CC BY
11PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCES
THE QUESTION OF DIALOGICALITY IN THE STRUCTURE OF SOCIAL INTELLIGENCE OF
THE FUTURE SPECIALIST
Slobodianiuk O.
Assistant Professor of the Department of Department of Developmental Psychology and Counseling, Phd student
Ternopil Volodymyr Hnatiuk National Pedagogical University, Ternopil, 2
Maxyma Kryvonosa str.,46027
Abstract
The paper theoretically analyzes the importance of determining the dialogicality in the structure of social intelligence of the future teacher. An empirical study of the level of development of the social intelligence and the predominant type of orientation in understanding the situation of professional interaction in future teachers and based on the results analyzed three levels of development of social intelligence with different levels of predominant orientation.
Keywords: dialogue, dialogicality, dialogic orientations, social intelligence, teacher.
Introduction. It should be noted that the formation of the personality of a highly qualified specialist during his studies at a higher educational institution, his professional development in the process of interpersonal interaction, involves constant improvement. Personality is formed in a real environment, while reflecting its changing patterns. Hence, modern world trends in higher education indicate an increasing attention to the professional and holistic attitude of future specialist. The essence of these trends is to create conditions for the development of the future professional as a bright individual, a man of culture, capable of creativity in free forms of activity, self-development and self-improvement. The student's lack of experience in dialogic communication reduces the ability to understand and get to know other people, which is important for the professional development of a teacher. Dialogic form of communication in the dyad "teacher-student" is characterized by personal equality, "subject-subject" relations, cooperation, consistency of actions, thoughts, experiences, free discussion, transfer of knowledge, professional and personal experience, individual approach to each individual . Considering the personality of the teacher as a future specialist, according to I. Bulyubash, its important quality is dialogicality - the ability to be in the "I" - "You" relationship and maintain a dialogical position [5, p. 25].
In the educational practice of higher education there is a controversial situation perceived by many: on the one hand, in the learning process the tradition of monologue dominates, and on the other - there is a limitation of such organization of the educational process in changing reality. This is primarily due to the translation of ready-made knowledge and skills, which are an obstacle to the professional development of the individual as a specialist. Dialogization of the educational environment contributes to the creation of a qualitatively new space of interaction between teacher and student, as well as the realization of professional and personal potential of future professionals and the need of the individual to realize its natural property - dialogicality.
Literature review. The research of a number of scientists allowed to define dialogue as a unique way of
existence of culture, environment of formation of value-semantic sphere, way of realization of heuristic methods, as personal and spiritual-developmental communication, as spiritual act, as field of conscious-reflexive activity (K. Abulkhanova-Slavska, G Ball, S. Belova, I. Bekh, V. Zinchenko, M. Kagan, Z. Karpenko, S. Maksymenko, V. Slobodchikov, O. Starovoitenko, M. Trinyak, T. Florenskaya, etc.), research strategies are developed dialogical phenomena (M. Boryshevsky, Z. Karpenko, S. Maksymenko, I. Manokha, V. Romenets, G. Radchuk, V. Tatenko, T. Tytarenko, N. Chepeleva, etc.). The main characteristics of the dialogue from the point of view of psychology: equality of psychological positions, subject-subject interaction and cooperation (O. Bodalyov, S. Bratchenko, A. Petrovsky, S. Shein). It is these characteristics that determine the development of dialogicality in the context of professional interaction [6, 7].
Dialogue is situational, changeable and subjective, which expands the semantic space of this concept. In addition, dialogue is the most important condition for the existence and self-realization of the subject, which is carried out in many contacts with other actors in the presence of complications and differences between "I and You". The dialogic nature of an individual is determined by his self-worth, equality in relation to rights, freedoms and responsibilities. To carry out this activity, a person needs another, to communicate and interact with it. M. Bakhtin's opinion is important that "to express oneself means to make oneself a significant subject for another and for oneself" [1]. Dialogicality in a broad sense is understood as "a special form of interaction between equal and equivalent consciousness" [5].
The basis for the development of students' full perception of educational material, their mastery of worldview, and moral, social concepts are dialogical characteristics. Dialogic learning is a joint activity of a teacher and a student, which is based on a system of subject-subject relations: "personality-teacher" and "personality-student". An important prerequisite for the acquisition of professional qualities is the presence of the future specialist's responsibility for the processes of interaction: in the learning process, in communication,
in the process of self-organization, self-regulation and so on. Due to the developed value-semantic sphere, a person has the ability to self-regulation, self-reflection, to perceive and understand professional activity as a value of his life, as a need for creative attitude to it, in the formation of professionally significant qualities, in modeling their professional actions based on professional ideal.
That is why, in our opinion, the effectiveness of the professional activity of the future teacher is largely determined by the dialogic personality. Dialogue, we consider as the unity of knowledge necessary for the successful implementation of professional activities and experience, which involves not only the possession of the necessary practical skills and abilities, but also the presence of a developed field of personal values and professional meanings. Dialogicality acts simultaneously as: value-semantic basis of professional activity, an indicator of a high level of professionalism, a functional means of activity.
Method. For the empirical study of dialogicality in the structure of social intelligence of future teachers, we used the method of J. Guilford and M. Sullivan "Study of social intelligence" (adaptation of O. Mikhai-lova) and the questionnaire of dialogic orientation of T. Florenskaya.
The method of research of social intelligence consists of four subtests: subtest № 1 "Stories with completion" gives the chance to reveal a factor of knowledge of results of behavior; subtest № 2 "Expression groups" measures the factor of cognition of behavioral classes, namely the ability to logical generalization, the allocation of common essential features in various nonverbal human reactions; subtest № 3 "Verbal expression" determines the factor of cognition of behavior transformation; subtest № 4 "Stories with additions" measures the knowledge of behavioral systems, the ability to situations in
behavior in specific situations [2]. With the help of the questionnaire of dialogical orientation T. Florenska the prevailing orientations of students-teachers in understanding the situation of professional interaction were determined. The questionnaire consists of three parts, namely: I - "technological orientation"; II - "humanistic orientation"; III - "dialogic orientation". The basis of technological orientation is the focus on the application in professional activities of methods and techniques that will contribute to a better result. The humanistic orientation is focused on interaction based on empathy, congruence and promotes self-actualization. Dialogic orientation - the desire to hear internal dialogue. It is a two-way interconnected process in which a change in the personality of one leads to a change in the personality of the other [3].
Results. The empirical study was conducted on the basis of Ternopil Volodymyr Hnatiuk National Pedagogical University and Chernivtsi Yuri Fedkovych National University. The ascertaining stage of the research involved 226 future specialists - students of the first, second and fifth courses of pedagogical specialties.
The obtained results showed that among the studied in general the average and below average level of development of social intelligence prevails. Because the level of social intelligence is recognized on the basis of composite assessment, the comparative analysis helped to track the dynamics of its change in first- and fifth-year students. In particular, first-year students have a below-average level of social intelligence development - 39%, and fifth-year students - 36% average level. It is important to note that despite the fact that in fifth-year students the indicators of average (36%), above average (17%) and high (11%) level of development are higher than first-year students, a high percentage of subjects with below-average social intelligence
recognize the structure of interpersonal (26%) (Fig. 1). the dynamics, the importance of human
Fig. 1 Level of development of social intelligence in students of teachers ( n = 226)
The analysis of the indicators obtained by the method of dialogic orientation of T. Florenska shows that in most of the studied humanistic type of orientation prevails (56,7 %), the technological type of orientation has a slightly lower indicator (35,3 %) and the
lowest indicator indicates the dialogic type of orientation. (8%), as evidenced by the insufficient level of di-alogically oriented students-teachers in understanding the situation of professional interaction (Tab. 1).
Table 1
Distribution by the predominant type of orientation
in understanding the situation of professional interaction
The predominant type of orientation in understanding the situation of professional interaction Number of subjects in %
Humanistic 56,7%
Technological 35,3%
Dialogic 8%
In addition, the analysis of our study allowed us to analyze that the humanistic type of orientation predominates in first- and fifth-year students and correlates with medium and high rates of social intelligence. The dialogic type of orientation has the lowest indicators, which indicates an insufficient level of dialogically-oriented students and is offset by the low level of development of social intelligence. Hence, three levels of development of social intelligence were identified:
1. The development of social intelligence at the level of understanding the objectively objective context of interaction (38% of respondents): the level of development of the future specialist is revealed in low meaning, external motivation of educational and professional activities and weak desire for self-actualization. Characteristic features of such students are lack of independence, external localization of control, inability to control and evaluate the results of their actions, passivity and irresponsibility in their educational and professional activities. Inherently low level of self-esteem, superficiality in the self-analysis of professional opportunities, low level of general and situational reflexivity. Such students try to avoid social contacts, do not know social norms and stereotypes, in case of problematic situations in social interaction try to transfer the initiative to the partner. At this level, the predominant technological type of orientation in understanding the situation of professional interaction.
2. The development of social intelligence at the level of understanding the objective-personal context of interaction (56% of respondents): is reflected in satisfaction with past and present life, and low understanding of future prospects. Characteristic is the educational motivation of educational and professional activities, which is aimed at acquiring deep and solid knowledge. Such students share the values of a self-actualized personality, but do not yet realize them in their own behavior. They are not independent enough, often have difficulty in monitoring and evaluating their actions, unprepared to take an active position in their educational and professional activities, often dependent on control by teachers. The reasons for their failures are more often seen in external circumstances or other people. They are active in educational and professional activities sit-uationally, depending on the circumstances and their own interests. Self-assessment of one's own professionally significant qualities is somewhat fragmentary and not always justified. Such students are sensitive to the nature and nuances of human relationships, which helps them understand language expression in the context of a particular situation, specific relationships, and are able to find the appropriate tone of communication with different interlocutors in different situations and show
role plasticity. Characteristic of this level is the humanistic type of orientation in understanding the situation of professional interaction.
3. The development of social intelligence at the level of understanding the subjective-personal context of interaction (6% of respondents): indicates a meaningful positive attitude, a strong desire for self-actualization and internal motivation for educational and professional activities. Students have an attitude to themselves as a figure, manifested in activity, initiative, perseverance, determination, independence, self-control, the ability to transform the inner and outer world. Internality in actions and judgments is predominant. A high level of emotional awareness that promotes positive self-esteem and adequate, differentiated self-feelings and the emotions of others. That is, student teachers are successful in interpersonal contacts and well-adapted socially. They understand the connection between people's actions and their consequences, are able to grasp the meaning of nonverbal reactions in interpreting communication situations, successfully interpret the words of the interlocutor. Dialogic type of orientation in understanding the situation of professional interaction is observed at this level of development.
It should be noted that in our research we consider dialogicality as an important indicator influencing the development of social intelligence. Dialogue should be understood as the ability to engage in dialogue that appeals to the subjective experience of a professional. The presence of low rates of development of social intelligence is an obstacle to its professional development.
Conclusion. So, an empirical study of the definition of the predominant type of orientation in understanding the situation of professional interaction showed that in most subjects the humanistic type of orientation predominates (56.7%), a slightly lower indicator has a technological type of orientation (35.3%) and the lowest indicates a dialogic type. orientation (8%), as evidenced by the insufficient level of dialogically oriented students-teachers in understanding the situation of professional interaction. In addition, it was investigated that students-teachers have an average and below average level of development of social intelligence.
The study suggests that the process of developing dialogue in teachers leads to the solution of many crucial tasks of vocational education. We see prospects for further research in the development and application of the development program.
Acknowledgments The dissertation research was performed in accordance with the thematic plan of research works of the Department of Developmental Psychology and Counseling of Ternopil National Pedagog-
ical University named after Volodymyr Hnatyuk "Psychological and pedagogical principles of educational dialogue as an innovative psychological didactic technology".
REFERENCES:
1. Batory, A. (2010). Dialogicality and the construction of identity. Int. J. Dial. Sci. 4, 45-66.
2. Mikhailova, E. (2006). Test by J. Guilford and M. Sullivan. Diagnosis of social intelligence. User's Guide (2nd ed.). SPb .: GP «IMATON», 56 p.
3. Florenskaya, T. (2001) Dialogue in practical psychology. The science of the soul. M .: VLADOS. 207 p
4. Bulyubash, I. (2008) I hear you. Phenomena of language and speech in the practice of a Gestalt therapist. Samara: Ed. house "BAHRAH-M". 272 p.
5. Maksimenko, S. Shcherban, TD (1998), Professional development of a young teacher: textbook. manual for students. Ped. University. Uzhhorod: Zakarpattia, 105 p.
6. Markova, I. (2005). Dialogicality and Social Representations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
