Methodology for determining the levels of future teachers’ (bachelors) research thinking
https://doi.org/10.26795/2307-1281-2021-9-1-5
Abstract
Introduction. Modern society makes new demands on the teacher. Along with the formation of such future teachers’ competencies as the willingness to master new information in the shortest possible time, to study independently and find effective ways to solve non-standard professional problems, the need to develop their research thinking becomes more and more urgent. Insufficient degree of knowledge of the essence of the concept of "research thinking" and the lack of methods to identify it and determine the levels of it testify to the relevance of this topic.
Materials and Methods. The analysis of the psychological and pedagogical literature showed that one of the factors contributing to the future teachers’ research thinking development is the development of a methodology for determining the levels of future teachers’ (bachelors) research thinking development, which is the goal of this study. The article discusses the views of foreign and domestic scientists who have studied research thinking, substantiates the importance and necessity of developing the methodology for determining the levels of future teachers’ research thinking development, as well as the logic of its development and substantiation of the methodology for determining the levels of development of research thinking in future teachers (bachelors). Such methods of scientific and pedagogical research as synthesis, thought experiment, pilot experiment were used.
Results. As a result of the analysis and interpretation of the available sources, the author's methodology was developed to determine the levels of development of research thinking in future teachers (bachelors), which is based on the application of research tasks.
Discussion and Conclusions. We have identified the features and levels of research tasks to determine the levels of future teachers’ research thinking development. Examples of research assignments for each level are given.
About the Author
L. R. Khaliullina
Kazan (Volga region) Federal University, Elabuga Institute
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Khaliullina Liliya Rinatovna
Elabuga
References
1. Davydov V.V. Types of generalization in teaching: Logical and psychological problems of the construction of educational subjects. Moscow, Pedagogicheskoe soobshchestvo Rossii Publ., 2000.480 p. (In Russ.)
2. Demina N.F. The use of research tasks in the process of teaching physics: teaching aid. Kostanay, KGPI Publ., 2018. 100 p. (In Russ.)
3. Zak A.Z. How to determine the level of development of a student's thinking. Moscow, Znanie Publ., 1982. 96 p. (In Russ.)
4. Kazanceva YA.N., Semenova E.V., Semenov V.I., Rostova M.L., Nemchinova N.V. Educational and research practice of bachelors in a pedagogical university in the context of a competence-based approach. Sovremennye problemy nauki i obrazovaniya, 2014, no. 4. Available at: http://science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id=14401 (accessed: 20.10.2020). (In Russ.)
5. Klinberg L. Problems of learning theory: monograph / translation from German by V.S. Semenikhin. Moscow, Pedagogika Publ., 1984. 256 p. (In Russ.)
6. Kuzin F.A. Thesis. Writing technique. Registration rules. Protection order. A practical guide for doctoral students, postgraduates and undergraduates. 2nd edition, revised. Moscow, "Os'-89" Publ., 2001. 320 p. (In Russ.)
7. Lerner I.YA. Problematic learning. Moscow, Znanie Publ., 1974. 64 p. (In Russ.)
8. Mahmutov M.I. Problematic learning. The main questions of the theory. Moscow, Pedagogika Publ., 1975. 258 p. (In Russ.)
9. Mahmutov M.I. Selected Works: in 7 volumes. Volume 1: Problem-Based Learning: Fundamental Theory / compiled by D.M. Shakirov. Kazan, Magarif–Vakyt Publ., 2016. 423 p. (In Russ.)
10. Odincova L.A., Borisenko O.V. Organization of students' research activities as a factor in the development of professional competencies. Sovremennye problemy nauki i obrazovaniya, 2019, no. 2. Available at: http://science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id=28688 (accessed: 13.10.2020). (In Russ.)
11. Savina N.N. Levels of motivation among future teachers for professional research activity. Sovremennye problemy nauki i obrazovaniya, 2017, no. 3. Available at: http://science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id=26461 (accessed: 23.10.2020). (In Russ.)
12. Uspenskij V.V. School research tasks and their place in the educational process: dissertation of the candidate of pedagogical sciences. Moscow, 1967. 283 p. (In Russ.)
13. Furman A.V. Levels of problem solving by students. Voprosy psihologii, 1989, no. 3, pp. 43-53. (In Russ.)
14. SHmigirilova I.B. Features of the design of educational and search tasks in competence-based teaching of mathematics. Nauka i shkola, 2017, no. 3, pp. 152-160. (In Russ.)
15. YArkov V.G. The essence and functions of research problems in teaching mathematics to students of a teacher training university. Sovremennye problemy nauki i obrazovaniya, 2013, no. 6. Available at: http://science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id=11061 (accessed: 03.09.2020). (In Russ.)
16. Bruce C.D., Flynn T.C., Bennett S.A. Focus on exploratory tasks in lesson study: The Canadian ‘Math for Young Children’ project. ZDM Mathematics Education, 2016, vol. 48, pp. 541-554.
17. Clarke A., Erickson J. Teacher inquiry: What is old is new again! Available at: http://blogs.ubc.ca/stevemcg/files/2015/09/Clarke-Erickson-2006.-Teacher-inquiry-Whats-old-is-new-again.pdf (accessed: 12.09.2020).
18. Doig B., Groves S., Fujii T. The critical role of task development in lesson study. New York, Springer Science + Business Media B.V., 2011. Pp. 181-197.
19. Gralewski J., Karwowski M. Are teachers’ ratings of students’ creativity related to students’ divergent thinking? A meta-analysis. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 2019, vol. 33, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2019.100583.
20. Janssen Е.М., Mainhard T., Buisman S.M., Verkoeijen P., Heijltjes A., Peppen L.M., Gog T. Training higher education teachers’ critical thinking and attitudes towards teaching it. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 2019, vol. 58, pp. 310-322, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.03.007
21. Kincheloe J. Teachers as researchers: Qualitative inquiry as a path to empowerment. 2nd ed. London, Routledge, 2003.
22. MacLean M., Mohr M. Teachers researchers at work. Berkeley, Ca, National Writing Project, 1999. 290 p.
23. Murdoch K. How do inquiry teachers….teach? Available at: https://www.kathmurdoch.com.au/blog/2014/02/21/how-do-inquiry-teachers-teach (accessed: 25.07.2020).
24. Paredes-Chi A.A., Castillo-Burguete M.T. Is Participatory Action Research an innovative pedagogical alternative for training teachers as researchers? The training plan and evaluation for normal schools. Evaluation and Program Planning, 2018, vol. 68, pp. 176-184, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2018.03.007.
25. Peim N. Thinking in Education Research: Applying Philosophy and Theory. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2018. 296 p.
26. Ponte J.P., Mata-Pereira J., Henriques A.C. Designing and using exploratory tasks. M.Quaresma ICMI Study 22: Task Design in Mathematics Education. 2013. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259579908_Designing_and_using_exploratory_tasks (accessed: 15.10.2020).
27. Silander Т., Valijarvi J. The Theory and Practice of Building Pedagogical Skill in Finnish Teacher Education. PISA, Power, and Policy: the emergence of global educational governance. United Kingdom, Symposium Books, 2013. Pp. 85-86.
28. Stiggins R.J., Rubel E., Quellmalz E.S. Measuring Thinking Skills in the Classroom. National Education Association, 1986. P. 32.
29. Stiggins R.J., Griswold M.M., Wikelund K.R. Measuring Thinking Skills through Classroom Assessment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1989, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 233-246.
30. Taylor R. Creativity at Work: Supercharge Your Brain and Make Your Ideas Stick. Кogan Page Publishers, 2013. 208 p.
Review
Views:
1052
Email this article 