Педагогические науки/5. Современные методы преподавания

Ibrayeva K.Zh. Doctor of Pedagogical Science

S.Seifullin Kazakh Agro Technical University, Astana

NATURAL SCIENCE APPROACH TO LEARNING

Despite the craze for innovation, the problem of determining the methodological guidelines is one of the most important and urgent problems of modern didactics.

We believe that everything what happens in the world is matter and various forms of motion. There’s not special spiritual essence because all spiritual (cognitive) processes don’t exist apart from matter, independently of it. "The materialist worldview means just to understand the nature of this without any extraneous additions"[1, p.513]. We have no reason to exclude the learning process from the general system of nature, to conceive teacher and student, not as part of nature, which can interact with each other by the material means, and some special, no one certain way, in some intangible way. It’s impossible to separate from the real learning process, you must accept it for what it really is.

Education is the phenomenon of social life, but it is an special case of tangible interaction of objective reality. Exactly this interaction determines learning process as a whole. The physicality of the learning process means that this is tangible interaction. This is the meaning of the guideline throughout the didactic science, ie based on the nominated our didactic concept is based on the natural communication as a universal mechanism of interaction between social subjects.

Natural science approach to teaching gives us basis to assert that learning is the process of organized communication in which knowledge is managed, the assimilation of its subjects of socio-historical experience, the playback and capture any activity.

The physicality of training allows almost mathematical precision of its design, ascertain material mechanism, ie, determine the structure of communication, which in the educational process give us four organizational forms of learning (individual, pair, group and collective). The educational process is realized through these forms of learning. From this it follows that, the organizational forms of education are the mechanism through which implemented the learning process. And the progress of its development depends on the using of some form of learning [2, 3].

Determining the mechanism of material existence of training, we can establish the principles and laws of its functioning. This is the first part of any rigorous science. "The significance of the laws of learning, - write Arstanov M. J. and J. S. Khaidarov means that they are being objective and independent, can anticipate the results of the study before its implementation, they can be used to construct new learning processes with predetermined, guaranteed quality of its products (in a probabilistic sense) ...

We consider the laws of teaching, primarily as a socio-historical. Education doesn’t exist outside of society, it is a subsystem of social relations, standing in a line with subsystems such as science, manufacturing, and art. As a subsystem of public relations, training performs the function of reproduction of the productive forces and production relations, all aspects of the life of a citizen of this society.

The laws of learning, as a form of cognitive reflection of social relations, have socio-historical nature "[4, p.25].

Further, it follows logically question: is the modern material acting mechanism of the learning process eternal and unchanging, or it transforms and evolves? If this mechanism isn’t eternal, but changes, evolves, it is necessary to establish how it was in the past, what has become nowadays and why it is so and not otherwise. And finally, how this mechanism is due to internal, immanent laws and laws of the coming information civilization must become in the near future. It follows that, we can predict its development and understand the content and methods of education reform.

In our opinion, V.K. Dyachenko’s theory of periodization training process helps us to decide this problem. The scientist issues that the totality of organizational forms which all applied in the training (as a material mechanism) is a particular organizational structure of the educational process. If we consider the process as a whole, its structure depends primarily on what common forms are also used, which is the working mechanism of the real learning process. The collection of structural forms of learning used in the learning process of a historical period is the foundation of the organizational structure, which is a material mechanism. This mechanism of learning has its own history, its own laws of development [5].

Education is historically incurred a social process. Therefore, when his analysis should be approached "from the standpoint of science ... do not forget the underlying historical context. Look at every issue from the perspective of how phenomenon is known in history took place, and in terms of its development, to examine what this thing was now "[6, p.67].

The organizational structure of the educational process, in contrast to the specific content of courses a high stability and can remain unchanged for centuries.

How did the organizational structure of the modern educational process make its appearance? What it was in the past? Whether it is inherent dynamism and mobility or she remains in a static condition? If transformation, mobility features it, what is the way of its expression?

Radical changes in the material structure (mechanism) of the educational process taking place adequately to the needs of social production and the interests of the people, eventually cause of the formation of historical phases (or stages) of development of the educational process. Change of one phase by another, the transition from the structure at least to a more development is not accidental, but logical, due to laws socio-natural history. Knowing of the historical stages of the evolution of the mechanism of training material, its structure, becomes an important methodological mean in the hands of scientists and practitioners. It creates a real opportunity to scientifically based prediction of the educational process at schools and universities, which in turn provides an orientation to the path of the teaching community is really progressive transformation of the pedagogical process in accordance with the terms of the scientific and technological revolution and to a radical renewal of society.

In our opinion, until now such an objective was not possible and could not be due to lack of evidence-based explanations of strategic guidance of a holistic educational process, its organizational forms, methods and principles of learning. Lack of scientific learning theory generates a mass educational practice every kind of hobby "innovations" such as Lipetsk experience of Waldorf education, learner-centered, developmental education, endless manipulation of the educational plans and programs, the introduction of universal education, transfer to individual learning, etc., which could not bring the desired results. The quality and effectiveness of the pedagogical process in schools and colleges, which no longer satisfy not only domestic but also international community, due to the fact that the basis of this process is out of date material mechanism that backward educational technology, which doesn’t comply with the new, more complex tasks faced by educational institutions at all levels of multilevel system of training. The transformation of science and didactics in mastering the educational community makes it a direct material strength needed for successful implementation of education reform.

References

1. Энгельс Ф. Диалектика природы// Маркс К., Энгельс Ф. Соч. - т. 20. - С. 343-626.

2. Дьяченко В.К., Кусаинов Г.М. Основы современной дидактики/ Под ред. А.П.Сейтешева. - Алматы: Гылым, 1996. - 384 с.

3.Кусаинов Г.М. Новая педагогическая технология: методология, теория и практика. – Усть-Каменогорск, 1997. – 242 с.

4.Арстанов М.Ж., Пидкасистый П.И., Хайдаров Ж.С. Проблемно-модельное обучение: вопросы теории и технологии. - Алма-Ата: Мектеп,1980. - 208 с.

5.Дьяченко В.К. Наука об обучении и образование XXI века/ Под науч. ред. А.П. Сейтешева. – Алматы: Изд-во «TST-company», 2005. – 486 с.