Lecture
The role of communication as an educational tool is manifested in the fact that by communicating with people in the course of various activities, during games, sports activities, entering into informal contacts with peers, older and younger schoolchildren, relatives, acquaintances and other people, the child receives various knowledge of the objective world, as well as the world of ideas and relationships. This is a very effective way of learning, since the exchange of information in communication is characterized by a high level of understanding, low redundancy of information, and saving time.
Communication is not only the most important source of information. It has a significant impact on the perception of the knowledge that the student receives through other channels, in particular in the course of the educational process of the school, in the process of practical learning of the world, from the media. In addition, communication largely determines the child’s interest in knowledge in general, obtained from any sources. Communication is one of the most important factors in the emergence, formation, development and strengthening of cognitive interests in a growing person. This especially applies to communication with peers, during which the child manifests his interests and, meeting understanding from his comrades, is strengthened in his inclinations.
For the effective use of communication as a means of educating schoolchildren, it is necessary to organize its pedagogically directed influence on the livelihoods of groups, groups and individuals.
Communication, organized with the aim to influence the pupil, to include him in activities that contribute to the formation of positive personal qualities and cause him to strive for self-improvement, is called pedagogical communication. Its specificity is manifested in a pronounced educational nature, since it, unlike other types of communication (social, psychological, everyday, etc.) necessarily involves solving pedagogical problems.
Depending on the pedagogical tasks to be solved, it is customary to single out the following types of pedagogical communication: a) direct, in the form of direct contacts of an educator and pupil; b) mediated, manifested in the fact that the teacher directs his influence not on the pupil, but on the knowledge that he has to learn, on the qualities of the personality that he has to form, on the values in which he has to orient in a certain way.
Pedagogical communication is not only communication between the educator and the one educated, but also communication between the students. Communication with peers is not only an independent sphere of personal activity, but also a factor that permeates all other spheres, because on its basis there is an exchange of spiritual values in the form of a student’s dialogue both with “other selves” and in the process of interaction with other people. This determines the role of communication in the educational process.
However, communication with peers can destroy, disfigure the interests and inclinations of the child, as well as contribute to the formation of socially dangerous interests. It is in the sphere of students' communication with peers, older and younger schoolchildren that the greatest number of conflicts is observed, asocial habits are laid down, illegal behavior is formed and manifested.
In order for pedagogical communication to effectively carry out its educational functions, during its organization the following conditions must be met: 1) it must be carried out in accordance with a single humanistic principle in all spheres of a pupil’s life - in family, school, out-of-school institutions, etc .; 2) communication should be accompanied by raising the attitude of the child towards the person as the highest value; 3) in the course of communication, the child's assimilation of the necessary psychological and pedagogical knowledge, skills and abilities to know and treat other people should be ensured; 4) communication should be organized and carried out methodically competently.
The effectiveness of pedagogical communication is largely determined by what style of communication with students the teacher is oriented. Under the style of pedagogical communication understand the individual-typological features of the interaction of the teacher and the students. The communicative abilities of the teacher, the prevailing nature of his relationship with the pupils are expressed in it; creative individuality of the teacher, especially students. The generally accepted classification of pedagogical communication styles is their division into authoritarian, democratic, and permissive (A. V. Petrovsky, Ya. L. Kolominsky, M. Yu. Kondratiev, and others).
With an authoritarian style of communication, the teacher alone solves all questions concerning the life activity of both the classroom team and each student. Based on his own attitudes, he determines the position and goals of the interaction, subjectively evaluates the results of the activity. The authoritarian style of communication is realized through the tactics of dictate and guardianship. The opposition of schoolchildren to the authority pressure of a teacher most often leads to the emergence of stable conflict situations.
Educators who adhere to this style of communication do not allow students to exercise autonomy and initiative. They, as a rule, do not understand their pupils, they are not adequate in their assessments, based only on the performance indicators. Authoritarian teacher focuses on the negative actions of the student, not taking into account the motives of these actions.
External indicators of success of such teachers (performance, discipline in the classroom, etc.) are often positive, but the socio-psychological atmosphere in their classes is usually unfavorable.
The permissive (anarchic, ignoring) communication style is characterized by the teacher’s striving to be minimally involved in the activity, disclaiming responsibility for its results. Such teachers formally perform their functional duties, limited only by teaching. The permissive style of communication implies non-interference tactics, which are based on indifference and lack of interest in the problems of both the school and the students. The consequence of this tactic is the lack of control over the activities of schoolchildren and the dynamics of the development of their personality. The performance and discipline in the classes of such teachers, as a rule, are unsatisfactory.
The common features of the conniving and authoritarian communication styles, despite their apparent opposite, are distant relationships, lack of trust, clear isolation, alienation of the teacher, and a demonstrative emphasis on their dominant position.
An alternative to these styles of communication is the style of cooperation of the participants of pedagogical interaction, often called democratic. With this style of communication, the teacher is focused on increasing the role of the student in interaction, on involving everyone in solving common problems. The main feature of this style is mutual understanding and mutual orientation. For teachers who adhere to this style, characterized by an active-positive attitude towards students, an adequate assessment of their capabilities, successes and failures. Such teachers are characterized by a deep understanding of the student, the goals and motives of his behavior, the ability to predict the development of his personality. According to external indicators of activity, teachers - adherents of a democratic style of communication are inferior to their authoritarian colleagues, but the socio-psychological climate in their classes is always more prosperous.
In teaching practice, there are often “mixed” styles of pedagogical communication. The teacher cannot absolutely exclude from his arsenal some private techniques of an authoritarian style, sometimes quite effective, especially when working with classes and individual students who have a low level of socio-psychological and personal development.
Pedagogical communication in the form of friendly disposition, which can be considered as a prerequisite of a democratic style , is quite productive. Friendly location acts as a stimulus for the development of relations between the teacher and students. However, friendliness should not violate the status position, so one of the most common forms of pedagogical communication is communication-distance. This style is used by both experienced and novice teachers. At the same time, studies show that an excessively hypertrophied (excessive) distance leads to the formalization of the interaction between a teacher and a student. The distance should correspond to the general logic of their relations: being an indicator of the leading role of a teacher, it should be based on authority.
Communication-distance in its extreme manifestations goes into a more rigid form - communication-intimidation. This form is most often used by novice teachers who do not know how to organize productive communication on the basis of joint activities.
No less negative role in the acts of interaction between teachers and students is played by communication-flirting, which is also mainly used by young teachers. In an effort to quickly establish contact with children, to please them, but not possessing the communicative culture necessary for this, they begin to flirt with them: flirt, talk in private subjects on personal topics, abuse rewards without good reason.
A thinking teacher, comprehending and analyzing his activities, should pay close attention to which forms of communication are most typical for him and are used more often by him. Based on the skills of professional self-diagnostics, he must form a style of pedagogical interaction that is adequate to his psycho-physiological parameters, ensuring the solution of the tasks of personal growth of the teacher and students.
продолжение следует...
Часть 1 8.2. Communication as a means of education
Comments
To leave a comment
Theory of education. Organization and methods of educational work
Terms: Theory of education. Organization and methods of educational work