Methodological principles of organizing educational work of educational institutions in the digital reality
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22633/rpge.v25iesp.2.15279Keywords:
Methodological principles, Educational activities, Digital nativesAbstract
In this article we aim to problematize methodological principles of organizing educational work of educational institutions in the context of modern trends in a transforming society. The authors emphasize the inconsistency and multiplicity of conditions for mental and personal development of a person in the context of digital reality. The adoption of strategic documents that set the mandatory directions of educational activities at all levels of education requires an understanding of the existing traditions of teaching and education. The authors point to the insufficient elaboration of theoretical and methodological backgrounds of education of the digital society children - “digital natives”, insufficient analytics of the effectiveness and efficiency of the technologies and digital educational resources used. The article presents a fundamental vision of the organization of educational work: as a system and as a joint activity. The authors are convinced that for the organization of relatively socially controlled socialization of society members, for the transmission of culture and social norms, it is necessary to update the methodological principles of systematization, the environmental principle, the principle of value behavioral foundations, the principle of producibility, the principle of individual age characteristics inclusion and the principle of emotional involvement.
Downloads
References
ASMOLOV, A. G.; GUSELTSEVA, M. S. Value sense of sociocultural modernization of education: from reforms to reformation. RSUH/RGGU Bulletin: Psychology. Pedagogics. Education Series, v. 1, p. 18-43, 2019.
BENINGHOF, A.M. Co-teaching that works: structures and strategies for maximizing student learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2020.
BIESTA, G. Touching the soul? exploring an alternative outlook for philosophical work with children and young people. Childhood & Philosophy, v. 13, n. 28, p. 415-137, 2017.
BROD, G. generative learning: which strategies for what age? Educ Psychol Rev., 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09571-9
CONTAGE, G. D. Infância e invisibilidade: por uma pedagogia do oculto. Childhood & Philosophy, v. 15, p. 1-15, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12957/childphilo.2019.42877
DUGAROVA, T. T. et al. Self-identity of adolescents in the cross-cultural aspect (on the example of Mongolian and Russian adolescents). Journal of Environmental Treatment Techniques, v. 8, n. 4, p. 1599-1605, 2020.
HA LE, J. J.; WUBBELS, T. Collaborative learning practices: teacher and student perceived obstacles to effective student collaboration. Cambridge Journal of Education, v. 48, n. 1, p. 103-122, 2018.
KARABANOVA, O. A.; MALOFEEV, N. N. Education development strategy for children with disabilities: On the way to implementing a cultural-historical approach. Cultural-Historical Psychology, v. 15, n. 4, p. 89-99, 2019.
KOHAN, O.W.; KENNEDY, D. Gert Biesta and philosophical work with children. Childhood & Philosophy, v. 13, n. 28, p. 409-414, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12957/childphilo.2017.30504
MENDE, S.; PROSKE, A.; NARCISS, S. Individual preparation for collaborative learning: Systematic review and synthesis. Educational Psychologist, v. 56, n. 1, p. 29-53, 2021.
PEREIRA, S.; FILLOL, J.; MOURA, P. Young people learning from digital media outside of school: the informal meets the formal. Comunicar, v. 58, p. 41-50, 2019.
PEREIRA, S.; PONTE, C. E.; ELIAS, N. Children, youth and media: current perspectives. Comunicação e Sociedade, v. 37, p. 9-18, 2020
.
PRENSKY, M. Digital natives, digital immigrants. do they really think differently? On the Horizon, v. 9, n. 6, p. 1-6, 2001.
REAN, A. A. Psychology of studying personality. Moscow: Publishing house V.A. Mikhailov, 1999.
SALAKHOVA, V. B. et al. Informational and psychological safety of the educational environment in forming a person’s personality: current challenges and risks (ecological and psychological approach). Eurasia J Biosci, v. 13, p. 1797-1803, 2019.
SALAKHOVA, V. B. et al. The crisis of education in conditions of the covid-19 pandemic: The model of blended learning. Systematic Reviews in Pharmacy, v. 11, n. 12, p. 1411-1416, 2020.
SANTI, M. Collaborative problem-solving and citizenship education: a philosophical escape in the age of competencies. Childhood & Philosophy, v. 15, p. 1-19, 2019.
STRATEGY FOR THE EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT. Strategy for the Education Development in the Russian Federation for the period up to 2025. Moscow: Government of the Russian Federation, 2015.
TETZLAFF, L.; SCHMIEDEK, F.; BROD, G. Developing personalized education: a dynamic framework. Educational Psychology Review, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09570-w
TURKLE, S. Alone together: why we expect more from technology and less from each other. New York: Basic Books, 2010.
VOISKUNSKII, A. E.; SOLDATOVA, G. U. Epidemic of Loneliness in a Digital Society: Hikikomori as a Cultural and Psychological Phenomenon. Konsul'tativnaya psikhologiya i psikhoterapiya. Counseling Psychology and Psychotherapy, v. 27, n. 3, p. 22-43, 2019.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Revista on line de Política e Gestão Educacional
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Manuscritos aceitos e publicados são de propriedade da Revista on line de Política e Gestão Educacional. É vedada a submissão integral ou parcial do manuscrito a qualquer outro periódico. A responsabilidade do conteúdo dos artigos é exclusiva dos autores. É vedada a tradução para outro idioma sem a autorização escrita do Editor ouvida a Comissão Editorial Científica.
