Resources and Risks of Discussion as an Interactive Method of Organizing the Educational Process

Author Name(s): Tatiana T. Sidelnikova, Diana D. Fatykhova
Author Email: ttsidelnikova@gmail.com

Abstract

The article analyzes the discussion in the organization of “interactive education” as the process management of mastering knowledge through the organization of human interactions and relationships. In this case, learning is a social, collective, rather than an individual process. The discussion, representing a purposeful and orderly exchange of ideas, judgments, opinions in a group, acts as a method, providing interaction in education.

The study purpose is to identify the resources and risks of discussion as an interactive method of organizing the educational process. Achieving this goal requires consideration of the characteristics, functions, types of discussions, analysis of resources and limitations in its use by the higher educational institution teachers.

As a methodological research base, the work includes the following approaches and methods: systemic and structural-functional approaches, sociological, logical and comparative methods. The empirical base included the data of the observation included and the questionnaire data.

As a research result, we came to the following conclusions: an interactive education method requires a lot of preparatory work on the part of the teacher and the necessary skills of “conducting” the course of discussion; the teacher is required to constantly maintain the necessary level of students’ involvement in the course of discussion, to comply with the ethics of disputes, to have willingness to promptly neutralize the emerging conflict situations.; a discussion requires the teacher to develop a whole range of personal qualities (quick reaction, humor, tolerance, ability to relieve tension that has arisen, etc.)

Introduction

The subject education paradigm assuming that the student with his motivation, needs, interests is the epicenter means not only the parity start in building communication between both subjects (teacher-student(s)), not only the constant direct-reverse communication on the transfer of cognitive (knowledge) component.

The “interactive education”, implementing this paradigm, refers to the technologies of learning and mastering knowledge and skills through the organization of human communications [1, p. 25]. This is a decisive recognition that learning is a social, collective, but not strictly individual process. And it is precisely these characteristics of education that provide targeted development of competencies and qualities that are adequate, both to one’s own needs of an individual and to the requirements of society of the XXI century. There are the following characteristics constantly called among the latter: the ability to set and solve a problem; communicative skills; social responsibility; the ability to work with information; critical and systemic thinking; creativity and curiosity; focus on self-development [2, p. 56].

Even a cursory glance is enough to see what an important role in achieving these parameters is played by interactivity in learning and such a method of its implementation as a discussion. This article is devoted to this issue.

Summary

In conclusion, it should be said that the discussion plays an important role in achieving the goals of interactive education. However, it can be successful only if it is based on the high professional competence of the teacher. Discussion as a method of interactive education and as a special technology requires the teacher to develop a whole range of personal qualities (quickness of reaction, humor, tolerance, ability to relieve tension that has arisen, etc.), without which discussion is impossible.

Acknowledgment

The work is performed according to the Russian Government Program of Competitive Growth of Kazan Federal University.

References

[1] Sillaste G.G. Interactive Methods of Teaching a Course in Sociology in a Financial-Economic University: Study Guide. P. 1. Sociology Elective Courses / G.G. Sillaste. – М.: Finanacial Academy under the Government of the Russian Federation, 2004. – 118 p.

[2] Klarin M.V. Innovations in Education: Metaphors and Models: Analysis of Foreign Experience / M.V. Klarin. – М.: Nauka, 1997. – 223 p.

[3] Johnson D. Methods of Education: Training in Cooperation / D. Johnson, R. Johnson, E. Johnson-Holubek. – St. Petersburg: Economic School and Others, 2001. – 253 p.

[4] Badmaev B.Ts. Psychology and Methodology of Accelerated Learning / B.Ts. Badmaev. – М.: Vlados, 1998. – P. 74.

[5] Noskova L.G. On the Effectiveness of Professional Speech Training. // Higher Education in Russia, 2016, No. 3. P. 67-72.

 

619 total views, no views today

Download PDF File

About the author: admin