General Curatorship As A Special Task In Teacher’s Work With Foreign Students

Forming stage

For reaching pointed tasks were analyzed theoretical and methodological works for curatorship problems and was recognized that terms curatorship and tutor’s work are familiar for Russian mentality and often replace each other. In the scientific publications this issue one of the most challenging. It will be discussed below. The word «tutor» is usually used for teacher helping with an educational process while curator is used for an organizer of art exhibitions and similar events. According to practice, curator at the High school performs educational, informing and psychological functions.

Based on the diagnostic, the main definition of the term «curator» is considered as a senior helper in the educational and adaptive process. The survey contented questions with the opportunity to choose a few answers. So, for each question, it was supposed 100% for all answers. The sample showed that the maximum received following characteristics: 73,9% of lecturers voted for a senior helper, 43,5% also voted for organizer and informer and 43,5% voted for an intercultural guide.

At the same time was found out the level of necessity of tutor’s work: 69,1% of teachers support the idea about such curatorship work at the faculty without any doubts, 25,1% voted for tutor’s work with some changes in this system, for 13% of lecturers it was difficult to answer this question but nobody expressed negative opinion about uselessness of curator’s work. Generally, from students side the curator’s work was ranked on the scale from 0 to 5: almost 46% chose maximum, 24,1%, and 20,7% chose 4 and 3 points respectively and 1 and 2 points were equally chosen by less than 9,2% of respondents.

Control stage

The basic results of the research carried out significant in correlation statistic if students have had a tutor before study at University and if they recognize the influence of such work. According to the survey data, 30,7% of listeners do not have an experience of work with the curator while 47,7% of students highlighted positive experience of such work with the teacher at school. Also, between both groups of respondents, the correlation between the most problematic groups was found. The survey presented that in mixed by the national characteristics groups there are more challenging situations and conflicts: 60,9% of teachers and 40,1% of students voted for this case. Second place in a mentioned question took groups of the same nationality: 6,5% of lecturers and 30,1% of listeners chose this answer. Meanwhile, groups of same sex received 26,1% and 13,5% of votes from lecturers and students and groups of mixed sex got 6,5% and 12,6% of votes, respectively (Figure 01 ).

See Full Size >

The held analysis showed that actually teacher’s experience, his/her abilities to solve problems, communication and psychological help, tolerance, fast reaction, and erudition have the most significant role. Among them there are should be mentioned strictness and individual attitude. In dependence of competences skills and knowledge of tutor there was made a conclusion about curator’s important role. It is implied social and psychological support, energy and talented managing of the group. Especial attention is paid not only for formal education but also for informal interaction between the tutor and the group. For example, visiting events, theatres, museums, Kremlin, city’s streets and collaborative participating in sports events, projects and competitions are considered.

Due to the prepared sample of answers, there was carried out a conclusion about the professional and personal characteristics of the tutor. The diagram (Figure 02 ) presents the ranking of qualities from the most important to less important. Each criterion was estimated at 100%. Among them the capability to resolve conflicts got 91,3% and 56,8%, communication receive 73,9% and 43,2%, for tolerance voted 69,6% and 23,9% of respondents, for fast reaction – 39,1% and 45,5% and for erudition 30,4% and 31,8%, respectively. It is interesting that erudition and fast reaction prevail among students’ answers. Stress resistance and modern point of view at the World have almost equal esteems – approximately 20% of votes from lecturers and students. Individual attitude received 14,6% and 11,3% and strictness got 4,3% and 2% from teachers and listeners, respectively.

See Full Size >

Considering this data, it is possible to discuss new ways of development of preparation curators and improving their personal qualities during the pedagogical practice on the modern technological platform in the nearest future. These opportunities will enhance the level of curator’s background and help to recognize the significance of their role in curatorship.

Thus, familiar diagnostic researches touching criteria of ranking, functions, results of work, frequency and specific of problems could influence on creating different educational programs. From the one side, it is necessary to turn curatorship in a real active instrument not only at the preparatory level for foreigners. From the other side, it is important to highlight modern trends in the preparation of young teachers.

Among the positive moments in the idea of Curatorship Institution in Kazan Federal University it is important to find out and develop 3 main consisting parts: 1) existence of effective personal characteristics; 2) different ways of interaction – formal and unformal; 3) teacher’s motivation in professional realization and interest for actual problems of tutor’s work.

Discussion

The exploration of scientific literature at the mentioned issue gives an opportunity to track the tendency in using familiar terms ‘curatorship’ and ‘tutor’s work’. According to an encyclopedia, the meaning of the word «curatorship» traditionally was defined as a person who looks after someone’s working process or generally observes the deals of structure. In particular, one of the meanings of ‘curator’ stands by teacher or educator in some educational structures, who controls students studying process (Prokhorov, 2000). Adopted from English language word «tutor», which from word to word means «home teacher», defines mentor or educator in the Great Britain system of Primary and High school education (Kuznetsov, 2000).

The system of tutor’s work, implemented into Russian reality at the end of last Century, was accepted as educational navigation while a curatorship was considered as social navigation. Generally, the tutor was a coordinator in a whole educational process and in choosing a trajectory for the development that helped to solve current studying problems directed students in scientific and project work. In fact, the curator’s work was not limited only by the content of concrete discipline but had a purpose to give a social-oriented support connected with the emotional and psychological balance and adaptation to new conditions (Bim-Bad, 2002). It should be declared that at the boarder of the 20^th and 21^st centuries the difference between touched upon terms was eliminated. Nowadays both words often replace each other as the social curatorship and educational administrating are similar. The same point of view was presented by the modern authors. At the modern time tutor is a curator, an academic consultant and individual educational mentor (Kuzminykh, 2014).

As the authors of the tutor’s kit noticed, one of the aims of pedagogical support is a help in getting experience in emotional relations in a form of personal orientation (Voloshina, Karnaukhova, & Nikitaeva, 2010). Thus, a person who supports students in such a way also is a mentor and helper during the whole educational process. Definitely here is placed the main rational basis which implies the conductor between the group and society. It implies the presence of a teacher or tutor. The interpretation of curatorship traditions and historical and theoretical issues was mentioned in many works of Russian scientists (Barbariga & Fedorova, 1979; Dzhurinskiy, 2008; Proskurovskaya, 2009; Velikanova, 2011). Authors explain the appearance and dynamic of the development of the curatorial system in various conditions from different points of view. As examples, the experience of the oldest Universities of Europe is presented.

Velikanova and Tretyakova (2013) have an outstanding point in her publication. She considers curator as a social producer and supposes the tasks and functions of the curatorship through the students’ social practice. In the article of Lourence (2002) curatorship is shown as a united specific form of High Education and scientifically proved reality. There is possible to replace accent to collaborate work and successful studying. In such context, it is interesting to consider what Mandel (2014) had to say about existing and potential types of curatorship. According to his strict definition, the curator is an optimistic, mobile, flexible, sensitive teacher who easily orients in any situation and makes fast decisions noticing the interpersonal and international features of communication. Curator is capable to plan work, reach perspective goals, react and reflect students’ tastes and interests. Among the serious researches, it is necessary to highlight works connected o psychological and pedagogical problematic in a curator’s work. Sokolova (2007) separated deformations and mistakes of teacher’s activity and ways of its correction. Beylina and Rudenko (2016) considered the structure of curatorship and its potential in meaning of realization of the State Educational Standards of High Education.

In the frames of this article, it is not possible to list whole authors who have publications devoted to considering a theme. An exploration of issues about students’ specialization, dedicated to basic directions of the academic groups’ preferences, is presented in works of Chermyanin, Korzunin, and Skorokhod (2015) and Lyubin (2016).

Among the common methods to describe curator’s work as a category of education, which is practically used, there are could be mentioned scientific researches of Musharapova (2000), Parshina (2007), Radnaeva and Shibaeva (2016). They are dedicated to the dynamic of development and factors of adaptation of foreign students on the bases of structural departments of Universities. Basing on the wide range of the materials, authors carefully consider conditions of real practice and aspects of psychological and pedagogical support of students.