Subject Professional Activity Of A Teacher: Methodological Framework And Theoretical Design

Abstract

Based on theoretical analysis of advanced studies of philosophers, psychologists, teachers, and cross-disciplinary works devoted to theoretical analysis of the subject phenomenon, the paper considers the problem of uniqueness of an educator characterized by the intensity of individual activity and freedom of elective creative activity in the conditions of demanding social imperatives and standardization of education within the logic of new paradigm interpretation of professional pedagogical education as a way towards comprehensive and tiered ascent to original subjectivity of the educator overcoming the “constraint” of consciousness, fixed forms of activity, absence of demand in mobile attitudes, isolation of limits of developing individual and joint activity. It studies the methodological framework of the educator’ subject activity in the context of social and anthropological integrity of a person as an integrative personality trait, which is characterized by the author’s pedagogical position, strive towards self-actualization, free goal-setting in activity, restriction of individual initiatives by legal legislation. Besides, the study covers the issue of independent search and selection of content, technological creativity, empathy to students, self-reflection and prediction of outcomes and relations pedagogical activity. It is proved that the developing subjectivity of the educator is revealed through initiative development of professional and general abilities to internally motivated and actively conditioned action. It presents the results of theoretical design of components related to the educator’s professional activity, being the result of his subject activity.

Keywords: Professional and pedagogical activitysubjectactivityself-determinationself-fulfilmentself-reflection

Introduction

Numerous publications devoted to the topic of education place an emphasis on pedagogical education as a social institute, including its legal, economic, social-psychological, social-pedagogical, and institutional problems. At the same time, in the logic of this perspective and in the context of sociocultural changes in the country not enough attention is paid to issues of formation and development of the educator in its broad contextual meaning (teacher, mentor, instructor, tutor), its direct influence on the modern world (both creative and destructive). Therefore, there is a need to place a paradigm emphasis not so much on the process and the system of pedagogical education but on its subject, i.e. the subject of pedagogical education.

It is much more difficult to use, suppress, assess, manipulate a modern teacher as a subject of continuous personal development (in comparison with an object), in other words, there is a need to analyze the reasons of his disagreements, objections, resistance, to reckon with his professional competence, outcomes and achievements of his activity.

Due to various circumstances, the educator is forced to hide or suppress his subjective position, or act as a real or transformed object, which, as a rule, is observed in the activity of administrative and command structures. It is known that “it is possible to rely only on something that resists”, therefore the measure of expedient resistance of the subject keeps it from blind submission, conformism, dependence on opinions and estimates of the majority.

Thus, the developing subjectivity of the educator is only revealed at infinitely initiative development of his professional and general abilities towards internally motivated and actively conditioned action. If the educator is positioned as a creative and reformative human being first of all changing himself, but not circumstances and the environment (renewal of the environment – derivative of qualitative condition of the subject), then it happens through continuous renewal of his subjective activity, which is the basis for the mobilization of all professional and spiritual potentials.

For this reason the activity is a true characteristic of the subject, the main feature distinguishing it from an object characterized by passivity, non-resilience, inertness.

It is clear that a person can act in certain situations as a passive and obedient or partially active object, however his position as a subject is only revealed at infinitely initiative development of abilities towards active and internally conditioned action. If by nature a person is a creative being transforming and renewing the surrounding reality, then he is able to support this image only through original activity in his development as a creative subject.

Problem Statement

The concept of a subject in the context of social and anthropological integrity of a person remains fundamental in the modern theory of pedagogical education. The description of methodological and theoretical aspects of a problem reveals that the concepts “subject” and “object” as fundamental ones until recently remained rather proclaimed than comprehensively studied categories. If in terms of historical and philosophical perspective this problem was slightly studied, then the active actualization of its modern interpretation began in the last two decades. However, neither advanced studies of philosophers, psychologists, teachers nor cross-disciplinary works devoted to theoretical analysis of the subject phenomenon led to relatively uniform understanding of the essence and content of specified categories.

Professional activity of the educator is a scientific category representing interest with regard to the study of interrelation of potential and relevant resources in personal development; interconditionality of activity and communication as a development factor; unity of substantial and procedural sides of activity of the subject as a basis of mobile formation of the “concept of the future” (Brushlinsky, 1994; Rubenstein, 2003).

Research Questions

The methodological interpretation of the subject’s activity in the theory of pedagogical education shall be proved as:

• intrapersonal phenomenon, individual quality of the educator objectifying in productive relations with the world, culture, a person and a universe;

• individual education characterized by a possibility of free pedagogical goal-setting, ability to initiate and solve problems, including in complex and extreme situations;

• social and valuable way of relations with real and estimated subjects, processes, innovations.

Thus, the process of the educator’s activity is characterized as an integrative personality trait, which provides for free goal-setting in the activity triggered by self-governed motivation; initiation of new tasks with initiative and criticism, as a rule, going beyond a given situation; permanent reflection in the advance zone, prediction of results of pedagogical activity and relations.

Purpose of the Study

Theoretical modelling of components related to the educator’s professional and pedagogical activity, which serve as indicators of his subjective activity on the basis of methodological analysis and system understanding of the phenomenon “subjective activity of the educator”.

Research Methods

The following methods were used in the study:

• theoretical analysis of scientific literature on the problem of subjectivity in life and pedagogical activity, which allows using the results obtained by other scholars in pedagogics and other fields of scientific knowledge;

• analysis of the past and modern experience of the educator’s subjectivity in professional activity, which is carried out on the basis of monographic descriptions and allows revealing the main problems of subjectivity and specifics of their solution by the educator;

• systematization of theoretical knowledge on subjective activity of the educator, structuring and classification of communicative problems within modern educational process;

• theoretical modeling of components of professional and pedagogical activity of the educator, which serve as indicators of his subjective activity.

Findings

The realization of subjective strategies of the educator implies the correlation of activity and freedom manifested in spontaneous and voluntarily activity of the subject (Lat. sponte – oneself), which in fact constitutes a free activity leading to the creative intension of the subject. The prerequisite of subjective creativity is the recognition of a complete person that is only possible in case the person does not suppress the dignity and independence of the personality if the different fields of activity determined by the subject are integrated into whole. Any spontaneity of the activity results in the fact that the personality is combinable with the world, does not only preserves it, but also makes it stronger and therefore “active personality is strong so far as it is active” and independently active in understanding and expansion of boundaries and freedoms of personal development (Fromm, 2006).

The principle of the educator’s consciousness appealing to itself, its activity, recognition of autonomy and self-sufficiency of level and independence of consciousness will become possible with realized reflection under its processes of control. The activity of professional consciousness and self-consciousness is the relation of “I” to “not me”, in which “I” differentiates itself from “not me” and knows about this difference. Regarding the content, this is the relation of the educator’s thinking, which is actively implemented in practice; regarding purpose – this is concentrated, mobile movement from relevant “I” to potential “not me” as a way of reflexive understanding, which is the “direct reflection of “I” in itself, i.e. the attitude towards itself as to the object” (Hegel, 1959).

The genesis of reflexive consciousness activity reflects ontologicalal setting for the educator. The point is that its consciousness is simultaneously a subject and an object because the addressing to its own content implies its discharge, objectivation, judgement “in front of” itself.

For instance, this requires the content of professional pedagogical experience to be taken for the starting point of the analysis of consciousness, to objectify and subordinate it on logical grounds, whereas objectivation and logical subordination are considered as self-procedures; the activity of the pedagogical consciousness shall be analyzed to the maximum giving the chance to clear itself to a relative end (in itself and for itself) in the reflexive movement. This knowledge is implemented through intense and internally mobile activity of the educator thus developing the ability to forecast and create any professional structure.

Reflection is knowing and understanding activity of a spirit (Hegel, 1959). Hence, in the content of spiritual internal activity of the subject there cannot be content not addressed by the reflection. Everything that does not fit within a reflexive process and has no “activity of a spirit” cannot be part of the competence within both philosophical (theoretical) and pedagogical (practical) analysis.

The main feature of the reflexive movement is the reliance of yourself as of Another and the attitude towards yourself as to Another. For the reflection process to happen, there is a need to be discharged of yourself through the reliance of yourself in another and return again to yourself but at a qualitatively different level. The reflection always implies opposition, for example, the subject-object opposition. The reflection ensures the transition from the initial level to the subsequent, but not as to absolutely another, but to another as to yourself.

Without the total procedure of a “painful reflection” the results will be non-reflexive; the opportunities to be a subject among those who act as the carrier of subjective properties are limited; the results of process and production are formulated as “subjectless information” of a system about itself. The idea of reflection forms the basis for clear distinction of knowledge by a person of himself as a subject and the result of his professional activity correlated with both an object and a subject. In due time F. Nietzsche wrote that a person is considered informed and educated if he is able to control himself not because of love to divine precepts but because of love to self-improvement of his “I”.

Despite the fact that it is time when “positions of ironical resistance are given” and when a “person cannot despise himself”, there is confidence that there is no other way of “humanization” of a subject except continuous self-improvement. Therefore, encumbering a teacher with all “conceivable and inconceivable forms of responsibility” one shall bear in mind that there shall be practical understanding of the fact that “a person only moves forward and lives, and serves people when he knows how far he receded from truth and therefore considers himself bad. If he looks for justification to the sin and is happy with himself – he is dead” (Tolstoy, 1888).

Similar conclusions remain persistent in professional activity of pedagogical and administrative structures. Taking into account the increasing negative trends in the society their practical expediency shall be understood from advancing positions.

Besides, it is important to note that in 1980s of the last century some researchers came to a conclusion on deconstructive impact of activity “imposed” to a person, which, as a rule, is reactive regarding the fact that it is perceived as dictated from the outside, far from aspirations, objectives and interests. The activity is considered reactive if it is below the opportunities of a person (Antsyferova, 1994). In other words, if a educator continues to develop as a subject, then it is simply because he constantly and easily goes beyond the performed professional activity, which in the course of and as a result of may be more considerable and large-scale than any particular case.

In this sense the intentionality of activity of the educator in the context of a new paradigm interpretation of professional pedagogical education may be develop in the direction of comprehensive and tiered ascent to original subjectivity of the educator overcoming the “constraint” of consciousness, fixed forms of activity, absence of demand in mobile attitudes, isolation of limits of developing individual and joint activity. The activity of reflexive consciousness of the educator may reveal unique, special, identical personality traits typical for a particular educator.

In the majority of social and pedagogical theories of the previous years the category of uniqueness, individual originality of the educator was considered extremely insufficiently as a humanitarian value of pedagogical science and practice. However, it does not mean that unique aspects of the educator were not demonstrated to some extent in his individual activity even if not at the level of professionally organized educational process, then at the level of subject spheres and processes of own activity freely determined by the identity of the educator.

At the same time the educator often loses the right for free thought, truly independent activity, which creates a situation in which not only the activity conditions, but also the way of thinking promote (perhaps, not realized by the person) the transformation of many people into “total” objects that, in fact, emasculate and abolish their subject and author’s essence.

The general principles of set systems in relation to the person cannot but affect the educational system to a greater or lesser extent. In general, it is about neglecting, ignoring, derogating (in some cases – replacing) the individual and ontological beginning of a person. This promotes its “transformation” into some element, means, function of a uniform system mechanism, its gradual transformation into “non-person”, and eventually, a person even unable to realize the extreme nature and abnormality of the situation. The subjectlessness, authoritarianism in professional communities of teachers cannot disappear, therefore it is necessary to develop the aspiration to realize their essence, to reveal the reasons of existence and hence, to protect the next generations from their influence. In this regard such attributive sign of the educator as its uniqueness – the integral resulting feature, without which it cannot exist and be considered a subject, is renewed.

In the context of general humanitarian modernization of education, it is required to overcome situations of leveling a person, which requires deep theoretical and practical understanding of the problem of uniqueness, individual originality of the personality, the role of its originality in various spheres of social, professional and personal activity.

Among a few researches of the last two decades reflecting the tiered conceptual shift to unique personality there were ideas that the uniqueness, acquiring at the same time the status of complete property of the subject as “a live system”, is lifted to the level of free, valuable elective universal activity where the subject realizes its anthropological and social difference from all others “Uniform systems”.

Manifestation and development of such properties of the subject in education happen at the level of interparadigmality supporting creative openness going beyond the activity proceeding within the “logic of deep ontological communication” reflecting the intersubjective mode of being.

However, neither standard materials, nor concepts of education quality improvement consider the uniqueness and identity of teachers and students in general despite continuous appeals to the development of students’ subjective position. Nevertheless, the uniqueness remains objectively unique and exclusive spiritual and power characteristics of the subject; the identity reflects the originality of mentality and personality, its human originality thus characterizing its socially important difference from other people.

In general, the uniqueness of the educator has valuable and high-profile ontological meaning. With the disappearance of such personality something definitely significant disappears (spiritual, material) in the world and thus it cannot be replaced, identified, renewed. The uniqueness of the educator is characterized by the intensity of individual activity and freedom of certain creative activity. In the conditions of general and professional development a person can achieve certain results only when he faces a deep personal objective and “selfless aspiration to the solution of the idea”. Life of a specific essentially unique personality is the sphere of maximum actuation of its uniqueness towards the creation of “personal future”, towards continuous self-change of activity, high-quality development as a “subject of life” (Rubenstein, 2003).

In the conditions of rigid modern society there is a problem of correlation and interaction of the society and unique subjects. Meanwhile, there is a need to emphasize the understanding of a purposeful idea that only the uniform society is viable. Similar to any other developing system, it can normally function only if each of its components is ideally independent. This proves organic relations of freedom of goal-setting, individual originality in search of ways of its embodiment and the approval of uniqueness features of the subject.

Therefore, the uniqueness, unlike individualism and anthropocentrism, is not the opposition of yourself to others, but a necessary creative realization of personal originality in various professional and public spheres. In this case the society appears as the sphere of relations of freely operating unique subjects within the “unity of differences”. The boundaries, within which the educator begins to act as a free purposeful and unique subject, demonstrate the extent of development of the ability towards real opportunity to act as the subject of professional activity and relations. Since objective development of culture requires the formation of unique abilities of each personality, since the ontological interrelation of unique and social-typical is expressed not only in versatility of communications of the personality determining the depth of content of its individual characteristics but also on the contrary. The more original, more peculiar, and unique a person, the more he is able to bring to the relations with other people, to be useful to the society in general.

In social-psychological and professional-pedagogical systems the category pf “uniqueness” can really or potentially “act” almost at all levels of continuous education and development of any person and expert. However, in the general theory of education and management this problem is not demanded except for separate studies on acmeology.

The educator as the subject is the real driving force defining its development. Alienation of subjectivity from the educator, formal unification of his thinking, lack of freedom of action turn everyone into “the speaking function”, an element of the given system. There is the educator’s desubjectification, deformation of his consciousness, and thus he becomes an easily replaced social object. Hence, it is fully possible for a person to develop and demonstrate subjective opportunities only in the conditions of intensively developing society when a person realizes his uniqueness, and therefore responsibility (he can do this work better than many others).

However, in modern conditions of rigid hierarchy and centralization of management a person never stops being a subjectless, standard element of the social mechanism who is convinced that “there are no irreplaceable people”, and the production, perhaps with professional losses for himself, will demonstrate the uselessness of demand of unique abilities of an expert. This will continue until unique experience and professional intelligence of experts do not become “expensive goods”, and their carrier will not be able to cardinally and professionally influence the change of affairs to make sure there is an urgent public need in his self-education and self-development.

Mobile characteristics of a modern educator and a leader include the ability to catch new developing trends in the society, ability to counteract adverse circumstances by interfering with the course of events and overcoming the feeling of social fear thus assuming the responsibility for possible consequences of initiatives, thorough a word to form the most valuable fearless need for active creation, which really knows no limit. The civic courage, impudent courage, free strong mind and the feeling of general social responsibility for the surrounding reality are typical for a person acting at the subjective level.

For the purpose of more objective analysis of uniqueness of the subject it is expedient to introduce the concept of a measure of uniqueness, which is defined as an extent of manifestation and development in the specific identity of internal resources and full-fledged abilities for the real opportunity to act as a subject of individual and corporate activity. The intensity of manifestation of a measure of uniqueness and dynamics of its enhancement can be considered through the following logic:

• awareness of objective absence of demand of personal uniqueness of the subject due to its non-recognition and neglect in the course of activity;

• diagnosing and detection of apparent unique features and qualities of the subject;

• development of unique abilities of the growing person, preservation and enhancement of the educator’s identity.

The measure of uniqueness of the subject in the relation with individual originality is a conditional (established by the subject) boundary, on the one hand, protecting it from potential losses leading to stagnation, patterned and standard behavioral models, and on the another – from the excess of a measure of uniqueness, which transcendence leads to egocentrism, extreme expression of individualism, autism.

The interdependent correlation of professional competences, freedom and uniqueness of the subject in pedagogical activity contributes to the understanding of the essence of creativity as one of the highest ways of life of a person. The strive to creative activity demonstrates that the educator realizes himself as much as he is able to go beyond the personal “I” and limits of personal achievements.

Thus, the subjective strategies of the educator are developed in the context of “fruitfully focused person” (Fromm, 2006), “self-emerging identity”’, “fully functioning person”, actualize the activity of his professional consciousness and activity as “the most complete integrative characteristic of life of a person seeking for full self-definiteness and self-identity” (Slobodchikov, 2002) and have such qualities as:

- positive perception of reality demonstrating the readiness to solve professional and life problems to subjectively find yourself in difficult situations, to look for new extraordinary ways;

- acceptance of yourself, others and the world in general the way they are, but as they can be in the future;

- ability to be focused on problems related to participation in any idea, purpose, requirement, calling;

- manifestation of existential spontaneity, immediacy, sincerity, emotional reaction in the solution of pedagogical tasks;

- understanding of independence, confidence and certain autonomy from social environment, reliance on personal professional and spiritual potential as on the internal resource of development and growth;

- pulsation of creativity as an effective ability for creative freedom, professional skill, need for novelty and natural spontaneity as a norm of daily activity;

- overcoming external cultivation, resistance to social influences, ability to preserve internal independence being in constructive dialogue with your culture.

These qualities reflect ontological basis and contribute to the development of the educator in the context of his professional and pedagogical being.

Positioning of subjective strategy of the educator includes his stable intersubjective responsible attitude to students, colleagues, himself (as to Others) as something defining his professional behavior. At the same time, the subjective position of the educator expresses his critical self-assessment, professional claims, attitude towards his status in the system of public and pedagogical relations and claims for its further increase. All this is internally connected with the motivation of the educator, awareness of deep sense of personal work, which significantly increases the quality of professional competence.

Thus, the subjective activity of the educator in the context of social and anthropological integrity of a person is considered as an integrative quality of the personality, which basic characteristics include the following: author’s pedagogical position; strive towards self-improvement; free goal-setting in activity; restriction of personal initiatives by legal frameworks; independent search and selection of the content, technological creativity, empathy to students, self-reflection and forecasting of results of pedagogical activity and relations.

Let us consider the main components of professional and pedagogical activity, which serve as indicators of subjective activity of the educator.

1. Axiological component: valuable and semantic self-determination on the basis of awareness of the deep sense of personal work, which includes: analysis and correlation of valuable and semantic reference points of education and valuable patterns of professional and pedagogical position of the educator; identification and solution of problems connected with valuable and semantic self-determination of the educator; self-identification and development of the educator’s professional position; revealing professional and pedagogical position in presentations, protection of personal opinion in discussions.

The paradigm plurality of pedagogical reality poses a need for a modern educator to consider a free and responsible choice of professional values, ways of implementation of pedagogical activity (Lukyanova, 2013). The importance of axiological component of activity of the educator includes professional identity reflecting the system of professional and valuable patterns of the educator’s identity, his axiological qualities. The axiological approach considers the system of professional values as the main mechanisms of professional and personal self-determination of the educator (Astashova, 2002).

2. Acmeological component: acmeological self-assessment in the course of reflection and identification of unique characteristics and qualities of the subject, which includes: study of individual and personal features; definition “strengths and weaknesses” of the educator; development of professional portrait; analysis of opportunities; participation in pedagogical competitions.

The reference values, principles of reflection and educators’ self-assessment are defined in pedagogics (Markova, 1993). S.B. Mironova notes that “self-analysis and self-assessment based on reflection in educational and professional activity ensure control, correction and induce the subject to self-development and self-improvement” (Mironova, 2003). Formation and development of professional pedagogical self-assessment of the educator takes place in the course of acmeological activity (Bodalev, 1998).

3. Research and design component: design of the individual way of achieving the goal, which includes: study of ways of goal achievement, choice of the optimum way; development and implementation of the project; correction of activity.

A.K. Markova considers the activity of the teacher-researcher as a subject of pedagogical work, which seeks to estimate the importance of original ideas or new approaches of other teachers. T.M. Talmanova considers the research competence of the teacher as “the integrative, dynamic quality of the teacher expressed in the unity of psychological, scientific-pedagogical and practical readiness for diagnostic-analytical-design activity” (Talmanova, 2003).

4. Legal component: legal expertise of personal initiatives, which includes: compliance of pedagogical activity with principles and standards of international and internal law in the field of children’s rights, rights and freedoms of a person and a citizen, recognition of students’ rights for legal personality, asymmetry and democratic character, within legal equality of the parties; accounting of regulatory requirements of the right in relation to age and specific features of a student, high level of legal knowledge of the educator, development of general moral and legal norms (Fedyashin, 2002).

5. Informative and content component: professional self-education as an independent cognitive activity aimed at the solution of problems revealed through self-analysis of the quality of professional and pedagogical activity by means of: independent search and development of solution technologies; development and approbation of personal problem solving techniques; participation in joint search of problem solving techniques; receiving assistance of a corresponding expert in problem solution.

The importance of professional self-education is widely reflected in documents of modernization of the Russian education and its intrinsic characteristics are actively studied in pedagogical science. It is noted that “the pedagogics of professional self-education more than ever needs situational understanding of the solution of arising problems since the professional activity of the educator is ensured in the conditions of dynamic, unexpected, ambiguous and multifunctional situations” (Ganchenko, 2004).

6. Creative and technological component: technological creativity and improvisation in the solution of situations of uncertainty, which includes: analysis of situations requiring non-standard pedagogical solutions; training of improvisational abilities and readiness for non-standard actions of students; analysis and description of creative solutions.

Professional pedagogical creativity is considered as the process of self-realization of individual, psychological, intellectual opportunities and abilities of the educator as a purposeful, conscious, personal and significant activity focused on the optimal and productive solution of professional pedagogical tasks.

7. Dialogue and empathic component: implementation of the principles of dialogics and empathy in pedagogical interaction via confidential communication and goodwill in relation to every student; support of business and friendly atmosphere; protection of dignity and interests of students; prevention of professional burnout of the teacher. V.V. Gorshkova notes that a dialogue is a “unit” of intersubjective relations and the meaning of pedagogical activity is the transformation of a student from the object of educational process into its subject (Gorshkova, 2011). It is possible to highlight the empathic culture of the teacher demonstrated by the ability to demonstrate emotions in reacting to student’s feelings, to distinguish their thoughts and feelings, to build the relations with them, foreseeing their point of view and agreeing with their internal position in advance.

8 Innovative and transformative component: development and implementation of pedagogical innovations, including the diagnostics of happening changes and identification of crisis conditions of the educational process; search, development and deployment of innovations ensuring the efficiency of the educational process; choice of the course of educational development.

The pedagogics considers the following levels of readiness for innovative activity of the educator (Voropaeva, 2014):

• initial (insignificant educator’s interest or its absence to innovative activity, lack of the system of knowledge of innovative technologies within the chosen specialty and personal innovative potential, accidental, spontaneous implementation of innovative activity or its lack, lack of individual style of activity),

• low (unstable interest to innovative activity, separate system of knowledge of innovative technologies and personal innovative potential, insufficient systematic and careful implementation of innovative activity, but with elements of individual style of activity),

• average (stable interest to innovative activity, developed system of knowledge of innovative technologies within the chosen specialty and personal innovative potential, systematic implementation of innovative activity, individual educator’s style of innovative activity);

• high (high motivation, free and creative use of knowledge of innovative technologies, educator’s creative activity).

Conclusion

Subject activity of the educator in the context of social and anthropological integrity of a person is considered as an integrative feature of personality, which main characteristics include the following: author’s pedagogical position; strive for self-improvement; free goal-setting in activity; restriction of personal initiatives with legal frameworks; independent search and selection of content, technological creativity, empathy to students, self-reflection and forecasting of results of pedagogical activity and relations.

Developing subjectivity of the educator is revealed through initiative development of its professional and general abilities to internally motivated and actively conditioned action.

Theoretical model of components of professional and pedagogical activity of the educator, which indicate the subject activity of the educator:

• valuable and semantic self-determination on the basis of awareness in a very deep sense of personal work,

• acmeological self-assessment in the course of reflection and identification of unique features and qualities of a subject,

• design of the individual way of achieving the goal;

• legal expertise of personal initiatives;

• professional self-education,

• technological creativity and improvisation in the solution of situations of uncertainty,

• implementation of dialogics and empathy principles in pedagogical interaction,

• development and implementation of pedagogical innovations.

The approbation of the suggested theoretical model in teaching proved its efficiency.

References

1. Antsyferova, L. I. (1994). Personality in hard living conditions: rethinking, transformation of situations and psychological protection. Psychological journal, 1, 3-16.
2. Astashova, N. A. (2002). Conceptual framework of pedagogical axiology. Pedagogics, 8, 8-13.
3. Bodalev, A. A. (1998). Peak in adult development: characteristics and conditions of achievement. Moscow: Flinta-Nauka.
4. Brushlinsky, A. V. (1994). Problems of psychology of a subject. Moscow: RAS Institute of Psychology.
5. Fedyashin, V. P. (2002). Theory and practice of the teacher’s legal culture [Monograph]. Ufa: BSPU.
6. Fromm, E. (2006). Escape from Freedom. Man for Himself. Moscow: AST.
7. Ganchenko, I. O. (2004). Pedagogics of professional self-education [Monograph]. Krasnodar: Russian Interior Ministry Academy.
8. Gorshkova, V. V. (2011). Dialogue in the activity of a modern teacher. Pedagogics, 2, 68-76.
9. Hegel, G. (1959). Phenomenology of the Spirit. Mocsow: Mysl.
10. Lukyanova, M. I. (2013). On professional and personal freedom of a teacher in polyparadigmatic space of pedagogical reality. Bulletin of Saratov University. New Series. Acmeology of education. Psychology of development, 2, 141-146.
11. Markova, A. K. (1993). Psychology of the teacher’s work. Moscow: Education.
12. Mironova, S. B. (2003). Pedagogical system of general and professional self-assessment of university students (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Russian State Library Database.
13. Rubenstein, S. L. (2003). Life and consciousness. Person and world. St. Petersburg: Piter.
14. Slobodchikov, V. I. (2002). On correlation of categories “subject” and “personality” in the context of psychological anthropology. In V.I. Kabrin (Ed.). Personality in paradigms and metaphors: mentality – communication – tolerance [pp. 20-30]. Tomsk: TSU.
15. Talmanova, T. M. (2003). Development of research competence of the elementary school teacher within the system of continuous education (Dissertation) Moscow.
16. Tolstoy, L.N. (1888) About the life. Moscow: Typography of T. Rize.