these problems and exchanged views.
Tanya said: "Problems 7, 8 and 9 are similar."
Kolya disagreed: "Problems 7, 8 and 9 are different."
Vika: "Problems 7 and 8 are similar, but problem 9 is different from them."
Katya: "No, problems 7 and 9 are similar, but problem 8 is different from them."
Nina: "I think that tasks 8 and 9 are similar, but task 7 is different from them".
Which student is right?
* * *
Further, the teacher explained the tasks to the children on the form, pointing out that in the first task, first you need to solve problems 1 and 2, and then tasks 3, 4, 5 and 6. Then the children were instructed that in the
The results of the children in the control and experimental
second task you need to solve problems 7, 8 and 9, then read the students' opinions on these three problems and on the answer sheet indicate the name of the student who said the most correctly. After that, you need to briefly explain why this student's opinion is the most correct.
Results
The results of the children in the control and experimental groups of tasks 1 and 2 are shown in table. 1 and tab. 2 respectively.
Table 1
Characteristic solving problems Control Group Experimental Group
September May September May
Lack of solution 11,3 5,6 15,2 0,0
Particular solution 56,3 52,1* 54,5 36,9*
General solution 32,4 42,3** 30,4 63,1**
Note: * p <0.05; ** p <0.01
The data in Table 1 indicate that the number of children who solved problems in a general way increased from September to May in both groups. In the control group, the increase was 9.9% (from 32.4% to 42.3%), in the experimental group - 32.8% (from 30.4% to 63.1%). In September, the difference in the results characterizing the solution of problems in a general way by the children of the control and experimental groups was 2.0% and was statistically insignificant (the Fisher * test was used to determine the significance of the differences), and in May the difference in such results was 20.8% and became statistically significant (p <0.01).
This table also reflects data that the number of children who solved problems in a private way decreased from September to May in both groups. In the control group, the decrease was 4.2% (from 56.3% to 52.1%), in the experimental group - 17.6% (from 54.5% to 36.9%). Thus, in September, the difference in
the results characterizing the solution of problems by a private method by children of the control and experimental groups was 1.8% and was statistically insignificant, and in May the difference in such results was 15.2% and became statistically significant (p <0.05)
In addition, the table also contains data on the subjects of both groups who did not solve any problem. In September, there were fewer such subjects in the control group than in the experimental group - respectively: 11.3% and 15.2%; in May, such subjects remained in the control group, although their number decreased by half, and in the experimental group they were not remained completely - respectively: 5.6% and 0.0%.
The noted facts indicate that classes under the "In-tellectica" program, in which children from the experimental group participated, significantly contribute to the formation of metasubject competencies in fourth-graders related to the development of actions to build ways to solve search problems.
Table 2
The results of the children in the control and experimental groups performing task 2 in September and May, - in %_
Characteristic reflection
Control Group
September
May
Experimental Group
September
May
Lack of reflection
0,0
10,9
0,0
Formal reflection
81,7
87,3*
80,4
73,9*
Substantial reflection
12,7*
26,1*
Note: * p <0.05.
Table data 2 indicate that the number of children who carried out meaningful reflection in solving problems increased from September to May in both groups. In the control group, the increase was 2.9% (from 9.8% to 12.7%), in the experimental group - 17.4% (from 8.7% to 26.1%). In September, the difference in the results characterizing the implementation of meaningful reflection by children in the control and experimental groups when solving problems was 1.1% and was statistically insignificant, and in May the difference in such results was 13.4% and became statistically significant (p <0.05) ...
Table 2 also reflects the data that the number of children who performed formal reflection in solving problems from September to May changed in both
groups in the opposite way: in the control group, the number of such children increased from 81.7% to 87.3%, and in the experimental group - decreased from 80.4% to 73.9%. Thus, in September, the difference in the results characterizing the number of children who performed formal reflection in solving problems was 1.3% and was statistically insignificant, and in May the difference in such results was 13.4% and became statistically significant (p <0.05 ).
On the one hand, the facts noted (as well as in relation to the formation of metasubject competencies associated with the development of cognitive actions to build methods for solving search problems) indicate that classes under the "Intellectica" program, in which
children of the experimental group participated, significantly contribute to the formation of metasubject competencies in fourth-graders related to the development of cognitive reflection. On the other hand, the results obtained confirm our data that the formation of cognitive reflection of a meaningful type in primary school age occurs later than the development of an action associated with the construction of a general method for solving search problems (see, for example, [6; 7; 8] ).
Discussion
So, the results of the study confirmed the initial hypothesis that the mastering by children of the basic educational program of the fourth grade in class time and the "Intellectica" program during extracurricular hours contributes to the formation of cognitive metasubject competencies to a greater extent than the mastering the basic educational program alone.
This result is related to the characteristics of the problems included in the Intellectics program. Firstly, children are offered problems of non-educational content and search nature. Secondly, in the classroom, various kinds of problems are offered: plot-logical, spatial-combinatorial, comparative, route. Moreover, each kind of problem includes several types, and each type is offered in several versions. Third, students solve problems of different structures: with a complete condition and a question (find an answer), with an incomplete condition and a question (find a part of a condition), with a complete condition and without a question (find a question). Fourth, the program includes two types of tasks based on problems of each kind and type: to solve problems and check ready-made solutions to problems.
The important conditions for the implementation of the program are the features of developmental classes: their total number, frequency and regularity of the course, duration and structure of each lesson. In total, 32 classes were held for nine months (September -May), one lesson per week. Each session lasted 60 minutes and included three parts: preliminary discussion (about 15 minutes); independent problem solving (about 30 minutes); final discussion (about 15 minutes).
The study showed for the first time that the solution of non-educational search problems by primary schoolchildren (grade 4) significantly contributes to the formation of universal educational actions associated with the construction of methods for solving search problems and with cognitive reflection. This fact allows us to consider the "Intellectica" program as an important component of the program for the formation of universal educational actions, which, in accordance with the requirements of the Standard, should be part of the main educational program of primary education.
The study also made it possible to gain new knowledge about the conditions for the formation of universal educational actions in primary school, in particular, among 9-year-old children studying in the fourth grade of primary school. This knowledge expands the understanding of developmental psychology about the possibilities of intellectual development of children at primary school age and clarifies the provisions of educational psychology about the conditions of mental development when teaching in primary school.
At the same time, the results obtained allow us to consider the "Intellectica" program as an important factor in the intellectual enrichment of the educational environment in primary school. The results of this study give grounds to set the task of performing a number of studies to develop a more effective (than in this study) composition of search problems by including their new genera and species into the program. In particular, it is of serious scientific interest to include in the program of tasks for the implementation of the author's thinking (independent composing of problems) as conditions for the formation of universal educational actions (see, for example, [9]).
Conclusion
In general, the study showed the effectiveness of using the "Intellectica" program for the formation of cognitive actions in younger schoolchildren (in particular, fourth-graders), associated with the construction of methods for solving search problems and with reflection on the methods and conditions for solving problems.
References
1. Guruzhapov V.A. To a question of subject diagnostics of theoretical thinking of children in the developing training. Psychological science and education, 1997, No. 4, pp. 103-107 [in Russian].
2. Davydov V. V. The theory of the developing training. Moscow: Intor, 1996. 497 p. [in Russian].
3 Davydov V.V., Pushkin V.N., Pushkina A.G. Dependence of development of thinking of younger school students from nature of training. Questions psychology, 1972, No. 6. pp. 36 - 44 [in Russian].
4. Zak A.Z. Intellektica. A book for teachers. Moscow: Intellect-centr, 2005. 408 p. [in Russian].
5. Zak A.Z. Intellectica 4th grade. Notebook for the development of thinking abilities. Moscow: Intel-lect-centr, 2020. 96 p. [in Russian].
6. Zak A.Z. The thinking of younger school students. St. Petersburg: Sodeystviye, 2004. 828 p. [in Russian].
7. Zak A.Z. Diagnostics of distinctions in thinking of younger school students. Moscow: Genezis, 2007. 159 p. [in Russian].
8. Zak A.Z. Diagnosis of the intellectual development of primary school graduates as an assessment of the risks of training in the main school. Psychological science and education], 2009, No. 2, pp. 5-13 [in Russian]..
9. Zak A.Z. Development of author's thinking in younger school students. Moscow: Biblio-globus, 2016. 218 p. [in Russian].
10. Novikov P.V. Development of a reflection in younger school students: dissertation author's abstract for obtaining a scientific degree PhD in Psychology. Moscow, 1998. 22 p. [in Russian].
11. Rubinshtein S.L. Fundamentals of the general psychology. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2002. 720 p. [in Russian].
12. Sokolov V.L. Experience of diagnostics of the analysis and reflection as universal educational actions. Psychological science and education. 2012. .№ 3. pp. 29 - 33 [in Russian].
13. Federal state educational standard of the primary general education. Moscow: Prosveshenie, 2019. 53 p. [in Russian].
