Development Of The Pedagogical Educational System In Conditions Of Modern Society

Abstract

In this article the chronology of the development of the system of pedagogical education is considered. By analyzing the traditions of Russian education, two institutional models of higher pedagogical education – "university" and "specialized" - were identified almost always coexisting peacefully, as well as eight stages in the history of pedagogical education in Russia. Some systems of continuous pedagogical education abroad are analyzed. Despite the specific differences in the systems of education in Russia, France, Germany, England and the United States, career guidance, focusing on the choice of teaching professions, is based on similar principles and requirements for applicants and students. The system of education in the conditions of modern society is considered. The development of the system of pedagogical education in Russia continues through research and practical implementation of modern principles of professional pedagogy, one of which is the principle of advanced training of future teachers; a comparative analysis of the trends of modern training of teachers in Russia and abroad shows the commonality and difference of some approaches to this problem. The article defines that the main characteristic of a pedagogical university should be a scientifically understood professional orientation of the educational process, successfully solving the problem of training for direct professional activity and the formation of the competitiveness of the teacher. The authors present some conditions for the successful development of pedagogical education in Russia.

Keywords: Institutional modelspedagogical educationuniversityeducational systemteacher training

Introduction

Today, the Russian pedagogical education is a constantly updating and dynamically developing system, prepared for successful solution of any professional problem (Dorozhkin & Chapaev, 2015). According to Waks (2007) in the modern works of researchers, representing Russian modern pedagogical educational science, the education is considered as:

  • an integral part of the process of development and socialization as well as a meaningful social institution;

  • a way of transmitting culture, mastering which a person is not only adapting to a constantly changing society, but is also ready to non-adaptive activity, which allows to go beyond the preset and to develop the subjectivity and increase the world civilization potential.

This leads to the conclusion that education is a historically, socio-culturally and anthropologically conditioned phenomenon, i.e. a socio-cultural phenomenon of priority importance both for a person and for the preservation and development of the society. Thus, Waks (2007) notes that education is a means that allows culture and society to solve their basic problems: the purpose of society is to assist in human adaptation through the system of education, culture is aimed at creating the individuality which possesses a non-standard set of personal meanings (Waks, 2007). All the foregoing is supposed to prove directly and indirectly the high status of pedagogical education as a meaningful socio-cultural phenomenon (Chapaev, Erofeev, & Dvořáková, 2016; Dorozhkin, Zeer, & Shevchenko, 2017; Davydova, Dorozhkin, & Fedorov, 2018).

Problem Statement

Turning to the history of the Russian pedagogical education, it is possible to notice peaceful coexistence of two institutional models of the higher pedagogical education – a "university" model and a "specialized” model. Two institutional models of the pedagogical education, which appeared in the pre-revolutionary period as university and specialized ones, coexist quite successfully for the last two centuries (Batyshev & Novikov, 2009).

The history of professional and pedagogical education of the Russian system is usually attributed to the end of the XVII – the beginning of the XVIII centuries (Ushinsky, 1868). However, the studying of teacher education in Russia must begin with the era of Peter I. The first teachers’ seminary educating teachers of elementary school was opened in St. Petersburg in 1786. At that time it was the profession that was declared a state value and the most important need, and the pedagogical staff was sorely lacking. Next, the first half of the XVII century is considered to be a period of the participation of the government in the management of education, the approach to the content of education changes significantly, a certain order of training sessions takes place, and professional schools are opened. The reform during the reign of Alexander I should be also noted. It caused separation of the empire into six educational districts. In 1859, teacher training institutes at the universities were closed. At first, they were replaced by the two-year teacher training courses which admitted graduates of historical-philological and physical-mathematical departments. It was assumed that students already have general pedagogical and methodological background. These courses didn’t exist for a long period, too. In 1863 there was another university reform, university autonomy was restored, but the reforms have revealed the lack of the teachers of public education. The beginning of the XX century was marked by the development of the concept of the pedagogical education in universities. It was supposed to strengthen the weakest - psycho-pedagogical teacher training component. Thus, it can be noted that the development of the system of pedagogical education at that time cannot be considered not noticeable. The Soviet regime arrival has aggravated quite a sad state of vocational pedagogical education. Thus, historians of pedagogy consider the first decade after the arrival of Soviet power as «educational renaissance».

In pre-revolutionary Russia training of teachers for primary schools prevailed. The main type of teacher training for primary school teachers were seminaries with a 4-year course of study, subordinated to the Ministry of Public Education. At the beginning of 1917 in Russia 171 teachers’ seminaries existed. In the seminaries, the law of God, Russian and Church Slavonic languages, literature, arithmetic with initial information from algebra and geometry, science, physics, history, geography, drawing, singing, and pedagogy, the methodology of initial training in Russian and arithmetic were taught. According to the decision of the seminary council, teachers were trained in handicrafts. Pedagogical classes of 913 female gymnasiums, 50 female diocesan schools and Female Pedagogical Institute in St. Petersburg also trained teachers of primary education. In the XIX century teachers for parish schools were trained in church-schools and second-class school. Only graduates of universities and theological academies were generally being appointed as teachers of secondary schools. The twenties were characterized by acute shortage of qualified teaching staff. The whole concept of teacher training required to be changed. From 1918 to 1920 graduates of any field of study could become a teacher. Industrial-pedagogical and agro-pedagogical institutions with a three-year term of study appeared later. In 1924 All-Russian conference on pedagogical education was held which determined the new requirements for the teacher training. The conference recognized both these models as basic models of the higher pedagogical education: "training of of secondary school teachers should be carried out at pedagogical institutes or at the universities’ faculties of journalism". At this conference, it was pointed out that pedagogical universities had to communicate with the working masses, open pedagogical workers' faculties, to send the students to practice in plants, factories and villages, to organize mutual patronage with factories and villages. It was also emphasized that the future teacher must grasp the ideology of the Communist Party. The Conference pointed to the need to transform a pedagogical university into a pedagogical center in which teachers should receive assistance in practical work. Further, pedagogical institutes should be a production unit and carry out educational work included in the production schedule of the educational authorities. Special attention was given to strengthening relations with the workers and mutual patronage with factories and villages.

In the 1930s, when the system of teacher training had been completely brought under state control, the situation repeated. There was a division of teacher education institutions in the two major subsystems. The second was performed by pedagogical institutes and universities that prepared teachers for middle and senior levels of secondary school.

In 1934, the agro-pedagogical institutes were reorganized into pedagogical institutes, and by 1941 the engineering-pedagogical institutions had been dissolved.

The next period of development of pedagogical education in Russia is characterized by a noticeable shift towards the profession of a subject teacher. A leading place in the curricula of faculties was occupied by special disciplines. The era of focused specialization of a subject teacher returned. Then, in the late 1950s, after the adoption of the Law "On strengthening the connection with the school life and the further development of the public education system in the USSR", a reverse process began. Multi-subject teachers are being prepared again, the university schedule is reoriented according to the new aims. Pedagogical Institutes are transferred to a five-year period of study. In the 1960s, education is slowly returning to the focused specialization of the teachers. One of the major Russian achievements, recognized by the international community, was a system of continuous pedagogical education. It completely formed in the XX century. The Soviet system of pedagogical education possessed both strengths and weaknesses. Strengths include regularity of students training, connection with the science, a high level of requirements, and others. Among the obvious disadvantages were a high level of ideologization, one-sidedness of the humanities, etc. In 1966, UNESCO adopted a Recommendation on the Status of Teachers. It is the first international legal document regulating their professional and socioeconomic status. During these years, the foundations of continuous pedagogical education were laid. The documents of the special International Conference on Education, held in August 1975 at the 35th session of UNESCO, noted that it was impossible to provide a future teacher with the knowledge and skills adequate for his whole career. This is due to constant updating and development in the general pedagogical knowledge and constant changes occurring in pedagogical systems as well as the growth of the creative character of pedagogical activity. So the initial preparation for the profession should be considered in the process of continuous pedagogical education of teachers as the first fundamental stage.

Pedagogical education was developing very quickly in the era of post-Soviet Russia. In 1980 the problem of the graduates’ rapid adaptation was widely discussed. Orientation is taken to the wide profile and the enlargement of specialties. In 1978 with the decision of the USSR Council of Ministers the qualification characteristics were introduced as a first attempt of modeling professional activities. Ten years later, in 1988 new qualification characteristics of specialists with higher education are developed, including for pedagogical specialties.

In 1991-1998 pedagogical colleges, pedagogical institutes, pedagogical universities tried to adapt to new socio-economic conditions on their own.

In 1999-2002, the focus was on the problems of the development of the pedagogical education system as a whole. The result was the development of the Program for the Development of Continuous Teacher Education for the period 2001-2010. The next question was modernizing the education system, and first of all the comprehensive school. In 2003-2004, The Program for the Modernization of Teacher Education appeared. It was approved by the order of the Ministry of Education of Russia in April 2003. So, it was supposed to achieve the maximum orientation of the system of pedagogical education on the interests of the functioning and development of its direct consumer - the comprehensive school; to intensify research in the field of psychological and pedagogical sciences for the following scientific and methodological support of modernization processes both in the general education school and in the pedagogical system itself; to expand the use of state-public mechanisms in the management of the functioning and development of pedagogical education. Further, the prestige of the teacher's profession fell greatly again. If in 2008 the training of teachers was carried out by 70 specialized universities, then by 2012 their number had been reduced to 48, while according to the results of monitoring in 2012 more than half of these universities had signs of inefficiency.

Research Questions

The study of the problem was conducted in three stages:

  • at the first stage theoretical analysis of the existing methodological approaches in pedagogical and professional scientific literature was carried out; the problem, the purpose and methods of research were singled out;

  • at the second stage the data of domestic and foreign literature sources were studied and analyzed;

  • at the third stage theoretical and practical conclusions were specified.

So, in the history of the development of pedagogical education in Russia eight stages are usually distinguished (Fominykh, 2016):

  • educational stage;

  • the stage of reforms;

  • the stage of formation of pedagogical education;

  • the stage of the formation of university pedagogical education;

  • the stage of formation of continuous pedagogical education;

  • stabilization phase;

  • post-Soviet stage;

  • the stage of modernization of pedagogical education.

Insufficient level of students' preparation is connected with the problems in organizational and technical support of the educational process, rather short pedagogical practice, simplified and formalized nature of the pedagogical practice, refusal to go through the internship directly, etc. (Fitz-Walter, Wyeth, Tjondronegoro, & Johnson, 2014; Kaliisa & Picard, 2017).

As a result, graduates of pedagogical universities do not fully meet the criterial requirements that are imposed on teachers.

Today in Russia there are 79 pedagogical universities, 104 institutions for advanced training, and about 350 pedagogical colleges. In general, the number of universities with pedagogical faculties in Russia has exceeded 200, because they are widely represented in almost every region of Russia: from the Belgorod region to the Far East. The rating of pedagogical universities in Russia is mainly determined by the rating of all the leading contests ("100 best universities in Russia", "European quality" and others) conducted by the most famous domestic and foreign organizations (Russian Ministry of Education, Vladimir Potanin fund, Expert RA, etc.), and according to the results of voting the largest educational Internet sites.

Thus, when referring to comparative pedagogy, methodology and methodology of comparative pedagogical research, practice of reforming education systems, it is necessary to consider some systems of continuous pedagogical education abroad.

Despite the specific differences in the teaching systems of Russia, France, Germany, England and the USA, the basic principles and requirements for applicants and students lie at the heart of vocational guidance, which guides the selection of pedagogical professions (Schmidt, 1995; Greinert, 2004; Waks, 2007; Villegas-Reimers, 2003; Pintner, 1980; Raven, 1990; Russel, 1995; Shulman, 1986). Thus, the system of professional training of a future teacher at the universities of Russia, Germany, France, England and the USA is multilevel: bachelor and master. In state schools in England at all levels of education (preschool, primary, (including preparatory) and secondary education), you must have the status of a qualified teacher (Qualified Teacher Status - QTS) (Dirin & Nieminen, 2015; Fathema, Shannon, & Ross, 2015).

All teachers in England and the United States are required to participate in in-service training (INSET), which is intensively provided by the government (Hannelore & Esenina, 2015). In all these countries, additional training is carried out within the acquired profession, and there are special courses for the improvement of qualifications of different duration, structure and directions (postgraduate education).

Purpose of the Study

In the process of research the following methods were used: theoretical analysis and synthesis of the data of foreign and domestic sources, study and theoretical analysis of the educational, methodological and professional literature; comparative analysis of educational systems; historical method.

Research Methods

Qualification characteristics of a future teacher specify the necessary knowledge, skills in blocks of subjects and individual academic disciplines (Alharbi & Drew, 2014; Al-Jabri & Roztocki, 2015; Asiimwe & Grönlund, 2015). Thus, the main characteristic of a pedagogical university should be the scientifically understood professional orientation of the entire teaching and upbringing process, successfully solving the tasks of preparing for professional activity and forming the competitiveness of the teacher. Proceeding from the foregoing, let us cite some conditions for the successful development of pedagogical education in Russia:

  • development of state-public forms of pedagogical education management at all levels;

  • increase of efficiency and economy of management through expansion of direct horizontal links;

  • ensuring the development of professional pedagogical abilities of trainees on the basis of practices;

  • scientific study of the connection between the motivation of instruction in a pedagogical university and the pedagogical abilities of an individual;

  • development of a technological tool for professional pedagogical education in the conditions of advanced education;

  • ensuring an effective exchange of experience in the field of innovative scientific and practical developments in education in regions with similar socio-economic conditions.

Findings

It should be noted that the development of the system of pedagogical education in Russia is being provided through research and practical implementation of modern principles of professional pedagogy, one of which is the principle of perspective-advanced training of future teachers; the comparative analysis of the trends in the current training of teaching staff in Russia and abroad shows the similarity and difference of some approaches to this problem.

Most scientists dealing with the problems of teacher education in Russia note that the term "competitiveness of a specialist" is inappropriate for a teacher. As you know, competitive ability plays an important role for a specialist in the labor market. The National Doctrine of Education of the Russian Federation pays special attention to the need to further improve the education system and improve the quality of training and the level of qualification of teaching staff.

Conclusion

Consequently, systematic improvement of the entire training of teachers and other workers in educational institutions is an objective necessity. Sometimes, students really desire to become teachers, even they are by vocation, but not all graduates of a pedagogical university successfully get a job in schools and kindergartens. What is the reason? Even an experienced teacher sometimes lacks the knowledge of the theory of his profession. The theory of the profession in this case consists in knowing certain meaningful functions of a professional, in our case a teacher.

References

  1. Alharbi, S., & Drew, S. (2014). Using the technology acceptance model in understanding academics’ behavioural intention to use learning management systems. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 5(1), 143–155.
  2. Al-Jabri, I., & Roztocki, N. (2015). Adoption of ERP systems: Does information transparency matter? Telematics and Informatics, 32(2), 300–310.
  3. Asiimwe, E., & Grönlund, A. (2015). MLCMS actual use, perceived use, and experiences of use. IJEDICT, 11(1), 101-121.
  4. Batyshev, S.Y., & Novikov, A.M. (2009). History of vocational education in Russia. Moscow: Egves. [in Rus].
  5. Chapaev, N.K., Erofeev, A.G., & Dvořáková, L. (2016). Peculiarities of educational environment at mining and metallurgical schools of the Urals. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 11(14), 7066-7078.
  6. Davydova, N.N., Dorozhkin, Е.М., & Fedorov, V.A. (2018). Objectives and managing model of development of research and education networks. The European Proceedings of Social & Behavioural Sciences, 35, 273-280. DOI:
  7. Dirin, A., & Nieminen, M. (2015). mLUX: usability and user experience development framework for m-learning. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 9(3), 37-51.
  8. Dorozhkin, E.M., & Chapaev, N.K. (2015). Problemy vysshego obrazovaniya (Statia-retsenziya na knigu S.S. Naboichenko «istoriya vysshei shkoly sverdlovskoi oblasti») [Issues of higher education (article-book review «History of higher school in Sverdlovsk region» by S.S.Nabojchenko)]. Obrazovanie i Nauka - The Education and Science Journal, 2, 27-41. [in Rus]. DOI:
  9. Dorozhkin, E.M., Zeer, E.F., & Shevchenko, V.Y. (2017). Nauchno-obrazovatelnaya panorama modernizatsii podgotovki pedagogov nepreryvnogo professionalnogo obrazovaniya [Research and educational panorama of modernization of training teachers of continuous vocational education]. Obrazovanie i Nauka - The Education and Science Journal, 1, 63-81. [in Rus]. DOI:
  10. Fathema, N., Shannon, D., & Ross, M. (2015). Expanding the technology acceptance model (TAM) to examine faculty use of learning management systems (LMSs) in higher education institutions. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 11(2).
  11. Fitz-Walter, Z., Wyeth, P., Tjondronegoro, D., & Johnson, D. (2014). Exploring the effect of achievements on students attending university orientation. In Proceedings of the first ACM SIGCHI annual symposium on Computer-human interaction in play. (pp. 87-96) October 19-21, 2014, Toronto, Ontario, Canada: ACM.
  12. Fominykh, M.V. (2016). The game simulation as a method of training for teachers of a higher school. Bulletin of Science and Practic, 11(12), 339-341. [in Rus].
  13. Greinert, W.-D. (2004). European vocational training systems: some thoughts on the theoretical сontext of their historical development. Vocational Training. European Journal, 32, 18-25.
  14. Hannelore, D., & Esenina, E.Y. (2015). «Staraya dama v ochen sovremennom internatsionalnom platye» (nemetskaya dualnaya sistema professionalnogo obrazovaniya i obucheniya v germanii i v mire). [«Old woman in very modern international dress». (German dual system of vet in Germany and in the world)] Obrazovanie i Nauka -The Education and Science Journal, 8, 34-49. DOI: 10.17853/1994-5639-2015-8-34-49. [in Rus].
  15. Kaliisa, R., & Picard, M. (2017). A systematic review on mobile learning in higher education: The african perspective. TOJET, 16(1), 1-18.
  16. Pintner, W.M. (1980). Civil officialdom and the nobility in the 1850-s. In W.M. Pintner & D.K. Rowney (Eds.), Russian officialdom. The bureaucratization of Russian society from the seventeenth to the twentieth century (pp. 227-249). Chapel Hill, N.C.: Univ. of North Carolina Press.
  17. Raven, J. (1990). The most impoatant problem in education is to cometo terms with values. New York, N.Y.: Trillium Press.
  18. Russel, A.L. (1995). Stages in learning new technology: Naïve adult email users. Computers & Education, 25(4), 173-178.
  19. Schmidt, G. (1995). Reflections on vocational education at the turn of the XXI century. Prospects, 2, 205-213.
  20. Shulman, L.S. (1986). Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
  21. Ushinsky, K.D. (1868). The need for vocational schools in the capitals. Vedomosti. URL: http://www.biografia.ru/arhiv/91.html. Accessed: 01.10.2018.
  22. Villegas-Reimers, E. (2003). Teacher professional development: an international review of the literature. Paris: UNESCO: International Institute for Educational Planning. URL: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001330/133010e.pdf. Accessed: 01.10.2018.
  23. Waks, L.J. (2007). The concept of fundamental educational change. Educational Theory, 57, 277-295.

Copyright information

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

About this article

Publication Date

18 December 2019

eBook ISBN

978-1-80296-056-3

Publisher

Future Academy

Volume

57

Print ISBN (optional)

-

Edition Number

1st Edition

Pages

1-1887

Subjects

Business, business ethics, social responsibility, innovation, ethical issues, scientific developments, technological developments

Cite this article as:

Fominykh*, M., Uskova, B., Chapaev, N., Vetlugina, N., & Luzjanina, T. (2019). Development Of The Pedagogical Educational System In Conditions Of Modern Society. In & V. Mantulenko (Ed.), Global Challenges and Prospects of the Modern Economic Development, vol 57. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences (pp. 336-343). Future Academy. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2019.03.34