Masters Degree Program For 21st-Century Teaching And Learning

Abstract

At the stage of the master's level of higher education, it is necessary to activate students’ scientific-creative potential. This is due to the specifics of the master's level education as a new phenomenon for Russian system of education. It is noted that the search for criteria of subjectivity inevitably leads to the semantic space of facilitation, subject-oriented approach, the scientific-creative activity of students. The authors formally outline a model for activating the scientific-creative potential of undergraduates as a mechanism for the development of their subjectivity. The article presents an attempt to define criteria, basic ideas and approaches for the formation of the master - teacher of the XXI century. The research was conducted in several stages that include theoretical study of educational standards and qualitative analysis of student’s attitudes. Discourse analysis of GEF 3+ in sphere of master's degree level education for teachers helped to reveal the unification of structural approach in all fields of master degree education level; in order to define an appropriate changers in educational process was conducted a survey at the Institute of International Relations, History and Oriental Studies, 83 master degree students were involved into research. The obtained results demonstrate the need in raising an effectiveness of the structure of masters’ degree level of education. Authors also define possible approach for this.

Keywords: Master's programstudenteducationteacher of the XXI centurysubjectivitythe subject-oriented approach

Introduction

The relevance of the formulation of the research problem is due to the fact that a new phenomenon - master's degree - has appeared in Russian national higher educational space. The practice of higher education has shown that Russian educational and pedagogical methodology of master’s degree level is not enough developed for an appropriate structuring of the process. There is also a situation that rises the problem when a master's program at university very much duplicates a bachelor's degree at college. This happens when the same educational staff work at different institutions at the same time and teach similar courses. Another reason is that Master's educational program is oriented not so much on the scientific (research) activities but on the educational process itself. This leads to the situation when master’s level students do not clearly understand the ultimate goals and the results of their training. This highlights the problem that the process of master’s level education in Russia is not sufficiently correlated with students research work. In this regard, we believe that one of the most important areas at the stage of master's education is the concretization of the methodology for the training of future master that ought to help to restrict the educational process. This requires the University to design a new model of a graduate, focused on the result and new learning technologies. In particular, it is important for the preparation of a teacher of the 21st century to have not only knowledge but also strong research abilities. In this connection, we believe that the preparation of a modern teacher of the 21st century at the master's level requires the use of new models and technologies. The issue of studying the master degree level of education is studied quite actively by a number of scientists (Gaysina, Khairytdinov, & Mukhametzyanova, 2017; Mukhametzyanova, Korzhova, & Veselova, 2017a; Khovanskaya, Fakhrutdinova, & Maklakova, 2016). So, attention is paid to the analysis of the main approaches to the organization of master's degree education and to the comparison of master’s degree educational models in Russia and abroad (Safina, Safina, & Fakhrutdinov, 2015). The modern mechanisms of the development of it as a subject-oriented space of education are studied too. In our earlier works we also turned to the analysis of the master’s degree education as a phenomenon, considering it in the conditions of development of the subject-oriented educational environment (Mukhametzyanova, Korzhova, & Veselova, 2017b; Ibatullova et al., 2014).

Problem Statement

Today growing popularity of master’s degree level of higher education among modern students is noticed in Russia. At the same time it should be noted that the perception of the master's degree is not quite adequate for students, but also for teachers, as well as for managers of the educational process and employers. It should be understood that the main difference between master’s degree level of education and bachelor's degree level is, first of all, in the scientific educational orientation of the first. The master in the process of teaching sets himself other tasks than the bachelor, both science and practice-oriented master's education has a different emphasizes. This is due to the fact that the preparation of undergraduates is a stepping-stone to new kinds of professional activity - teaching and research. Therefore, there should be a different choice of methods and technologies.

Research Questions

We are based on the fact that the training of students at the master's degree level of education assumes the use of an exclusively subject-oriented approach. At the same time, the criterion for the subjectivity of masters is changed; the tasks of scientific research activity and search activity are put at the forefront. A master in this case is more a subject of education than a bachelor. However, in the process of preparing the future specialist with master degree, it is also necessary to use new teaching technologies, which lead to the creativity development. Here creativity is the most important part of subjectivity.

This rises the problem of the creativity and subjectivity in respect of individual and professional development of the further teacher of the XXI century with master’s degree.

Purpose of the Study

In order to define ways and mechanisms of educational process restructuring and to define weather this restructuring will lead to the desirable results we conducted the survey among students s at the Institute of International Relations, History and Oriental Studies.

Research Methods

In order to define an appropriate changers in educational process was conducted a survey at thе Institute of International Relations, History and Oriental Studies, 83 master degree students were involved into research. Before the research we have interviewed leading specialists who work with master students and asked them to define criteria of a successful master’s programme graduate student (these specialists are representatives of 7 Russian Universities, that are situated in Kazan city they all are professors 50-60 years old). As a result we have got a list of 7 qualities of the student, but only 4 positions have been repeated by all experts. As soon as we assumed that science oriented education helps for students at master degree level of education in their professional and individual development we changed an educational approach in several academic groups. We were not able to change Standards, but mechanisms of their achievement are in charge of the University. In order to gradually involve the student into creative activity, these activities can be arranged according to a certain scheme. In the practice of the scientific management of masters at the Institute of International Relations, History and Oriental Studies of the Kazan (Volga region) Federal University, we managed to build a certain model for activating the scientific-creative potential of students. The initial stage is the diagnosis of the first level of subjectivity of students and the formation on this basis of activity groups. Master degree students involved into the highest level of scientific activity become the example for other groups of undergraduates (the experimental group). Other students were studied be normal educational skim. After a year of education we interviewed both groups of students to define criteria of a successful master’s programme graduate student.

Findings

Summarizing the works of well-known Russian scientists, devoted to the problem of professional and individual development (Gaysina et al., 2017; Fakhrutdinova & Kondrateva, 2016), we are based on the definition of subjectivity as a qualitative and functional characteristic of the personality of the master’s programme graduate student. Here we understand that subjectivity is a "shift" of the behavior and thinking of the subject. It is seen as an aim for a personal development of a master degree student. We have already noted this in our earlier works (Gaysina et al., 2017; Mukhametzyanova, Korzhova, & Veselova, 2017a, 2017b; Kondrateva, Fakhrutdinova, Kapustina, & Vafina, 2018; Kondrateva, Fakhrutdinova, Kapustina, & Vafina, 2018). In this respect, we should speak about the level of subjectivity of the individual, since this definition presupposes a certain continuum, on one pole of which high subjectivity is located, at the other pole - helplessness. This concept is sufficiently developed in the native science, to be operated on. At the same time this cannot be mentioned concerning the criteria and indicators of student’s subjectivity. In particular, this applies to students at the master's level of education.

The research has shown that educational route of the undergraduate should become a science-oriented cycle of events with his participation. Among the indicators of one’s subjectivity, the focus should be precisely on the activity of the student's participation in the master's level of study in science-oriented activities. In order to gradually involve the student into creative activity, these activities can be arranged according to a certain scheme. Model for activating the scientific-creative potential of students is implementation of a system of activities aimed at achieving the goals of subject-oriented training for masters. The cycle of events is an interrelated system, at various stages of which there is a further development of subjectivity of students. Among the links of the algorithmic process of development of subjectivity, we organized the school of young researchers, 3 research conferences for young scientists, a competition of scientific works of young scientists, a forum of young scientists, publications in the journal of young scientists (in our case it is the Kazan Gazette of Young Scientists) and collections of works. Each of listed events has its own target orientation and is a preparatory platform for the next event.

Among the experts most often highlight autonomy (more than 70%), initiative (nearly 50%), responsibility (35%), , creativity, (more than 55%). Subjectivity acts as an integrator of all these qualities of the student in the educational process (Safina, Safina, & Fakhrutdinov, 2015; Vinnikova & Dulmukhametova, 2017). At the same time students who were involved into scientific research work only to some extent (published research paper, took part in 1-2 conferences) highlight autonomy (more than 80%), initiative (nearly 35%), responsibility (more than 25%), creativity (more than 20%). At the same time results we obtained by survey of students who were actively involved into scientific research activities most often students highlight autonomy (more than 65%), initiative (nearly 55%), responsibility, initiative (more than 50%), creativity, (more than 60%). These results are very close to those that are defined by experts. By this we support the opinion of scientists that master can become a subject of professional communication in the event that he develops subjectivity as a degree of his transformative activity and reflection of relationships and relationships with the surrounding world, people, himself. Finally, another important criterion of subjectivity of the master is the authorship of his life activity and the trajectory of education formed on his basis. We believe that the role of the teacher in the students of the master's level changes: he acts as a facilitator of the process of formation and development of subjectivity of the master (Fakhrutdinova, Fakhrutdinova, & Severyanov, 2013). What is the facilitation effect of the teacher? It, apparently, can be seen in the promotion of the educational route of the master student. This is possible only in the context of a subject-oriented learning environment. Dedicated concepts, in fact, and constitute a field of subject-oriented training for students of the master's level. In this context, in the preparation of future masters among teaching technologies, the role of pedagogical facilitation increases. The phenomena of pedagogical facilitation of the phenomenon we pointed out in previous works (Gaysina et al., 2017; Belentsov, Fahrutdinova, & Okulich-Kazarin, 2017).

Among other indicators of subjectivity of the master, in our opinion, independent search activity is of particular importance. If the master student seeks to search for new forms of self-fulfillment in scientific and near-scientific sphere, as well as pre-professional activities, one should speak of a high level of his subjectivity. The search for opportunities for participation in conferences, various publications assumes the self-activity of the student, where the teacher serves as a facilitator, consultant, helping to form an educational route and implement the educational trajectory of the master.

Aggregation of the above indicators leads us to some integral index of subjectivity of the undergraduate, on the specification and methodological basis of the calculation of which our team is currently working.

Conclusion

Based on the analysis, a conclusion was made about the main difference between master's degree and bachelor's degree education. This difference is in the science-oriented magistracy. This goal implies the achievement of the result of training-the formation of a master's degree with a high level of research competence. Competencies can be formed only in the subject-oriented educational environment, with a high level of facilitation practices of the future teacher. This allows us to develop a criteria model of master's education as a condition for the formation of a teacher of the 21st century.

References

  1. Belentsov, S. I., Fahrutdinova, A. V., & Okulich-Kazarin, V. (2017). Education of civic consciousness in George Kershenshteyner's creativity. European Journal of Contemporary Education, 6(1), 5-13.
  2. Fakhrutdinova, A. V., & Kondrateva, I. G. (2016). Contemporary tendencies of social tutoring in period of multiculturalism: moral characteristic. Man in India, 96(3), 853-858.
  3. Fakhrutdinova, E., Fakhrutdinova, A, & Severyanov, O. (2013). The transformation of educational approaches at the time of social and economical changes. World Applied Sciences Journal, 27(13), 15-19.
  4. Gaysina, A. R., Khairutdinov, R. R., Mukhametzyanova, F. G, Orazov, D. M., & Yarullina, A. S. (2017). Pedagogical facilitation in the development of the subject's potential of future masters. Revista San Gregorio, 20, 124-131.
  5. Gaysina, A. R., Khairytdinov, R. R., & Mukhametzyanova, F. G. (2017). Social-psychological characteristics of the subject use of slang and abbreviations in english-speaking social networks. The Turkish Online Journal of Design, Art and Communication TOJDAC, 832-839.
  6. Ibatullova, Y. T., Vasyukhno, I. O., Frolova, A. V., Mukhametzyanova, F. G., Zelenkova, E. V., & Sadovaya, V. V. (2014). Interrelation of social and psychological adaptation and tendency to deviant behavior of students. Asian Social Science, 11(2), 290-295.
  7. Khovanskaya, E. S., Fakhrutdinova, A. V., & Maklakova, N. V (2016). University as a social phenomenon. Man in India, 97(9), 101-107.
  8. Kondrateva, I., Fakhrutdinova, A., Kapustina E., & Vafina, R. (2018). Update of value centered approach for socio-stable and safe school environment. Abstracts & Proceedings of INTCESS 2018- 5th International Conference on Education and Social Sciences, 5-7 February 2018. Istanbul, Turkey.
  9. Mukhametzyanova, F. G., Korzhova, E., & Veselova, E. (2017a). Subject characteristics of teachers' personality and work efficiency. The European Proceedings of Social & Behavioural Sciences EpSBS (pp. 563-567). Wolfgang Krieger. 2017.
  10. Mukhametzyanova, F. G., Korzhova, E. Y., & Veselova, E. K. (2017b). The study of the subjective effectiveness of teacher’s personality and activity. The European Proceedings of Social & Behavioural Sciences, 29, 563-567.
  11. Safina, L., Safina, D. & Fakhrutdinov, R. (2015). Sources of quality formation of labor life in Russia. Heritage as an Alternative Driver for Sustainable Development and Economic Recovery in South East Europe, 188, 181-185.
  12. Vinnikova, M., & Dulmukhametova, G. (2017). Modern use of the pedagogical technology team-teaching in the training of teacher candidates. Quid-Investigacion Ciencia Y Tecnologia, 28, 767-772.

Copyright information

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

About this article

Cite this paper as:

Click here to view the available options for cite this article.

Publisher

Future Academy

First Online

18.12.2019

Doi

10.15405/epsbs.2018.09.111

Online ISSN

2357-1330