CC BY
20
POLY-PARADIGMATIC NATURE OF LIFELONG EDUCATION OF TEACHERS
А. S. Mischenko
Our research of secondary vocational schools of St. Petersburg (19942014) show that changes in the theoretical and methodological equipment of the educational process, especially in the field of social science and humanities, formed (in comparison with decades of the Soviet period) new trends in teaching activities. In particular, they are associated with the emergence and assertion of the methodological principles of poly-paradigmatic content selection and construction of continuous professional education of teachers, with an increasing number of different equally existing educational concepts. Furthermore, during many years all the above tendencies were accompanied by spontaneous filling of content with poorly tested, but dynamically changing education technologies.
This trend which, in fact, has developed over the last twenty years, can be explained by the fact that many educative practices of schools, lyceums and colleges are based on poly-paradigmatic concepts, recognition of equal value of different theoretical concepts and assumptions in their educational processes. The obvious increase in the number of such equal educational concepts, used in the same educational institution, sometimes by the same teacher, is expressly perceived by the author of this article as a negative phenomenon of modern education. If, at the beginning, this trend had a positive connotation, then at the present time it has become a brake and a negative tendency for the development of domestic educational theory. Modern education has become a kind of "vanity fair of teachers", or, as was more nicely pointed out by N.V. Bordovskaya, a kind of “fair of pedagogical concepts” [2, p. 49].
Over the last quarter of the century, if to count down from 1989, there have been a lot of competing educational concepts. All the above contributed to the disintegration of pedagogical theory, the emasculation of the content of pedagogy by various conceptual and terminological "simulacra" (Jean Baudrillard): "humanist pedagogy", "learner-oriented pedagogy", "pedagogy of cooperation", "pedagogy of creativity", "competence-based pedagogy”, et al. All the above tendencies continue to clog up the categorical apparatus of national education. As a result, we can see a weakening of the role of educational theory, as a clear target of continuous pedagogical education development and regulator of the activities of teachers-practitioners. This trend is negatively valued not only by scholars - teachers (V.S. Bezrukova, N.V. Bordovskaya, N.M. Novikov, et al.), but also by a significant number of the surveyed teachers-practitioners (39.1%). The results of the survey indicate that, with respect to the content of continuous pedagogical education, this trend has exhausted its positive potential. It is important to understand this because reliance on poly-paradigmatic bases for the purpose of selection of content of continuing education of teachers significantly diminishes the role of proven scientific principles of pedagogical theory and practice. Poly-paradigmatically-founded content of lifelong education of teachers is regarded by modern scholars as its necessary component. The basis of this position is formed
287
by different personality-oriented concepts: "humanistic pedagogy", "learner-oriented pedagogy", "pedagogy of freedom", "pedagogy of non-violence", "creative pedagogy" and others. (A.A. Bodalev, E.V. Bondarevskaya, O.S. Gazman, V.A. Karakovsky, S.V. Kulnevich, Z.A. Malkov, V.V. Serikov, S.D. Smirnov, I.S. Yakimanskaya et al.). The negative character of this fact becomes apparent when you learn that adherers of these pedagogical concepts themselves say that the above approaches are not very reasonable and do not have sufficient theoretical depth [1, p. 229].
An analysis of the above-mentioned educational concepts shows that they are based not on objective, economic, social and cultural conditions, but on subjective, individual and psychological factors. The educational process is not considered as socialization and cultural orientation of a person (introduction into the world of wealth of national and universal culture), but rather as a largely self-contained individualization of an individual’s development. With such an approach, we can observe that under the absolute value of the processes of atomization and alienation, prevailing in the modern civil society, interests of a person and the society are wrongfully opposed.
The opposition of personal and public interests leads to the formation of individualistic orientation of youth to cultivation and conservation of their alienation from society. However, such negative dialectics of education development are not understood by many educators. According to our research, the proclamation of an individual approach to students, as a main principle of pedagogy, is valued by a significant number of teachers. This principle is interpreted by them as pedagogical support of spontaneous, individual, unique desires, motives and interests of their students, which leads to underestimation of the social and cultural conditioning of the educational process to limitation of the ability of a school, a lyceum or a college team, a family and other real institutes of youth development, as well as development of teachers themselves. “In such circumstances, the maximization of freedom to choose the content and forms of educational activity, boundless in its intentions of poly-paradigmal character, weakens the focus and systematic character of the whole educational process, and its synergetic character. The above directly contradicts the duty of a teacher to ensure strict compliance with the established educational standards. Not by chance, 54.8% of the surveyed teachers, supporting the idea of free choice by the students of individual educational routes, "doubted the reality of this concept due to the scarcity of training time," and 26.1% of the respondents had a negative attitude towards this, "due to the absolute unreality" of the idea, because, "it disturbs the systematic character and quality of knowledge of students”.
Various person-oriented educational concepts are another focal point to support the poly-paradigmatic nature of education in general, and lifelong education in particular. Their basic concept is that a student and a teacher are the equivalent subjects of the training and educational process, and more than that, a student is its central subject. The first statement is supported by 53% of teachers, and the latter by 31.3% of the respondents. Only 15.7% of teachers believe that a teacher is a leading subject of the educational process. These responses suggest that educational process participants cannot see the obvious fact: a teacher, and not a student, bears real social, economic, legal, and, ultimately, civil liability to the
288
society for the quality of teaching and education of the youth. The derogation of a teacher, as a subject of the educational process, inevitably reduces the teacher’s credibility in the eyes of students and parents. The latter greatly complicates teaching activity and has a negative impact upon its results. Thus, in the learner-oriented educational concepts, we can see clear underestimation of the importance of culture as a fundamental factor in the development of students. This concept is tried to not be critically translated to the practice of lifelong education. Subsequently, trained teachers start to actively use these concepts in practice.
Certain dissatisfaction with personality-oriented educational concepts, as a theoretical basis for modernization of national education, strange through it may appear, has resulted in an increase of poly-paradigmatic educational concepts due to the emergence of a competence-based approach and its various interpretations (O.V. Akulova, A. Volkov, M.P. Voyushina, Y.V. Myachin, A.M. Novikov, N.V. Platonova, N.F. Radionova, Y.N. Solovieva, A.P. Tryapitsina, I. Frumin,
M.A. Shatalov, L. Jacobson et al.). The meaning of this approach can be seen in its key term. The terms "competence" and "competency" are used as synonyms of previous theories and practice of use of such concepts as "knowledge", "mind-set", "skill" and "experience." The term “competency”, in particular, means a set of authorities (rights and obligations) or a certain body or an official, established by the law, the articles of association of the body, or other provisions. Meaning the ability of a person to perform his or her functions, the term "competency" was used primarily in the social and legal regulation of professional activities. Until recently, the term "competency" has not been used in educational terminology. It was not included into the Pedagogical Encyclopedia of 1965, into the Russian Educational Encyclopedia of 1993 [4; 5]. In foreign publications and documents on education, the terms "competence" and "competency" appear only in the 90s of the twentieth century, but are used much less frequently than the traditional terms, such as "knowledge", "skills", and "ability". The National Doctrine of Education of the Russian Federation (2000) has such terms as "skills", "ability”, "culture", and "qualification”; such a term as “competence” can never be found in its text. [3]
Supporters of the competence-based approach see education as a social institution which is based on real social and economic needs of the society. However, the role of education is determined by them in the context of the transition by our country from a state governed educational system to one ruled by the law and the market economy. That is why the problem of excessive pragmatism is obvious, which manifests itself in the definition of education as a sector of the economy, as a sphere of educational services, private entrepreneurship, and profitable investment into human capital. The pragmatism inherent to this approach becomes obvious when its authors see the purpose of vocational training of young people in their communion to market values, and adaptation to the labor market. Under these conditions, the main task of education is to ensure its high quality, while reducing and fragmenting the period of training: five years for a fully-trained specialist; four years for a bachelor specialist. In this case, the theoretical training of undergraduate students accounts for one third -one half of the training time, and for graduate students - up to 47% of the total workload, which additionally has purely applied disciplines (marketing, management, organization and management of production, management of
289
creative teams, business administration, etc.). All this, according to the supporters of the competence-based approach, allows you to bring Russian education to the world level.
The disadvantage of the competence-based approach is that it focuses on the formation of students' competency as an ability to make choices on the basis of an adequate assessment of themselves in a particular situation. Training is based on the practical experience of specialists, on constant emphasizing of practice-oriented education. On this basis, the traditional knowledge-based paradigm of national education is denied, the training and educating roles of a teacher are underestimated, and their role is reduced to counseling students in the process of execution of independent work. Besides, the competence-based approach gives secondary importance to the cultural function of education, which is in contrary to the traditions of Russian culture and the value-based motivation of our teachers. According to our survey, teachers point out that a value-based approach is the main motivation of their activities: 86.1% of the teachers surveyed categorically deny prioritization of formation of the new mercantile value orientations of students; 74.8% of the respondents indicate their commitment towards "the creative nature of work"; 62.6% of teachers - to "the opportunity to realize their knowledge and experience"; 33.9% of the respondents - on "the opportunity to benefit youth," and finally, 17.4% of the respondents in their activities are guided by effective and fruitful "cooperation with colleagues”.
Thus, the presented characteristics of poly-paradigmatic building of modern education in general and lifelong education of teachers in particular, do not, in our opinion, allow us to take them as a serious theoretical and long-term strategic framework of their modernization. Such grounds should be based on deep and comprehensive development of the teachers’ modern human culture and creativity, providing not only the efficiency but the wisdom of building their educational work with their students.
References
1. Бондаревская Е.В., Кульневич С.В. Педагогика: личность в гуманистических теориях и системах воспитания: учеб. пособие для студ. сред. и высш. пед. учеб. заведений, слушателей ИПК и ФПК. - Ростов - н/Д: Творческий центр «Учитель», 1999. - 560 с.
2. Бордовская, Н.В. Диалектика педагогического исследования: Логико-
методологические проблемы. - СПб.: Изд-во РХГИ, 2001. - 512 с.
3. Национальная доктрина образования в Российской Федерации [Текст]: Законодательные акты Российской Федерации о высшей школе http://www.dvgu.ru/umu/ZakRF/doktrin1.htm
4. Педагогическая энциклопедия / гл. ред. И. А. Каиров, Ф. Н. Петров. В 4 т. - Т. 2. - М., Советская Энциклопедия, 1965. - 911с.
5. Российская педагогическая энциклопедия. В 2 т. / гл. ред. В.В. Давыдов. - М.: Большая Российская энциклопедия, Т. I. - М., 1993. - 608 с.
290
