A goal is a conscious anticipation, expressed in words, of the future result of pedagogical activity. A goal is also understood as a formal description of the final state given to any system.
In the pedagogical literature there are various definitions of goal:
a) the goal is an element of the educational process; system-forming factor;
b) goal (through goal setting) is a stage of managerial activity (self-government) of the teacher and student;
c) the goal is a criterion for the effectiveness of the system, process and management of education as a whole;
d) the goal is what the teacher and the educational institution as a whole strives for.
Goal setting is an integral part of the professional activity of a teacher. They mean the structure, hierarchy and classification of the goals of pedagogical activity. In pedagogical science, goal setting is characterized as a three-component education, which includes: a) justification and setting of goals; b) determining ways to achieve them; c) designing the expected result.
The following types of goal setting are conventionally distinguished:
1) free
2) hard
3) integrated (combining elements of the first two).
With free goal setting, the participants in the interaction develop, construct their own goals, draw up a plan of action in the process of intellectual communication and joint search; free goal setting provides a variety of goals in content for the individual and for the group. These goals reflect the individual needs and capabilities of each person and are focused on individual self-development.
In a hard school, goals and action programs are given to schoolchildren from the outside; only tasks are specified and distributed in the process of interaction. With strict goal setting, the goals are of the same type, but for some they may turn out to be underestimated, for others they may be inaccessible, although outwardly they can unite participants in joint activities.
With integrated goal setting, the goals of the group can be set externally by the teacher, the group leader, but the ways to achieve them and the distribution of actions are carried out in the process of joint search, taking into account the interests and needs of the children.
Goal setting has the following stages:
1) Establish a hierarchy of goals for the 1st and 2nd stages of education (that is, from goals in the socio-pedagogical and general pedagogical sense), determine strategic, tactical and operational goals, then transfer them from the theoretical level to the technological level. If we are talking about an academic subject, the general learning goals for a specific subject, for individual sections and topics of this academic discipline are determined. Taking into account the individual characteristics of schoolchildren, a number of subgoals are set for their individual development. Global educational goals are also specified in the tasks of educational work, taking into account the age of students, their level of education, specific conditions of educational work, and the individual characteristics of those being educated.
2) one should keep in mind the content and organizational aspects of the activity. This can be a physical, intellectual, spiritual, etc. goal. development; formation of will, creative abilities, readiness for self-development. It is necessary to determine the prospects for long-range, medium-range and short-term goals, to establish their logical sequence and successive relationship.
3) analysis of goals from the point of view of their manufacturability and diagnosticity. In other words, goals will then be diagnostic when the exact parameters of activity are formulated; there is a measure for judging the extent to which progress towards the goal is taking place; there is a standard sample as an example of the desired anticipated result. Diagnostic goals are technologically advanced and allow you to accurately determine whether a specific goal has been achieved.
4) Diagnostics of the conditions for upcoming educational activities to achieve the goal.
5) Determining the means of achieving the goal: a) ideal - knowledge, skills and abilities of students, general educational skills, methods and techniques of teaching; b) material - information carriers: textbooks, books, audiovisual and other educational, technical and electronic means, equipment, etc.; c) organization of the educational process at all its stages.
6) Determining the algorithm of activities to achieve the goal: exact instructions, steps and actions leading to achieving the goal.
7) Since the pedagogical process is two-way, it should be remembered that those being educated also form or realize their own goal, sometimes intentional and conscious, sometimes insufficiently meaningful, moreover, favorable or undesirable for the subject of education. The teacher, predicting his actions to achieve the main goal, must adjust them so that the goals interact and do not conflict. And in any case, the teacher sees his main goal at each stage of the educational process as creating the most favorable conditions for students, so that all their potential opportunities for initiative and self-development are fully revealed.
The nature of the joint activities of teachers and students, the type of their interaction (cooperation or suppression), and the position of children and adults, which is manifested in further work, depends on how goal setting is carried out. Goal setting can be successful if it is carried out taking into account the following requirements.
1) Diagnosticity, i.e. putting forward, justifying and adjusting goals based on a constant study of the needs and capabilities of participants in the pedagogical process, as well as the conditions of educational work.
2) Reality, i.e. putting forward and justifying goals taking into account the possibilities of a particular situation. It is necessary to correlate the desired goal and projected results with real conditions.
3) Continuity, which means: a) the implementation of connections between all goals and objectives in the educational process (private and general, individual and group, etc.). b) Promotion and justification of goals at each stage of teaching activity.
4) Identification of goals, which is achieved through the involvement of all participants in the goal-setting process.
5) Focus on results, “measuring” the results of achieving a goal, which is possible if the goals of education are clearly and specifically defined.
The study shows that if goal-setting activity is organized and permeates the entire pedagogical process, then children develop the need for independent goal-setting at the level of group and individual activity. Schoolchildren acquire such important qualities as determination, responsibility, efficiency, and they develop predictive skills.
The meaning and logic of goal setting in pedagogical activity. The goal of pedagogical interaction is a system-forming element of educational technology. The remaining elements depend on it: content, methods, techniques and means of achieving an educational effect. A goal as a scientific concept is an anticipation in the consciousness of the subject of the result towards which his activity is aimed. As a result, in pedagogical literature the goal of education is considered as a mental, predetermined idea of the result of pedagogical interaction, of the qualities and state of the individual that are supposed to be formed. Determining the goals of education is of great practical importance. The pedagogical process is always a purposeful process. Without a clear idea of the goal, it is impossible to achieve the effectiveness of the pedagogical technology used. All this predetermined the essence of the concept of goal setting in educational technology, which means the process of identifying and setting goals and objectives of pedagogical (educational) activities. In educational technology, goals can be of different scales and form a certain hierarchy. The highest level is state goals, public order. We can say that these are goals-values that reflect society’s idea of a person and a citizen of the country. They are developed by specialists, adopted by the government, and recorded in laws and other documents. The next stage is goal-standards, goals of individual educational systems and stages of education, which are reflected in educational programs and standards. The lower level is the goals of educating people of a certain age. At the last two levels, goals in educational technology are usually formulated in terms of behavior, describing the planned actions of those being educated. In this regard, a distinction is made between actual pedagogical tasks and functional pedagogical tasks. The first of them are tasks for changing a person - transferring him from one state of education to another, usually of a higher level. The latter are considered as tasks for the development of specific personality qualities. In the history of human society, the global goals of education have changed and are changing in accordance with philosophical concepts, psychological and pedagogical theories, and the requirements of society for education. For example, in the USA in the 20s of the 20th century, the concept of adapting the individual to life was developed and, with minor changes, continues to be implemented, according to which the school should educate an effective worker, a responsible citizen, a reasonable consumer and a good family man. The humanistic, liberal pedagogy of Western Europe proclaims the goal of education to be the formation of an autonomous personality with critical thinking and independent behavior, realizing one’s needs, including the highest need for self-actualization and the development of the inner “I.” At the same time, various areas of foreign pedagogy are quite distrustful of the presence of mandatory educational goals for all purposes. An extreme expression of this position is the view that school should not set goals for personal formation at all. Its task is to provide information and ensure the right to choose the direction of self-development (existentialism) of a person, his social and personal self-determination. In domestic pedagogy from the 20s to the 90s of the last century, the goal of education was the formation of a comprehensively and harmoniously developed personality. It came from the pedagogical traditions of Ancient Greece, Renaissance Europe, Western and Russian utopians, and French enlighteners. The doctrine of the comprehensive development of the individual as the goal of education was developed by the founders of Marxism, who believed that it was a comprehensively developed personality that was the goal of the historical process. The comprehensive development of the individual as the goal of education is now directly or indirectly affirmed by many countries and the international community, as evidenced by UNESCO documents. All of the above factors determine the relevance and significance of the topic of work at the present stage, aimed at a deep and comprehensive study of the essence and features of goal-setting of the educational process. The topic of the essence and features of goal-setting of the educational process has been poorly studied by domestic teachers, so it is advisable to devote work to systematizing, accumulating and consolidating knowledge about the essence and features of goal-setting of the educational process. The purpose of this work is to highlight issues of methodology, essence and features of goal-setting of the educational process. 1. The essence, meaning of goals and goal setting Solving goal setting problems, as it were, completes the formation of the methodological base of educational technology. However, this does not provide grounds for a preliminary assessment of its effectiveness. This problem is largely eliminated as a result of modeling certain educational technologies at the stage of their theoretical development and justification. When analyzing the essence of pedagogical goals, various researchers adhere to a common position that pedagogical goals represent the expected and possible results of pedagogical activity, which consist in changes in students. These changes may relate to personality type, the person as a whole, or individual properties. N.K. Sergeev (1997, pp. 71 – 74) comes to the conclusion that, by organizing the activity of the student, the teacher, as it were, “builds up” (Yu.N. Kulyutkin) over it: the goals that he sets for himself are a forecast of the possible and desirable advancement of the child in his development; the teacher’s achievement of his goals is possible only through organizing and achieving the goals of adequate student activity; assessment and correction of the progress of the pedagogical process are carried out on the basis of how successful the child’s planned movement is. In connection with the above reasoning, it seems at least dubious to recommend that when developing educational goals, “the goal is formed as the teacher’s idea of the type of experience that a child must acquire in order for his “personal adaptation” to the world around him to take place” (Safronova , 2000, p. 139). The limitation of the category “personal experience” in pedagogical goal-setting, in our opinion, is explained by the initial assumption about the programmability of the educational process, the situations of the pupil’s upcoming life activity, from the predictability and predetermined nature of his life. Thus, these ideas are based on an understanding of the pupil’s “exposure” to culture, characteristic of the learning situation, and an understanding of the pupil’s changes as quantitative accumulations, which is clearly not enough in education (from the standpoint of “independence”, the formation of human quality). Experience cannot be the goal of education, since experience is conclusions from the past. It can only be the basis for forming one’s own position as a conceptually meaningful look into the future. Forming a position requires a theoretical approach; in this we see a contradiction with the empirical essence of experience. “Personal experience”, as shown in the study by N.K. Sergeeva (1998, pp. 30 – 31), however, can be an essential component of the content of education. In this understanding, a logical chain of the educational process “situation - activity - experience - position” is built. The situation here is the main means, activity is a procedural characteristic, experience is the content, and the subject position is the goal of education. Although this scheme is quite conventional. Pedagogical thought comes to the denial of the idea of arbitrary formation of personality in accordance with a given standard; this denial comes from the idea of human formation. O.E. Lebedev (1992, p. 43) identifies the following methodological requirements for determining the goals of education: - the goals of education must reflect the real capabilities of the education system in personal development; - they cannot act as a specification of the social functions of the education system; - these goals cannot be a specification of the ideal personality, because the potential of the education system will always be insufficient for the formation of an ideal personality; - the social functions of the education system and the ideal of the individual can act as criteria for selecting educational goals; - it is necessary to distinguish between the goals of education, the goals of education, the goals of training, and the goals of development of the education system. Next, Lebedev makes an attempt to highlight the specifics of the educational goals presented in table. 3. Table 3 Types of pedagogical goals Educational goals Educational goals Learning goals Model delayed pedagogical results Model immediate pedagogical results Model predicted results Model planned and predicted results Model personality type Model personality quality(s) Model the development of individual personal structures Infinite goals Finite (FOOTNOTE: Available meaning: “finite, associated with a finite number” (from the Latin finites - final (See: Dictionary of Foreign Words, 1989, p. 524.)) goals The table shows that the goals of education should be understood as predictable, realistic ones. achievable results of pedagogical activities in the formation and development of the basic personality type (Lebedev, 1992, p. 46). 2. Features of the goal-setting process A pedagogical goal presupposes appropriate activity, i.e. impact on the process of personality formation and corresponding changes in this process. The famous writer S. Soloveichik states: “A teacher, like an artist, acts not according to a plan, not according to an abstract idea, not according to a given list of some qualities and not according to a model, but according to an image. Each of us, even if we don’t know it, has the image of an Ideal Child in our heads, and we, unnoticed by ourselves, try to bring our real child under this ideal image” (Soloveitchik, 1989, p. 122). The peculiarity of such a goal is undifferentiation, integrity. At the same time, the personality is considered as a whole, and not reduced, not “pulled apart”, divided into individual qualities. But pedagogical activity in this case is built spontaneously, by trial and error: “it worked, it didn’t work.” In various studies, the “goal of the process” and the “goal of the result” (Z.I. Vasilyeva), “goal-result” and “goal-expectation” (N.K. Sergeev), as well as “goal-ideal” (V. N. Sagatovsky), which sets the direction for the entire movement of the pedagogical process. “In special pedagogical contexts,” argued A.S. Makarenko, – it is unacceptable to talk only about the ideal of education, as is appropriate in philosophical statements. The teacher is required not to solve the problem of an ideal, but to solve the problem of ways to this ideal. This means that pedagogy must develop the most complex question about the goal of education and the method of approaching this goal” (1977, p. 30). Thus, the ideal is not yet a pedagogical goal. We consider it important to note that setting a pedagogical goal means determining those changes in the personality of the student that the teacher wants to achieve. The meaning of goal setting in the educational process is to direct it to the individual goals of the teacher of the students, which always exist, even if these goals are not realized. A.V. Petrovsky (see: Psychology of the Developing Personality, 1987, p. 155) revealed that “for teachers of the creative type, the nature of interaction with the student has a subject-object-subject structure, i.e. the transformation of the student’s personal and semantic sphere is the goal of the pedagogical process, and not a means of solving situational educational problems.” The personal orientation of education assumes that “the most perfect values of the human race must, as it were, be born anew in its [person’s] experience, otherwise they simply cannot be adequately appropriated, i.e. gain personal meaning" (Serikov, 1994, p. 18). Based on this position, we consider it necessary to clarify our previous thesis: the educational goal formulates the desired changes in the human quality of the pupil, his views, attitudes, and position. The real sources of pedagogical goal setting are 1) the pedagogical request of society as its need for a certain type of education, expressed in objective trends in the development of society and in the consciously expressed educational requests of citizens; 2) a child, a subject of childhood as a special social reality that has independent value not only as a period of preparation for something, and 3) a teacher as a bearer of human essence, as a special social subject who most effectively realizes the “essential ability to create another” (I A. Kolesnikova). The proportion of these source factors at different stages of the development of the education process and the specification of its goals may change, but none of them disappears. It is known that teachers, as a rule, understand the general educational tasks quite deeply, but they find it difficult (and sometimes consider it unnecessary) to specify them into tasks of joint activities with students. They often underestimate the special work with students to comprehend and “assign” the goals of the activity. Such assignment of goals is possible provided there is unity of meaning. The category of meaning helps to distinguish between the goals of teachers and students. “It can be argued,” believes E.V. Titova (1995, p. 97) - that the meaning of the teacher’s activity is not to directly and directly influence the child’s personality, trying to “transform” it, but to organize the child’s activity, in which his personality." The statement, which is quite controversial in terms of the possibilities of activity, turns out to be impeccable in its statement about the meaning, even if we put the pupil in the place of the teacher. And such verification is necessary when it comes to education as an activity, event, state. Thus, the meaning of activities in education for a child and a teacher may be common, but the goals, as a rule, are different. It is known that pedagogical laws (unlike the laws of nature) are statistical in nature, i.e. the probability of their action is not one hundred percent. Pedagogical law cannot inevitably predetermine the achievement of the intended result. Therefore, even a pedagogical goal based on scientific knowledge will not be realistic if it does not take into account the individual’s own activity, his selectivity, self-development, and integrity. According to the ideas of the activity approach, it can be considered legitimate to single out positing as a necessary link in any activity (A.V. Brushlinsky, A.N. Leontyev, O.K. Tikhomirov, etc.) and to single out an independent type of activity, the product of which is the goal (N.N. Trubnikov, A.I. Yatsenko, etc.). At the same time, goal setting is most often understood as an ideal process of goal formation unfolded over time. Its result is the formulation of a goal. Being a special type of activity that develops a goal, positing cannot be only a mental process. V.N. Zuev (1986, p. 262) considers the process of goal setting as an inextricable unity of two moments: the ideal setting of a goal by theoretical activity - goal formation and its real setting outside, in objective reality - goal realization. V.V. Serikov (1999, pp. 48 – 49) distinguishes two stages in the process of goal setting: emergence and concretization. The logic of goal setting cannot be reduced to an ideological component; it has its own pedagogical laws, and the basis for determining the content of education is, as a rule, in-depth research into the educational needs of various strata of society and social forecasts. S.A. Raschetina (1988, pp. 31 – 33), among the features of goal setting within the framework of subject-subject relations, highlights awareness and assessment of: - the subject of joint activity from the position of another person; - the inner world of another person as an equal subject of setting and realizing a goal; - your own inner world, your actions to set and realize goals from the position of another person. This or that way of understanding a person, determining one’s own value attitude towards him is a condition for self-determination of the individual. In this sense, the moment of concrete contact with another consciousness helps “to develop and change the attitude towards oneself, to reevaluate and modify one’s internal experience, to look at oneself as if with “different eyes”” (Rodionova, 1981, p. 183). Thus, S.A. Raschetina (1988) defines goal setting on the part of one’s subject-subject characteristics as awareness and assessment of personal qualities and relationships necessary to achieve the goal of an activity based on their correlation with the qualities and relationships of other goal-setting subjects. The act of goal setting, therefore, conceals within itself the possibility of deploying reflexive processes that play an important role in the processes of self-education of subjects of activity. This provision is also true for subjects of the educational process who believe and implement the goals of self-education. 3. Methodology of goal setting Traditionally, the goal of education was presented as an order of society, expressed in a personality model, in a standard of education and behavior. As O.E. concludes in his study. Lebedev (1992, p. 40), “the thesis about the social determination of goals cannot be doubted, but the concept of “order” requires critical analysis.” Also Yu.K. Babansky (1977, p. 12) drew attention to the fact that when determining goals, one should take into account not only social requirements, but also the capabilities of the educational system itself and the conditions in which the learning process takes place. The practice of education has shown the reality and danger of transforming the idea of “social order” into the idea of “state order”. As society renewed itself, the need to overcome the idea of “social order” and to identify new approaches to defining pedagogical goals became increasingly apparent. A.S. Arsenyev, based on an analysis of the basic principles of Marx’s concept of the goals of human activity, came to two fundamental conclusions: a) the main goal of education should be a person as an end in itself; material ends, while they still remain, must be considered as subordinate to this main purpose; b) there is an antinomy between the goals of scientific education and personal development. Resolution of this antinomy is possible on the basis of a hierarchization of goals, in which the highest goal is the formation of a moral personality (see: Philosophical and psychological problems... 1981). The teacher himself, as a rule, is not mentioned among the sources of educational goals. He is traditionally assigned the role of executor of “projects” and “technologies”. “In every professional activity,” says V.P. Bespalko (1989, p. 11), - the personality traits mediate the technology of work, but it is only mediated, not determined.” “Or maybe teaching activity is just one of the few unique realities in which the individual not only mediates, but rather determines the goal and content of the process?” - V.V. notes about this. Serikov (1999, p. 52). The pedagogical process, among other things, is also the self-realization of the teacher, who with a certain independence sets his own goals, content, and means. And any “project”, “order”, etc., must be accepted by him before it reaches the student. Even if he is offered another, more “scientifically” set goal, in which he does not see the opportunity to realize himself, he will still not achieve it. No matter how technologized education is, it is, first of all, the communication of souls, and then the functioning of “programs”, “systems”, etc. Transformation of a teacher into a performer, i.e. depriving him of his own subjectivity automatically deprives him of the opportunity to perform educational functions. The emergence in the state of a monopolist on the development of the ideal of the individual is a sure sign of authoritarianism, dictatorship in the country. In the process of research, we developed and turned out to be effective the following recommendations for teachers on goal setting: 1. When defining the ideal of education, we must remember that in its formation we are forced to go from universal human values through the values of national culture, traditions of the region, social group to the views of a particular family and the a growing person for his future. Therefore, it is important to stop in time to detail the ideal image of your pupil. 2. In the process of goal setting, as we see, our mastery of methods of psychological and pedagogical diagnostics plays an important role. The teacher must not only have a sufficient number of mastered techniques, but also construct from them a program for studying the child and groups of students. Moreover, the study should be woven into the educational process, and not represent a separate activity, additional to the main one. 3. You should protect yourself from pettiness, from the desire to “fit” each specific child to the formulated ideal. Firstly, one can never be completely sure that this ideal is formulated correctly. Secondly, it is always difficult to carry out a sufficiently complete diagnosis of the selected qualities and properties. Thirdly, a person is constantly changing and “yesterday’s” knowledge about him may not be applicable today. Finally, the issue of taking into account the self-development of the student’s personality is problematic. To what extent should a teacher follow the student’s self-development prospects? What if this is the identity of the offender, the criminal? In the practice of educational work, collective forms of discussion help to answer many questions: a pedagogical council, a small teachers' council. Here, on the basis of knowledge, experience and the results of studying students by many teachers, it is possible to optimally solve problems related to the development of educational goals, the selection of pedagogical means and the analysis of achieved results. 4. Only this step will allow us to formulate an educational goal. At the same time, it is important to take into account not only the time, but also the means that the teacher has to achieve an educational result. It turns out that goal setting is a central point in the design of the pedagogical process (as, indeed, of any activity). But the goal has been set. Before we begin to implement it, let’s stop and evaluate how correctly it is delivered. After all, an erroneously chosen goal almost guarantees us fruitless efforts to achieve it. When solving the problem of competently setting the goal of educational work, one should answer the questions: 1) can the formulated phrase be called a goal, i.e. does it determine the result of the activity that should be achieved, or only outlines the direction of movement; 2) is this an educational goal, i.e. does it determine educational activities aimed at qualitative changes in the child, and not organizational, environmental, etc.; 3) does this goal take into account the holistic character of a person, i.e. the presence in it of a system of various interrelated properties, among which there are leading ones (for example, citizenship, readiness to work, morality); 4) is it real, i.e. whether the goal setting assumes a certain period of time and means to achieve it. The goal setting process described above is quite difficult. How, for example, can one determine the educational purpose of a lesson? What qualities or properties can be developed in 40 - 45 minutes? And some people think that expressions like “instill respect for work” or “continue to develop self-awareness” save the day. But to educate does not mean to educate, to move does not mean to achieve a result. Such “relief” only hides the teacher’s lack of a conscious goal, and therefore reduces her effectiveness and job satisfaction. To excite the forces of self-propulsion, and not to “sculpt” your ideal image from a child - this is the main meaning of the teacher’s activity. It is expressed by the ancient wisdom that “a student is not a vessel that needs to be filled, but a torch that needs to be lit.” Hence an additional requirement for setting educational goals: maximum consideration of the student’s own activity. Conclusion Thus, the goal itself and the process of goal setting in the structure of educational activity perform the functions of managing the educational process. The effectiveness of goal setting increases if it is based on a forecast (identification of intentional characteristics) of the educational process and a conceptual vision of the result of education as the acquisition of “human quality in a person.” The choice of educational goals should not be voluntary. It is determined by the methodology of pedagogy, philosophical ideas about the goals and values of society, as well as socio-economic, political and other features of the development of society and the state. In the new socio-economic and political conditions of the development of our country, the comprehensive development of the individual as the goal of education is assessed very critically. However, not all experts share this position. This is explained by the fact that until the 90s, the goals of education were determined by the needs of an authoritarian state and were ideological in nature, but now, scientists believe, education must be based on the individual’s needs for self-realization, in the development of everyone’s abilities. Therefore, the goal of education, towards which modern educational technologies must be oriented, is formulated in the most general form as creating conditions for the diversified development of the individual. In this regard, in the Law of the Russian Federation “On Education”, the solution of educational tasks in the educational process is aimed at developing an individual’s life self-determination, creating conditions for his self-realization, forming a citizen integrated into society and aimed at its improvement. Consequently, the ideological approach to setting educational goals is replaced by a personal one, which gives the pedagogical technologies developed and implemented in Russian society the features of Western humanistic pedagogy.
Goal formation and goal setting are an integral part of the professional activity of a teacher, his analytical, prognostic, design abilities and skills.
The teacher formulates specific goals and objectives of teaching and education at the microsocial, interpersonal and personal levels. The goals and objectives of the pedagogical process in educational institutions are usually combined into three groups: the goals and objectives of teaching, the goals and objectives of education, the goals and objectives of development.
In the context of the technological approach, a goal is a norm that prescribes an idea of the result or an image of the desired result. Famous scientist-teacher M.V. Klarin described possible (typical) ways of setting problems encountered in school practice. Let us briefly describe them.
1 .Defining tasks through the content being studied. The area of knowledge that is studied in the lesson is indicated (for example, study the content of the chapters of a work or study the rule of the Russian language). This method does not allow us to judge in the future how these problems have been solved.
2. Defining tasks through teacher activities(introduce students to..., explain..., demonstrate...). This is essentially planning by the teacher of his own activities and it also does not provide an indication of learning outcomes.
3. Setting goals through internal processes of student personal development(to form the ability to observe, analyze or develop interest in...). This method is possible for setting tasks in the process of studying a major topic, section of the curriculum, i.e. for a series of lessons. However, such tasks are not specific.
4. Setting goals through student learning activities(for example, analyzing the content of a work, performing exercises on the wall bars, etc.). Also, learning outcomes are not indicated.
5. Most technologically advanced formulate learning objectives as expected (intermediate) learning outcomes, expressed in the actions of the student, which the teacher himself or another expert can reliably identify.
In any case, the purpose and objectives of the lesson should be clearly and concisely formulated. They should, if possible, reflect expected changes in students’ knowledge, in their attitudes to the world and themselves, and in practical skills. The effectiveness of the lesson as a whole is assessed primarily by the fact that the lesson’s objectives are solved. You cannot define the objectives of a lesson with general phrases and expressions like “teaching to read.”
The teacher begins practical work on goal setting by defining the main didactic goal of the lesson. To set it up, it is necessary to analyze the content of the educational material of the entire topic and distribute its study across lessons. The didactic goal depends on the type of lesson. If the lesson is introductory, then a possible goal is formulated: “Give a general idea of ...”; if the lesson of learning new knowledge is “Study...”; if the lesson is to consolidate knowledge, develop skills and abilities - “To consolidate ... knowledge, form ... skills, ... skills”; if the lesson in generalizing and systematizing knowledge is “Summarize knowledge, bring it into a system”; if the lesson of testing, assessing and correcting knowledge, abilities and skills is “Determine the level of assimilation of knowledge, abilities, skills and their application.”
The main didactic goal of the lesson involves setting and solving teaching, educational and developmental tasks. Learning Objectives include students’ mastery of a knowledge system, the basics of a scientific worldview, and practical skills. Educational tasks contribute to the formation of a positive attitude towards knowledge, the learning process, and cognition in general; relationships to the world and oneself, expressed in ideas, views, beliefs, qualities, assessments, self-esteem of the individual; gaining behavioral experience. Development objectives contribute to: the formation of general educational and special skills, the improvement of mental operations; the development of the emotional sphere, monologue speech of students, question-answer form, dialogue, communicative culture, the implementation of self-control and self-esteem, and in general - the formation and development of personality.
In the process of goal setting, the teacher can begin formulating goals and objectives with verbs that characterize the content of the educational material, the activities of the teacher, and the activities of the student. For example, learning objectives can be formulated as follows: “to ensure that students understand the content of the educational material; level of its assimilation; applying knowledge in practice in a standard, non-standard or creative situation; generalize..., systematize..., continue the formation...", the tasks of education are "to create conditions for...; contribute to the discovery of... abilities; arouse interest..."; development tasks “to promote the development..., help...etc.”
In the process of goal setting, one should also take into account the nomenclature of the beginning of the formulation of educational goals and objectives, proposed in the educational standards approved by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Belarus. In educational standards, the goals of studying an academic discipline are developed as a hierarchy of requirements for basic, advanced and in-depth levels of student training and are specified as planned learning outcomes.
I.P. Podlasy proposes the following algorithm (requirements) for translating the general goal of the lesson into tasks that represent specific steps to achieve the goal:
break down the overall goal of the lesson into its component parts;
each part of the goal is formulated as a separate task;
tasks do not overlap each other;
tasks are not repeated;
the teacher’s tasks are transformed into the students’ tasks;
the tasks are clearly defined;
the tasks are formulated briefly.
No less difficult for a teacher is the problem of coordinating the goals and objectives of his activities with the goals and objectives of the student. The goals and objectives of the lesson, designed by the teacher, should be such “as if the student had set them for himself, understandable to him, obvious in their meaning, assimilated with interest and eagerness” (S.I. Gessen). The question of how the goal set by the teacher is “appropriated” by the students and becomes their own goal is still very far from being resolved.
At primary school age, goals should be of a vital and practical nature. In the older years - to be consistent with the inclinations of individual students, to be individualized. So that the studenthas formulated and appropriated a goal, he must be confronted with a situation in which he will discover a deficiency in his knowledge and skills. A student cannot study well if he has not realized and accepted the goals and objectives of the activities in the lesson as his own, and then has not implemented them.
Since the goal, tasks, means of solving them and the result are common to the teacher and the student, the formulations may provide for the option of joint activity between the teacher and the student. For example, the teacher says: “In this lesson, you and I will try to answer the question... understand the problem... or we will try to generalize, systematize... we will study or learn to research on our own...”, etc.
Coordination of goals lies in the fact that the teacher knows how to translate educational and educational goals into the goals of the student’s activities. The ability to coordinate the goals and objectives of the subjects of activity in the lesson is one of the criteria of pedagogical mastery.
At the same time, even the most perfect system of learning goals and objectives will be of little help to practice if the teacher does not have a correct idea of the ways to achieve these goals through the activities of students and the sequence of their individual actions.
The goal is a system-forming (determining) element of pedagogical activity. The goal of education is a mental, predetermined idea of the results of the pedagogical process, of the qualities and state of the individual that are supposed to be formed.
Goal setting in pedagogy is a conscious process of identifying and setting goals and objectives of pedagogical activity.
Goals can be of different scales and form a stepwise system:
State goals
Goals of individual educational systems and stages of education
The goals of teaching a particular subject or raising children of a certain age
The goals of a particular topic, lesson or educational event.
You can also highlight:
Global or ideal goal,
Specific historical
The purpose of the activity of a teacher, educator in the specific conditions of the pedagogical process, a personal goal.
The global (ideal) goal of education is to raise a comprehensively developed personality. This goal was first formulated in the works of thinkers of the past (Aristotle, Confucius, etc.). Scientific justification for this goal was made in the 19th century.
A specific historical goal is a goal formulated taking into account the characteristics of the historical stage of development of society. Currently, it is aimed at developing civic responsibility and legal self-awareness; spirituality and culture; initiative, independence; tolerance; ability for successful socialization in society and active adaptation in the labor market.
The purpose of the teacher’s activity specifies the designated goals, taking into account the characteristics of students, personal experience and the capabilities of a particular educational institution.
A personal (individual) goal reflects the needs of each individual for self-development.
The need for comprehensive personal development is justified:
High level of technical and economic development requirements for personal qualities;
The need of the person himself to develop his inclinations in order to survive in the conditions of the struggle for existence in a rapidly changing world.
In the history of pedagogy there have been different approaches to determining the essence of this goal. Currently it focuses on:
Comprehensive development of the child’s inclinations,
Unlocking his creative potential,
Formation of socially and personally significant qualities.
Focusing on the pedagogical needs of society, the needs of the child and his parents, and his own capabilities, the teacher organizes goal setting.
Goal setting is distinguished:
Free,
Hard,
Integrated.
When free, joint (teacher and students) design and determination of educational goals is organized.
In a hard school, both goals and a program of action are given to schoolchildren by the teacher.
When integrated, goals can be set externally by the teacher, and the program of actions to achieve them is determined jointly.
The sources of goal setting are:
pedagogical demand of society;
Pedagogical goal setting includes the following stages:
1) diagnostics of the educational process, analysis of the results of previous activities;
2) modeling by the teacher of educational goals and objectives;
3) organization of collective goal setting;
4) clarifying goals and objectives, making adjustments, drawing up a program of pedagogical actions.
Goal setting involves highlighting the perspective of intermediate goals (A.S. Makarenko defined these goals as close, medium and long-term prospects), as well as setting educational goals as ways to achieve them.
In pedagogy it is customary to distinguish:
Proper pedagogical tasks (SPZ)
Functional pedagogical tasks (FPZ).
SPZ are tasks aimed at changing the student and his personal qualities (for example, developing responsibility), and FPZ are tasks of a separate pedagogical action (for example, one of the tasks of holding a school disco will be teaching children the ability to organize their leisure time).
Tasks should be determined by the initial level of development of the individual and the team; be sure to express what needs to be changed in the individual, be diagnostic (their results can be verified); specific, achievable within the planned period.
6. EDUCATIONAL PROCESS (EP)– this is a purposeful activity for training, education and development of an individual through organized educational and educational processes in conjunction with the self-education of this individual, ensuring the acquisition of knowledge, skills and abilities at a level not lower than the state educational standard.
The educational process must be considered as an integral dynamic system, the system-forming factor of which is the goal of pedagogical activity - human education. This system has specific procedural components. The most significant of them are the processes of training and education, which lead to internal processes of change in education, good manners and personality development. The processes of training and education also consist of certain processes. For example, the learning process consists of the interconnected processes of teaching and learning, education - from the process of educational influences, the process of their acceptance by the individual and the resulting process of self-education.
The educational process as a system functions in certain external conditions: natural-geographical, social, industrial, cultural, the environment of the school and its microdistrict. Intra-school conditions include educational-material, school-hygienic, moral-psychological and aesthetic.
The internal driving force of the educational program is the resolution of the contradiction between the put forward requirements and the real capabilities of students to implement them. This contradiction becomes a source of development if the requirements put forward are in the zone of proximal development of the students’ capabilities, and vice versa, such a contradiction will not contribute to the optimal development of the system if the tasks turn out to be excessively difficult or easy.
The dynamism of the educational program is achieved through the interaction of its three structures: 1) pedagogical; 2) methodological; 3) psychological.
The pedagogical structure of the EP is a system of four elements: a) target; b) meaningful; c) operational and activity-based; d) analytical-effective. The target component involves teachers and students determining the goals of their educational and extracurricular activities, the content component involves determining the content of the educational process based on the goals, and the operational component involves organizing joint activities of teachers and students. The analytical-resultative component includes analysis of results and correction of pedagogical tasks.
The methodological structure of the EP includes the following elements: a) learning (upbringing) objectives; b) successive stages of a teacher’s activity; c) successive stages of student activity.
The psychological structure of OP is represented by a combination of three elements: 1) processes of perception, thinking, comprehension, memorization, assimilation of information; 2) students’ expression of interest, inclinations, motivation for learning, dynamics of emotional mood; 3) rises and falls of physical and neuropsychic stress, dynamics of activity.
Among the goals of the EP are regulatory state, public and initiative ones. Regulatory state goals are the most general goals defined in regulatory legal acts and state education standards. Social goals are the goals of various segments of society, reflecting their needs, interests and requests for professional training. Initiative goals are direct goals developed by practicing teachers themselves and their students, taking into account the type of educational institution, specialization profile and academic subject, as well as the level of development of students and the preparedness of teachers.
In the “educational process” system, certain subjects interact. On the one hand, the school management, teachers, educators, teaching staff, and parents act as pedagogical subjects; on the other hand, the roles of both subjects and objects are students, staff, certain groups of schoolchildren engaged in one or another type of activity, and also individual students.
The essence of OP is the transmission of social experience by elders and its assimilation by younger generations through their interaction.
The main characteristic of the educational program is the subordination of its three components (teaching and educational, educational and cognitive, self-educational processes) to a single goal.
The complex dialectic of relations within the pedagogical process lies in: 1) the unity and independence of the processes that form it; 2) subordination of the separate systems included in it; 3) the presence of the general and the preservation of the specific.
In the pedagogical process, not only the goal itself is important, but also how it is determined and developed. In this case, it is necessary to talk about goal-setting, goal-setting activity. The goal becomes the driving force of the educational process if it is significant for all participants in this process and appropriated by them. The latter is achieved as a result of pedagogically organized goal setting.
In pedagogical science, goal setting is characterized as a three-component education, which includes: a) justification and setting of goals; b) determining ways to achieve them; c) designing the expected result.
Goal setting is a continuous process. The non-identity of the goal and the actually achieved result become the basis for rethinking, returning to what was, searching for unrealized opportunities from the perspective of the outcome and prospects for the development of the pedagogical process. This leads to constant and endless goal setting.
The nature of the joint activities of teachers and students, the type of their interaction (cooperation or suppression), and the position of children and adults, which is manifested in further work, depends on how goal setting is carried out.
Pedagogical goal setting can be conditionally represented in general terms by the following stages:
1) diagnostics of the pedagogical process, analysis of the results of previous joint activities of the participants;
2) modeling by organizers and teachers of educational and educational goals and objectives, possible results;
3) organization of collective goal-setting, joint goal-setting activities of teachers, students, parents;
4) teachers clarify educational goals and objectives, make adjustments to initial plans, draw up a program of pedagogical actions for their implementation, taking into account the suggestions of children, parents and predicted results.
Levels of goal setting
First level - The image of the final result of the educational activities of the entire society. Social educational order.
Second level - The image of socially desirable personal preparedness at the level of educational aspirations Implementation of social order in specific educational systems.
The third level is the level of purpose and meaning of a person’s life, his need for self-realization.
Principles of training
Ya.A. Comenius identified the following principles.
1. Conformity with nature - proper upbringing must be in accordance with nature.
2. Sequence of teaching subjects.
3. Visualization - learning to start with things, phenomena of objects.
4. Systematic training - do not make leaps in training.
5. Consciousness of teaching - do not offer for memory what is not understandable by reason.
6.Feasibility - take into account the capabilities of students.
7. The strength of learning is not to rush, but to move forward slowly.
Later, other principles were identified.
The scientific principle is, first of all, implemented in the selection of educational content and its compliance with the modern level of development of science and technology. This principle is fundamental in the development of didactic units: curricula, programs, textbooks. This principle is manifested in the teacher’s activities when teaching specific disciplines, when he applies study methods that are adequate to the relevant sciences. In the learning process, it is necessary for schoolchildren to master the skills and experience of scientific research, methods of scientific organization of educational work. This goal can be achieved by using problem situations in the classroom and organizing student research activities, mastering the skills of observation, analysis, synthesis, generalization, induction and deduction in the learning process.
The principle of connecting theory with practice and with life expresses the need to prepare students for the correct use of theoretical knowledge in a variety of practical situations, for the transformation of the surrounding reality.
The principle of unity of knowledge and behavior. This principle follows from the law of the unity of consciousness and activity, recognized in Russian psychology and pedagogy, according to which consciousness arises, is formed and manifests itself in activity. When implementing this principle, it is necessary to organize the activities of children and children's groups so that its participants are constantly convinced of the truth and vital necessity of the knowledge and ideas they receive, and practice socially valuable behavior.
Principles of education
The principles of organizing the educational process (principles of education) are general starting points that express the basic requirements for the content, methods, and organization of the educational process. Let us characterize the requirements for these principles.
Commitment. The principles of education are not advice or recommendations; they require mandatory and complete implementation into practice. Gross and systematic violation of principles, ignoring their requirements not only reduce the effectiveness of the educational process, but also undermine its foundations. A teacher who violates the requirements of the principles is removed from leading this process, and for gross and deliberate violation of some of them - for example, the principles of humanism, respect for the individual - may even be subject to prosecution.
Complexity. The principles of education imply their simultaneous, and not alternate, isolated application at all stages of the educational process; are used not in a chain, but frontally and all at once.
Equivalence. The principles of education as general fundamental principles are equivalent; among them there are no major and minor ones, or those that require implementation in the first place, and those whose implementation can be postponed until tomorrow. Equal attention to all principles prevents possible violations of the educational process.
At the same time, the principles of education are not ready-made recipes, much less universal rules, guided by which educators could automatically achieve high results. They do not replace any special knowledge, experience, or skill of the teacher. Although the requirements of the principles are the same for everyone, their practical implementation is individually determined.
The principles on which the educational process is based make up the system. There are and have been many educational systems. And naturally, the character, individual requirements of the principles, and sometimes the principles themselves cannot remain unchanged in them. The modern domestic education system is guided by the following principles:
- social orientation of education;
- connection between education and life, work;
- reliance on the positive in education;
- unity of educational influences.
The system often also includes principles humanization, personal (individual) approach, national character of education and other provisions. It should be noted that the humanization of education and a personality-oriented approach are considered by most teachers as common to effective modern education. And there are conflicting views on the principle of national education in such a multinational state as Russia.