Analysis of the problem series of pedagogical theories of a humanistic orientation
Now let us consider the following series of theories: Plato → E. Rotterdam → Comenius → Russo → Humboldt → Diesterweg.
Many pedagogues addressed and addressed to the theme of humanism (from Latin humanitas - humanity), except for the above-listed authors (including such authoritative researchers as, for example, psychologists A. Maslow and K. Rogers).
Humanistic ideas with their emphasis on the fate of man are known from a distant Antiquity. The brightest representative of ancient humanism is Plato. Erasmus of Rotterdam is a representative of the revivalist humanism, which in its orientation was primarily humanitarian, aesthetic, and often opposed to Aristotelianism, which gravitates toward logic and natural science. Comenius' humanism was painted in Christian colors. Rousseau belonged to enlightened humanism (he welcomed only natural religion). V. von Humboldt gravitated toward neo-humanism, close to German romanticism of the XIX century. Diesterweg - focused on humanism enlightening sense.
Humanism has repeatedly been severely criticized. He was accused of sentimentality and rhetoric. Particularly negative were the poststructuralists, in particular Foucault and Lyotard, who believed that humanism offers an all-embracing abstract concept that can easily be put to the service of repressive regimes. Supporters of humanism, responding to their critics, noted that, opposing all forms of intransigence and suppression, it is impossible to do without humanistic terminology. They are ready to recognize the need to rethink humanism in new historical conditions.
We are forced to state that among the main philosophical trends of modernity there is no humanism and this, apparently, is not accidental. We believe that he lacks the metascientific conceptual detail. Whenever the doctrine of an authoritative philosopher-humanist is considered, it turns out that it has a quite definite basis (for example, Plato's humanism comes down to his political theory of justice and the epistemological concept of ideas).
Turning to humanistic pedagogy, it is reasonable, especially by virtue of the criticism discussed above, to reflect its most striking features (so that all the provisions of humanistic pedagogy point to humanism, and not to any other concepts). Having carried out a number of studies, we decided to address the ten principles of K. Rogers.
1. Man has the natural makings necessary for learning.
2. Successful learning takes place when the student perceives the subject as necessary for him to achieve his goals. In this case, the training is carried out as quickly as possible.
3. Teaching, which requires the student to change the inherent way of self-organization, is perceived as threatening his well-being, and therefore rejected.
4. Training that carries with it some threats to students is perceived better if these threats are minimized.
5. With minimal threats, training can be carried out in various ways.
6. A lot of training is achieved through practical actions.
7. Learning a student is facilitated if he himself refers to him with due responsibility.
8. The most productive is the training, which is conducted on the initiative of the student and includes the fullness of his feelings and intellect.
9. Independence, creativity and independence of students are especially effective if they are based on self-criticism and self-evaluation. External criticism is perceived as secondary.
10. The most socially useful learning is the study of himself, accompanied by the receptivity of experience and inclusion of himself in the process of change.
For the sake of completeness, let us cite one more generalization of the principles of humanistic pedagogy, which belongs to the modern author.
1. Accounting for the impact of the emotionally stimulating learning environment in training programs, encouraging student initiative, an interdisciplinary approach, self-regulation and freedom, coupled with a sense of responsibility.
2. The emphasis is on warm, open relations between participants in pedagogical interaction, the absence of biased judgments and threats on the part of the teacher, and the establishment of constructive interpersonal relationships in the learning group.
3. Structuring the educational process by the teacher and students on a "solidarity basis", which is accepted by both parties.
4. Limiting the role of the teacher to the role of a consultant and a "source of knowledge", always ready to help.
5. Creating for each student a real possibility of choosing "cognitive alternatives" and the desire of the teacher to encourage students to self-realization in a form determined by the level of their development.
6. Evaluation of the educational program in terms of maximum opportunities for developing creative potential and stimulating students' creative abilities.
7. A joint discussion by the teacher and students of the problems of the progress of cognition and the methods of its evaluation, the refusal to use marks as a form of pressure on students.
All these principles of humanistic pedagogy seem to us attractive. But do they refute the argument about the insufficient elaboration of its conceptual structure? We believe that no. Why? Because there are significant ambiguities regarding the nature of the method of humanistic pedagogy. Almost all of its provisions can be found in other pedagogical systems. But each time their quintessence expresses some method. Let's compare humanistic pedagogy with other systems. Phenomenologists are fervent about a person, but they are guided by the method of synthesis of sensory impressions. Hermeneuta, again caring about the fortunate fate of man, guided by a dialogical method. Poststructuralists, trying to preserve the identity of each individual, also offer various methods, in particular Dirid's aporetics. In humanistic pedagogy there is no method appropriate to its direction. Appeal is: love students (!), But there is no method. Humanistic pedagogy is far from metascience.
1. The humanistic direction in pedagogy lacks a clear definition of the scientific method by which its enthusiasts are guided.
2. In our opinion, if we follow the meta-scientific approach and bring it to meta-scientific ethics, then the need for a special humanistic method is no longer needed.
Also We Can Offer!
- Argumentative essay
- Best college essays
- Buy custom essays online
- Buy essay online
- Cheap essay
- Cheap essay writing service
- Cheap writing service
- College essay
- College essay introduction
- College essay writing service
- Compare and contrast essay
- Custom essay
- Custom essay writing service
- Custom essays writing services
- Death penalty essay
- Do my essay
- Essay about love
- Essay about yourself
- Essay help
- Essay writing help
- Essay writing service reviews
- Essays online
- Fast food essay
- George orwell essays
- Human rights essay
- Narrative essay
- Pay to write essay
- Personal essay for college
- Personal narrative essay
- Persuasive writing
- Write my essay
- Write my essay for me cheap
- Writing a scholarship essay