Debatability as a principle of teacher education: methodological aspects and practical implementation

Introduction. Debatability is considered as a manifestation of dialogism and as one of the conditions for the formation of democratic thinking. The main characteristics of debatability as a principle of teacher education are revealed: realization of the right to formulate one's own professional position and its public discussion; harmonious combination with the main methodological approaches in education; creative and probabilistic character; joint identification of the meanings of pedagogical activity. The preparation of future teachers for the implementation of debatability in the educational process is defined as the modern mission of a professional pedagogical institution. The relationship between the philosophical substantiation of the principle of discussion and its specific implementation in the activities of a teacher of pedagogical disciplines is shown.

Materials and Methods. With the use of the theoretical analysis, the properties of the discussion that determine its use in the professional training of future teachers are highlighted. The ideas of students of the pedagogical college about the influence of the role and place of discussion in their professional training were studied and analyzed on the basis of the results of the survey and the products of activity. Also, a conversation was held with fellow teachers about the possibilities of using the discussion. The ranking method made it possible to identify the most effective methods for implementing the principle of discussion in the practice of teaching the academic discipline «Pedagogy».

Results. The ideas of future teachers about discussion forms and methods of teaching have been studied. The main methodological methods for implementing the principle of discussion in teacher education are considered. The risks and limits of the application of the discussion are substantiated. The development of debatable forms and methods of teaching is considered as a condition for stimulating professional self-development. Potential directions for improving the professional training of future teachers for mastering the discussion are identified, including the expansion of the use of discussion by students in the course of teaching practice.

Discussion and Conclusions. The implementation of the principle of discussion predetermines the rejection of traditional subject-object models of pedagogical education and the transition to a dialogic model. The equality of the main methodological approaches (culturological, dialogic, axiological, activity, anthropological, personal, technological) requires the implementation of their balance in the methodological activity of the teacher. The choice of discussion as a teaching method depends on the value priorities of the teacher. Modern students are ideologically ready to participate in dialogic forms of education. Democratic thinking as a tool for the humanistic worldview of future teachers is one of the main results of the discussion.

1. Alieva Z. S. Pedagogy of dialogue as the basis of the educational activities of the counselor. Izvestiya Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta, 2020, no. 4, pp. 22-26. (In Russ.)

2. Andreev V. I. Pedagogy: a training course for creative self-development. Kazan, Centr innovacionnyh tekhnologij Publ., 2000. 608 p. (In Russ.)

3. Vasil'kova V. V. Mini-discussion as a method of interactive learning. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta, 2016, Series 12, Issue 2, pp. 97-103. https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu12.2016.208. (In Russ.)

4. Gabdulhakov V. F. Personification of professional training at the university: components of pedagogical technology: monograph. Moscow, Moskovskij psihologo-social'nyj universitet (izd-vo NPO «MODEK») Publ., Kazan, Kazanskij (Privolzhskij) federal'nyj universitet Publ., 2013. 293 p. (In Russ.)

5. Gorbunova N. V., ZHuravleva O. I., Fetisov A. S. Modern didactic concepts in higher education pedagogy: monograph. Simferopol, ARIAL Publ., 2023. 229 p. (In Russ.)

6. Dubcova M. M., Starchakova I. V. Technology of dialogue interaction in the professional training of undergraduates of geographical orientation. Problemy sovremennogo pedagogicheskogo obrazovaniya, 2022, no. 76-1, pp. 106-109. (In Russ.)

7. Korepanova E. V., Peryshkova S. A., Trunina A. S. Humanization of the pedagogical interaction of participants in the educational process in higher education. Voprosy sovremennoj nauki i praktiki. Universitet im. V.I. Vernadskogo, 2022, no. 4 (86), pp. 115-124. (In Russ.)

8. Korol' A. D, Morozova N. I. Dialogueization of university education: the experience of the Belarusian State University. Universitetskij pedagogicheskij zhurnal, 2021, no. 1, pp. 5-10. (In Russ.)

9. Korosteleva S. G. Discussion as an active method of teaching in the professional training of the future teacher. Vestnik Kostromskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Pedagogika. Psihologiya. Sociokinetika, 2019, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 118-122, https://doi.org/10.34216/2073-1426-2019-25-2-118-122. (In Russ.)

10. Korotaeva E. V. Interactive dialogue in education: yesterday, today, tomorrow. Pedagogicheskoe obrazovanie v Rossii, 2013, no. 4, pp. 207-211. (In Russ.)

11. Mahmutov M. I. Selected works: in 7 volumes. T. 1: Problem-based learning: Basic questions of theory / comp. D. M. Shakirova. Kazan, Magarif-Vakyt Publ., 2016. 423 p. (In Russ.)

12. Pavelko N. N. Interactive pedagogy in the conditions of modernization of Russian education. Vestnik Akademii marketinga i social'no-informacionnyh tekhnologij, 2014, no. 1-2 (57-58), pp. 1-11. (In Russ.)

13. Pozdeeva S. I. Professional development of a teacher as a response to external actual challenges. Nauchno-pedagogicheskoe obozrenie, 2022, no. 2 (42), pp. 40-47. (In Russ.)

14. Frolova S. V. Sociocultural factors in the formation of a professional worldview of a modern teacher: challenges of the new world of education. Vestnik Mininskogo universiteta, 2022, vol. 10, no. 2, p. 3. (In Russ.)

15. Brown N., Jafferani A., Pattharwala V. Partnership in teacher education: developing creative methods to deepen students’ reflections. Journal of Educational Innovation, Partnership and Change, 2018, vol. 4, no. 1, http://dx.doi.org/10.21100/jeipc.v4i1.747. 16. Dewey D. Democracy in Education. The Elementary School Teacher, 1903, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 193-204. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/992653 (accessed: 10.12.2022).

16. Douglas-Gardner J., Callender C. Changing teacher educational contexts: Global discourses in teacher education and its effect on teacher education in national contexts. Power and Education, 2022, vol. 15, no. 1, https://doi.org/10.1177/17577438221124744.

17. Ertmer P., Koehler A. Online case-based discussions: examining coverage of the afforded problem space. Educational Technology Research and Development, 2014, vol. 62, pp. 617-636, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-014-9350-9. 19. Freire P. Teachers as Cultural Workers. Letters to Those Who Dare Teach. New York, 2005. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429496974.

18. Helskog G. H. Bildung towards wisdom, through philosophical dialogue in teacher education. Arts & Humanities in Higher Education, 2016, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 76-90, https://doi.org/10.1177/1474022216670609.

19. Henshon S. E. Prospector Leading the Search for Creative Educational Gold: An Interview with Ronald A. Beghetto. Roeper Review, 2015, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 119-123, https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2015.1047479.

20. Knezic D., Wubbels T., Elbers E., Hajer M. The Socratic Dialogue and teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2010, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 1104-1111, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.11.006.

21. Koehler A., Ertmer P., Newby T. Discussion Facilitation Strategies and Design Skill Development: Examining the Relationship. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 2021, vol. 15, no. 1, https://doi.org/10.14434/ijpbl.v15i1.28749.

22. Korthagen F., Loughran J., Russell T. Developing fundamental principles for teacher education programs and practices. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2006, vol. 22, no. 8, pp. 1020-1041, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.04.022.

23. Kumar I. A., Parveen S. Teacher Education in the Age of Globalization. Research Journal of Educational Sciences, 2013, vol. 1 (1), pp. 8-12. Available at: http://www.isca.me/EDU_SCI/Archive/v1/i1/2.ISCA-RJES-2013-001.pdf (accessed: 10.12.2022).

24. Lopes A. Still Building a Better World? Research Reflections on Teacher Education and Identity. Kowalczuk-Walędziak M., Korzeniecka-Bondar A., Danilewicz W., Lauwers G. (eds) Rethinking Teacher Education for the 21st Century. Trends, Challenges and New Directions. Opladen; Berlin; Toronto, Verlag Barbara Budrich, 2019. Pp. 27-42. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvpb3xhh.6.

25. Marginson S. Engaging democratic education in the neoliberal age. Educational theory, 2006, vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 205-219, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5446.2006.00012.x.

26. Menter I. Teacher Education Research: Values-Based Planning in an Uncertain World. Education and Self Development, 2021, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 158-166, https://doi.org/10.26907/esd.16.3.13.

27. Ovens A., Lynch S. Democratic Teacher Education Practices. Peters M. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Teacher Education. Springer, Singapore, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1179-6_218-1.

28. Panigrahi S. P., Naaz I. Emerging research trends in teacher education. Journal of Indian Research, 2021, vol. 9, no. 3-4, pp. 78-85. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359999621_EMERGING_RESEARCH_TRENDS_IN_TEACHER_EDUCATION (accessed: 10.12.2022).

29. Schleicher A. Educating Learners for Their Future, Not Our Past. ECNU Review of Education, 2018, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 58-75, https://doi.org/10.30926/ecnuroe2018010104.

30. Serdenciuc N. L. Competency-Based Education – Implications on Teachers’ Training. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2013, no. 76, pp. 754-758, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.04.200.

31. Singh P., Hoyte F., Heimans S., Exley B. Teacher Quality and Teacher Education: A Critical Policy Analysis of International and Australian Policies. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 2021, no. 46(4), http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2021v46n4.1.

32. Smith D., Cook A. Teacher Education and the Principle of Uniqueness. South Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 1992, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 137-146, https://doi.org/10.1080/0311213920200206.

33. Soundararajan M., Prabakaran B., Padmini Devi K. R., Saravanakumar AR. Teacher Professionalism and Teacher Education. 2022. p. 2-5. https://doi.org/10.52458/9789391842598.2022.tb.

34. Tom A. Principles for Redesigning Teacher Education. Journal of Primary Education, 1996, vol. 6, no. 1-2, pp. 19-27.

35. Zhang M., Lundeberg M., McConnell T. J., Koehler M. J., Eberhardt J. Using Questioning to Facilitate Discussion of Science Teaching Problems in Teacher Professional Development. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 2010, no. 4 (1), https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1097.

36. Zhou X., Duan S., Li W. A Problem-Driven Discussion Teaching Method Based on Progressive Cycle. Cheng, J., Tang, X., & Liu, X. (eds) Cyberspace Safety and Security. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2021, pp. 225-235, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73671-2.