Insufficient feedback. Having presented a particular topic, novice teachers often only formally inquire: “Is everything clear? Have questions? “If there are no questions, the teacher continues the lesson. But the absence of questions does not necessarily mean that the material has been mastered. Many students are embarrassed to ask questions.

Some people believe that frequently turning to the teacher with questions indicates a student's negative qualities. Instead of asking the whole class a question, the teacher should determine the level of initial mastery of the material by addressing individual students. Only after making sure that the material presented is understood can the teacher move forward. If an individual survey reveals a misunderstanding of the material, additional explanation and subsequent discussion are obviously required.

Incorrect conduct of the survey. When conducting a survey, typical mistakes teachers make are:

· requirement for verbatim reproduction of material;

· satisfaction with the mechanical reproduction of the material. The ability to literally reproduce a text does not always mean understanding it. Academic work involves conscious, rather than mechanical, assimilation of material. In order for conscious assimilation of the material to occur, the survey must include questions that require assessment, analysis, comparisons, contrasting comparisons, generalization, and a critical look;

· indicating the name of the person answering before asking the question; in this case, only the one who was called will reflect on the question;

· demanding an immediate response from the student. It is necessary to give the student time to collect his thoughts and think. A serious question requires the student to concentrate and organize his thoughts, which takes time. Often the student answers: “I don’t know” for the reason that he did not have time to think about the answer;

· dictation of test questions. This leads to wasted time and misinterpretation of questions, leaving no time to think about difficult questions. Some students manage to cope with the next question, while others do not have enough time. Some heard and understood the question, others ask to repeat it. To avoid this error, each student must have an individual package of control tests or assignments.

Lack of visibility in teaching. Teachers often ignore the use of visuals: they teach geography lessons without using a map; describe historical battles without attempting to depict the positions of the warring parties on the board, etc.

Unclear learning tasks. The teacher must first familiarize students with the upcoming task, suggest what they should pay attention to, and connect the task with previously covered material. It is always necessary to leave time for possible clarifications on completing assignments and answering student questions. This is especially true for homework.

Neglecting training. Some teachers believe that if their class is ahead of others in terms of the pace of passing the educational material, this indicates a good level of teaching and learning the material. Although in fact, for a solid assimilation of the material, training is necessary, which some teachers neglect. It is necessary to use a variety of tasks (individual tasks from the textbook, on cards, tasks in pairs and groups, etc.) and in large quantities in order to achieve a solid assimilation of knowledge.

Pedagogical errors in planning lesson

Unclearness in setting specific goals and objectives of the lesson. Often, lesson objectives are formulated as educational material that students need to learn. Lesson objectives should be related to student behavior and should include a description of the specific skills that the student is expected to master during the lesson. For example, an erroneous statement of the lesson goal: “To introduce students to winter changes in nature.” Correctly set goal: “To develop in students the ability to identify and analyze changes in nature in winter.”

Absence detailed lesson plan. In the teaching environment, there is an opinion that a detailed lesson plan is not needed, that it hinders the teacher’s creative self-realization. In this regard, the work of innovative teachers is sometimes referred to. For example, literature teacher E. Ilyin writes that when he enters the classroom, he does not know exactly how he will begin the lesson. But in this teacher’s arsenal there are a hundred lesson starters, each of which he has developed and tested in detail.

Lack of thoughtfulness of the training scenario. When drawing up a lesson plan, some teachers do not think through its scenario: who will write on the board, how the check will be carried out, what mistakes may be made, what skills students must master when performing a certain exercise, etc. Such an error leads to the fact that the goals of the lesson are not achieved; students do not understand how to do this or that task. It is not ensured that all students are busy in the lesson (someone quickly completed the task and is idle, not having the next one).

Pedagogical errors in relationships with students:

· Fear of decisive action. This mistake lies in the fact that the teacher seems to isolate himself from complex communication problems, hoping that everything will be resolved successfully without his active participation. Waiting tactics further aggravate the current situation. Difficult situations in relationships with students, as a rule, arise due to inertia, indecision and belated actions of the teacher.

· Lack of clear rules. From the first lesson, the teacher must make students aware of the rules and regulations that must be followed. The absence of clear rules creates chaos.

· Inconsistency. In pedagogical practice, there are cases when a teacher puts forward a pedagogical requirement, but does not achieve its fulfillment, or the requirements of one teacher contradict the requirements of another. In such cases, all students in the class begin to ignore the requirements of the teaching staff.

· Unjustified condescension. In pedagogical practice, there is a situation when teachers, especially beginners, believe that the softer and more lenient they are towards students, the more favorable they look and the greater the learning results. In fact, students prefer moderate rigor. The negative impact of unjustified leniency is that students do not develop self-control skills and create unfavorable conditions for learning.

· Hard style. Often teachers (most of all beginners) resort to a rigid leadership style, fearing that they will not be able to keep the class under control in any other way. By keeping the class in constant tension, you can achieve discipline for a short time. But the constant use of a harsh style, the use of shouts and threats lead to disruption of the normal educational process.

· Pedagogical actions at the level of emotional reactions. In teaching practice, there are often situations when a teacher is literally shrouded in a cloud of negative emotions: anger, irritation, and not always understandable resentment towards students. In this case, the pedagogical process is dominated by emotional reactions, on the basis of which the teacher acts. At the same time, as a rule, he avoids analyzing the situation, which gives rise to many pedagogical errors. You should realize how important it is to control your emotions.

· Careless remarks, tactlessness in communicating with students. One carelessly spoken word by a teacher can have a wide resonance. This has a negative impact on students, directly on the teacher himself, and on the teaching staff of the school.

· Familiar relations, flirting with students, familiarity. Even with the most friendly feelings, the teacher must maintain a certain distance from the students in order to avoid a familiar attitude on their part. The teacher should avoid any advances with students for the sake of gaining cheap popularity. Excessive familiarity on the part of the teacher can give rise to disrespect for the teacher.

· Insufficient knowledge of students, ignoring an individual approach. Without knowing the individual characteristics of his students, a teacher cannot count on success. The teacher should not forget about the individual approach to students, their personal characteristics and problems. The teacher’s task is to help each student discover their potential as a unique individual. A teacher for whom all students are the same quickly loses his authority.

· Underestimating face-to-face conversations. There are still fans of “public spanking” among teachers. There are others who try to solve the individual psychological problems of individual students on an impersonal basis, publicly, in the presence of the whole class. Caution and delicacy are required in complex issues of motives and drives, maladjustment, discipline and personal relationships. In an individual conversation, the teacher can better understand the student, help in solving problems, and achieve closer mutual understanding.

· Excessive passion for individual approach.

Teacher mistakes

In modern education, there is an acute question about the quality of training and education, which is closely related to the problem of pedagogical errors.

The very problem of errors, misconceptions, and shortcomings has been considered in the philosophy and methodology of many sciences, however, in pedagogy, the topic of pedagogical errors of their types, causes and consequences has clearly been insufficiently considered.

The word "error" has many meanings. Consideration of definitions, explanations and examples of errors given in information sources made it possible to compile a list of concepts that correspond to it.

It follows from it that error is a general name for a bare class of concepts associated with distortion, with a defect in activity in each of the three fields: subject, logical and the field of relationships, meanings.

The modern point of view is that even in an organization with effective learning management, some errors are not only possible, but may even be desirable, since in many situations errors help to reveal a diversity of points of view, provide additional information, help identify a larger number of alternatives, problems , which makes the decision-making process more effective and gives you the opportunity to express your thoughts. Not a single teacher is immune from pedagogical errors, even classics of pedagogy, such as A.S. Makarenko, V.A. Sukhomlinsky, made pedagogical mistakes, which they did not hesitate to admit in their works.

It is known that only those who do nothing make no mistakes, and no one can be immune from mistakes, even the most experienced and competent teachers. Therefore, in the final analysis, what matters is not the fact that the teacher makes mistakes, but how often and what kind of mistakes are made. After all, it is not the mistake itself that is terrible, but its consequences.

It’s one thing to make a mistake and then correct it, and quite another if the mistake turns out to be irreparable. The best thing to do in the latter case is to learn a lesson for the future. But to do this, you need to find the error, understand it, identify the reasons that gave rise to it, determine measures to eliminate the error or its causes)

The inability to assume one’s mistake, much less admit it, is the biggest and most common human mistake.

But in order for a teacher to be able to see, recognize and correct his own mistakes, he needs to know what should be considered a mistake, which mistakes are the most typical, what are the ways and means of correcting them (professional correction and self-correction).

Knowledge about incorrect, erroneous actions is a prerequisite for correct, error-free and, therefore, effective actions of teachers.

Pedagogical errors, in our opinion, can be considered the actions and personal manifestations of a teacher related directly to the organization of activities, to the methods of its implementation and leading to losses in the quality, effectiveness and efficiency of professional teaching activities.

The mistakes that are made in teaching activities are very diverse, both in terms of the reasons for their occurrence and the nature of their manifestation.

First of all, according to the degree of awareness by teachers, mistakes can be divided into conscious, or consciously made (I know that this is impossible, but I do it), and unconscious misconceptions (we don’t know what we’re doing), in which more subjective ideas (opinions, points of view) are not correspond to the objective state of affairs.

This classification has implications for professional correction. In the first case, it is necessary to encourage the teacher to self-correction, since he has already realized the fact that his actions were wrong, and in the second, the efforts of the teacher himself or the administrator, methodologist, colleagues, etc. will be required, aimed at making him aware of the mistakes and identifying them.

It is equally important to distinguish errors by the reasons for their occurrence. In this sense, we can distinguish: qualification errors (errors of incompetence) - made for reasons of ignorance, inability, or unpreparedness for professional teaching activities; forced errors (errors of impossibility) - made for reasons of impossibility of correct actions, lack of necessary conditions (temporal, spatial, logistical, socio-psychological, etc.); random errors (errors-omissions) - made for reasons of an atypical nature - due to haste, situational fatigue, forgetfulness, distraction by something, etc.; mistakes of professional degradation - made solely for reasons of deformation of professional consciousness and professional position (reluctance to work efficiently, professional apathy, laziness, syndromes of emotional burnout and professional maladjustment, etc.).

Errors of the first three types can be both unconscious and conscious, while errors of the fourth type can only be conscious.

From the point of view of characterological characteristics, professional mistakes of teachers can be divided into: design and analytical, methodological and technological; ethical-psychological

Design and analytical errors are made by a teacher as a result of the fact that a distorted image of the activity being carried out is formed in his professional consciousness, as well as in the absence of necessary actions, leading to deformation or incompleteness of the image of activity. They can be divided into analytical-diagnostic and design-prognostic.

Analytical and diagnostic errors manifest themselves in the form of inferences, conclusions, and assessments of the teacher, containing incorrect judgments about the circumstances of pedagogical activity and the participants in the pedagogical process. Analytical and diagnostic errors include incorrect, incorrect analysis of the pedagogical situation, errors in diagnosing the state of the pedagogical process, lack of analysis and diagnostics (starting, current, final), incorrectness or lack of analysis of the results of the pedagogical process and teaching activities, etc.

As a rule, a teacher’s analytical and diagnostic errors become the cause and source of other types and types of errors, which is associated with underestimation, incorrect, inept, unskilled performance or omission (non-fulfillment) of analytical and diagnostic actions and procedures in teaching activities

Usually, when setting goals and analyzing results, beginning (or insufficiently qualified) teachers make typical mistakes that can be identified experimentally. There is a distinction between thinking errors and practical errors. Thinking errors are usually caused by a lack of necessary information or incorrect, inaccurate execution of mental operations. Their source can also be the beliefs and values ​​of the teacher, which negatively affect the objectivity of professional judgments and actions.

Practical errors are associated with the predominance of intuitiveness in activities, the lack of skills in obtaining and interpreting diagnostic information, the inability to analyze the pedagogical situation and the conditions associated with assessing the achievability of the goal, as well as the irrationality of choosing certain actions.

Design and forecasting errors are manifested in actions and their consequences associated with the formation of an image of the upcoming pedagogical activity. These types of errors include:

• -lack of a general concept of activity and action plan (I’m going to do something, but don’t know what yet);
• - erroneous choice of approaches, fundamental ideas, principles of designing pedagogical activities;
• - erroneous forecast (incorrect assumptions) about the adequacy, effectiveness of the chosen means, methods and procedures of teaching activity and other errors in professional choice;
• - incorrect forecast of possible pedagogical effects and further development of the professional situation after achieving the goal, etc.

Methodological and technological errors include actions that lead to a violation of professional standards for organizing the pedagogical process, to distortion of methods or technology, to deformation of results, to losses in the effectiveness and efficiency of education and training. A characteristic feature of this type of error is the actual participation of pupils and students in them, since the teacher’s actions in question are addressed directly to them, include them in the pedagogical process and are reflected in their activities and achievements (academic, subject-practical, personal). This group of errors includes strategic, tactical, logical and technical errors.

Strategic mistakes occur when:

• 1) The inclusion of students and pupils in joint or individual activities is not accompanied by setting specific goals and objectives for them or themselves. The goal can only be known to the teacher, while the actions of other participants in the pedagogical process become aimless;
• 2) Deliberately false guidelines for activity and education are put forward as a goal. For example, a chemistry teacher, in a class with low academic performance and low interest in chemistry, sets a deliberately impossible task for the class - to win the International Chemistry Olympiad, so that as a result they will go on a trip on a boat around the world. This approach can stimulate students to study chemistry in the short term, however, in the long term, such actions will only reduce students’ motivation to study chemistry, which will be caused by disappointment, a contradiction between the expected result and reality.
• 3) The organized activity is in no way connected with the goals set or contradicts them (declarative nature, formal nature of the goal). As a rule, this happens if the teacher, when constructing the pedagogical process and planning work, takes a formal approach to the matter; pedagogical qualification error
• 4) the organized activity does not have a clearly defined goal at all, is not expedient in nature, and is not aimed at any final result;
• 5) the activities of a group (school class, public organization, creative association) lack a main goal and prospects. At the same time, it is unclear to both the students and the teacher himself why this team exists at all, what it strives for, and why it acts. Such errors are quite common in mass practice. The exception is the activities of teachers - leaders of so-called specialized groups (press center, theater studio, etc.) or ordinary (non-profile) groups, but with a goal that represents the work of life (for example, searching for and perpetuating the memory of those killed during the Great Patriotic War , patronage of a kindergarten or orphanage, improvement of a microdistrict, etc.);
• 6) in the interaction between teachers and students, the principles of teaching, upbringing or the activities of public organizations in which the students belong are violated. For example, more often than others, such principles of education as the principles of purposefulness of the pedagogical process, systematicity, consistency, taking into account age and individual characteristics, etc. are violated.

Tactical errors are expressed in the fact that when interacting with students, the wrong pedagogical position is chosen and negative characteristics of the style of pedagogical activity appear. You can talk about tactical mistakes when:

• 1) when organizing activities, the teacher takes on functions that could (and should) be performed by the students themselves. For example, he draws up a work plan for the team, does some work for the guys (publishes a wall newspaper), overly patronizes them in situations where their independence and initiative are needed (when organizing a recreational evening, on a hike), replaces one of the organizers (the duty officer and etc.);
• 2) the teacher unsuccessfully (inadequately to the situation) chooses a role for himself in joint activities. For example, he becomes a leader in a creative activity, when it is more important for him to act as an expert in assessing the creative ideas of the participants, or, conversely, he calmly sits on the jury when the guys need his help in holding some kind of competition;
• 3) the teacher withdraws himself from organizational activities, lets everything take its course (“Let them do everything themselves, they should have self-government”);
• 4) the teacher gravitates towards an authoritarian position in the system of interaction with students, recognizing at the verbal level the need to democratize school life

Logical errors are actions that violate (distort) the general logic of organizing activities and the pedagogical process. Logical errors appear:

• 1) in skipping certain stages of organizing activities. For example, failure to include children in planning their own activities, lack of summing up and analysis of the work done;
• 2) in the inconsistency of the organizational and pedagogical position. This often happens when the team is presented with any organizational requirements;
• 3) In the absence of logic when choosing forms of work, determining their relationship and the sequence of implementation. In this case, joint activity is a random set of randomly replacing each other forms of work that do not take into account either the state of development of the team (group), or the ratio of intellectual, emotional and physical load of participants in the pedagogical process, or the interrelation and combinations of various types of activities - cognitive, artistic and aesthetic, labor, sports, etc.;
• 4) in the spontaneity of choosing forms of interaction with students, due to psychological unpreparedness for varying these forms (poor mastery of methods of interaction with the class as an integral entity, preference for group forms of educational work with their ineffective use in the lesson)

Technical errors include organizational mistakes, usually associated with ill-considered actions, both of one’s own and of students, which leads to a decrease in the overall level of organization of activities and affects its results. Technical errors occur when:

• 1) the teacher does not think through the implementation of this or that action or procedure. For example, when planning in detail the content and course of a quiz, he may not think through its beginning (what he will say, what he will do before moving on to the quiz questions) and ending;
• 2) the children do not receive the necessary information and explanations in order to correctly perform any actions; the teacher does not provide them with organizing information. The teacher may incorrectly or inaccurately, incompletely explain how to perform this or that action or work, may simply forget to clarify or remind something, or do it at the wrong time, or consider that no explanation is required;
• 3) when carrying out activities, various organizational details are forgotten (the importance of accommodating participants in a joint venture is underestimated, visibility opportunities are not used, prizes and awards are not prepared when organizing a competition, it is not thought through how the results of the competition, competition, etc. will be quantified and counted)

Among the typical reasons for making mistakes at the technological level, we note: - lack of technology training in basic training (prerequisites for the formation of manufacturability); - the existence of barriers in understanding the need to work with oneself as the main pedagogical tool; - satisfaction with the successful use of local techniques and specific techniques; - fear of abandoning one’s own didactic experience; - inability to combine new work mechanisms with positive work results (standards); - unpreparedness for new forms of relationships that are part of new technologies.

Ethical and psychological errors in the work of a teacher deserve special attention in the activities of a modern teacher. In pedagogy, such errors are considered within the framework of didactogeny.

Didactogeny is the adverse consequences of pedagogical errors and negative educational influences and influences, i.e. the consequences of violations of pedagogical deontology (i.e. the science of pedagogical ethics). Didactogeny is a historical phenomenon. Even in the old days, they understood its detrimental effect on learning, and a law was even formulated according to which a rude, callous attitude of a teacher towards a student will certainly lead to negative consequences.

Didactogeny is an ugly relic of authoritarian pedagogy. And although now in schools they don’t beat, they don’t humiliate, they don’t insult, but didactogeny has been preserved in some places. If the teacher gives the main place to “order”: “Children, sit down!”, “Children, hands!”, “Straighten up!”, “Children, legs!”, then this is very similar to disrespect for the individual. Didactogeny becomes the cause of deviant behavior and pedagogical neglect. A striking example of inappropriate pedagogical behavior can be the following case:

Evgenia K. was a good student until the 3rd grade. An incident occurred. The teacher told the children to bring money to pay for lunch as usual. But Zhenya asked her grandmother for a slightly larger amount, adding more money for ice cream. Once, when my grandmother came to school, she inquired about the reason for the increase in lunch fees... When everything became clear, the teacher, in the presence of her grandmother and the whole class, declared Zhenya a “thief”: “I stole money from my grandmother!” After that, when Zhenya turned out to be the object of her attention, every time she always pointed her finger at her and said loudly: “Here she is, a thief!” The girl became an outcast. I couldn't answer the lesson. I couldn’t do work in class. At first I lived in a state of anxious anticipation, then general lethargy set in. Now the teacher began calling her “stupid.” Once, in the presence of the class, she said to the intern, pointing to Zhenya: “Don’t ask this fool, she doesn’t know anything anyway.”

As a result, the child developed depression and required the intervention of a psychologist. This is a vivid example of a pedagogical error bordering on professional incompetence - such errors cannot be corrected and it makes sense for such a teacher to find another field of activity

In general, we can say that if analytical-diagnostic errors and methodological errors can be justified, corrected, corrected, then ethical errors are, in many ways, evidence of a teacher’s lack of personal qualities necessary for teaching activities, and in the case of frequent If errors of this kind occur, we should be talking about leaving the profession.

Thus, the teacher has the right to make a mistake, subject to subsequent work on its correction, which involves continuous self-assessment - assessment of the teacher’s activities, determination of the type of errors, their causes, methods of elimination, and knowledge of the typology of errors forms a pedagogical vision of situations of failure of professional activity, sets the approach to their analysis and professional reflection.

Knowledge about mistakes can become a kind of tool for teachers to correct their professional activities. It is no less necessary for methodologists and heads of teaching staff. Addressing the problem of errors highlights the projective potential of failure, its diagnosticity. Knowing about the existence of errors of these types, you can not only detect them, but also prevent and prevent them.

References

• 1. Burich A. S. Introduction to pedagogical deontology. S. Pb. Peter. 2004.
• 2. Kolesnikova E. A., Titova E. V. Pedagogical praxeology. M. Academy. 2005.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

• Introduction
• Conclusions on Chapter I
• 2.2 Results of the study of pedagogical errors of primary school teachers
• Conclusions on Chapter II
• Conclusion
• Practical recommendations for primary school teachers on the prevention and resolution of communicative and pedagogical errors
• Literature
• Applications
• Introduction
• The relevance of research. The teacher organizes interaction with students through resolving pedagogical situations. The pedagogical situation is defined as “the actual situation in the educational group and in the complex system of attitudes and relationships of students, which must be taken into account when deciding on ways to influence them.” In pedagogical situations, the teacher most clearly faces the task of managing the student’s activities. Conflict is defined as “a collision of oppositely directed, mutually incompatible tendencies, a single episode in the mind, in interpersonal interactions and interpersonal relationships of individuals or groups of people, associated with negative emotions and experiences.”
• Many teachers do not have professional psychological and pedagogical training, i.e. are specialists in various subject areas not focused on activities in the field of education. Of course, over the years of work in an educational institution they have become high-class professionals, but such formation, based on the empirical mastery of a new pedagogical activity for them, takes a long time. The main mistakes that beginning teachers make are explained not so much by a lack of experience, but by the system of modern psychological and pedagogical training and the underestimation of the pedagogical component in the development of their professional competence.
• In domestic and foreign psychology in recent years, there are still rare studies and individual articles on the topics of pedagogical errors, their psychological mechanisms, factors of occurrence and ways of correction. However, it should be noted that the following researchers working in this area: A.K. Markova, I.A. Kolesnikova, D. Tollngerova and others.
• There is a need to find means that allow teachers to effectively identify the sources of their own professional errors, choose the most constructive ways to overcome them, and act adequately in specific pedagogical situations. Therefore, the analysis of errors in the activities of teachers allows us to study their causes and anticipate the consequences. Many of them are psychological in nature and can be the subject of special research.
• Knowledge about mistakes can become a kind of tool for teachers to correct their professional activities. It is no less necessary for methodologists and heads of teaching staff. Addressing the problem of errors highlights the projective potential of failure, its diagnosticity. Knowing about the existence of errors of these types, you can not only detect them, but also prevent and prevent them.
• Purpose of the study: to identify the features of the manifestation of communicative and pedagogical errors in the relationship between teachers and junior schoolchildren and the relationship between teachers’ pedagogical errors and conflict management competence.
• Object of study: pedagogical mistakes of teachers.
• Subject of research: psychology of pedagogical errors of primary school teachers and their relationship with conflict management competence.
• Research hypothesis: we assume that there is a connection between communicative and pedagogical errors and conflict management competence.
• Based on the set goal, we form the following tasks:
• 1) consider theories of the psychology of pedagogical errors;
• 2) to study the manifestation of communicative and pedagogical errors of teachers in relationships with younger schoolchildren;
• 3) study the specifics of the “teacher-student” relationship system;
• 4) conduct an empirical study of teaching errors.
• 5) Identify the relationship between communicative and pedagogical errors and conflict management competence.
• Theoretical and methodological basis of the research: the research is based on the works of such scientists as L.S. Vygotsky, A.V. Zaporozhets, A.N. Leontyev, A.R. Luria, SL. Rubinstein, V.V. Davydov, V.P. Zinchenko, M.A. Danilov, B.P. Esipov, V.P. Bespalko, O.S. Baturina.

Research methods: analysis, synthesis, generalization, systematization, classification, identification of cause-and-effect relationships, testing, conversation, theoretical analysis of literature on the research problem, observation; methods of mathematical statistics, qualitative analysis of results.

Empirical basis of the study: the study was conducted on a sample of primary school teachers of Municipal Budgetary Educational Institution Secondary School No. 1 in the village. Atnyash Karaidel district with a total number of 20 people.

Structure of the work: course work consists of an introduction, two chapters, a conclusion, a list of references and an appendix.

Chapter I. Theoretical analysis of the problem of psychology of communicative and pedagogical errors of primary school teachers

1.1 The concepts of “error” and “pedagogical error”

In modern education, there is an acute question about the quality of training and education, which is closely related to the problem of pedagogical errors. The very problem of errors, misconceptions, and shortcomings has been considered in the philosophy and methodology of many sciences, however, in pedagogy, the topic of pedagogical errors of their types, causes and consequences has clearly been insufficiently considered. The word "error" has many meanings. Consideration of definitions, explanations and examples of errors given in information sources made it possible to compile a list of concepts that correspond to it. It follows from it that error is a general name for a bare class of concepts associated with distortion, with a defect in activity in each of the three fields: subject, logical and the field of relationships, meanings.

The problem of errors, misconceptions, and shortcomings was considered in the philosophy and methodology of sciences (Aristotle, I. Kant, G. Bachelard, V.F. Asmus, M.M. Bakhtin, etc.), cybernetics (D. Norman), and in the philosophy of education ( B.S. Gershunsky), in general psychology (L.S. Vygotsky, A.V. Zaporozhets, A.N. Leontiev, A.R. Luria, S.L. Rubinstein), labor psychology (Yu.K. Strelkov, N.A. Nosov, E.A. Klimov), educational psychology (P.Ya. Galperin, V.V. Davydov, V.P. Zinchenko), pedagogical praxeology (I.A. Kolesnikova) and didactics (M.A. Danilov, B .P. Esipov, V.P. Bespalko).

Obviously, different systems and activities are not the same in terms of how errors fit into them. Thus, the “man-machine” system and the corresponding organizations (air and rail traffic control centers, nuclear power plants, nuclear aircraft carriers) have a high reliability status, i.e. have low incident rates and their cost of error is extremely high.

The objectives of the education system are many and varied. Perhaps the risk of adverse events and their consequences is not as high as in other systems, which does not mean that there are no professional errors in their activities. Another thing is that “the concept of mistakes of the teacher and teaching staff cannot be considered sufficiently developed in psychology.”

In domestic and foreign psychology in recent years, there are still rare studies and individual articles on the topics of pedagogical errors, their psychological mechanisms, factors of occurrence and ways of correction.

A.K. Markova distinguishes teacher mistakes as a direct violation of professional norms of activity; difficulties as the absence or non-use of the necessary means of pedagogical activity or abilities to implement norms and shortcomings - as the use of methods (means, techniques, etc.) of activity that are not entirely adequate and ineffective for a given situation.

One of the few works aimed at constructing a classification of pedagogical errors was undertaken in praxeology, which can be considered as an applied branch that develops at the intersection of occupational psychology and educational psychology. According to the definition, praxeological errors should be considered the actions and personal manifestations of a teacher related directly to the organization of activities, to the methods of its implementation and leading to losses in the quality, effectiveness and efficiency of professional teaching activities.

Since the mistakes made in teaching activities are very diverse, the construction of their classification becomes a rather important task. A complete and constantly improved classification of the phenomena being studied is an attribute of any mature science and practice.

Based on the proposed I.A. Kolesnikov’s classification lays out the reasons for their occurrence and the nature of their manifestation:

I. According to the degree of awareness: conscious, or consciously admitted and unconscious misconceptions. This group of errors is important for professional correction.

II. For reasons of occurrence: 1) qualification errors or errors of incompetence (allowed for reasons of ignorance, inability, unpreparedness for professional and pedagogical activities; 2) forced errors (allowed due to the lack of necessary conditions (temporal, spatial, logistical, socio-psychological and etc.); 3) random errors or omissions (allowed for reasons of an atypical nature - haste, situational fatigue, forgetfulness, distraction, etc.); 4) mistakes of professional degradation (allowed solely for reasons of deformation of professional consciousness and professional position (reluctance to work efficiently, professional apathy, laziness, “emotional burnout” syndrome, professional maladjustment).

III. From the point of view of characterological characteristics, professional mistakes of teachers can be divided into 1) design-analytical (analytical-diagnostic, design-prognostic); 2) methodological and technological (strategic, tactical, logical, technical); 3) psychological and ethical (inadequacy of communication style, speech errors, etc.).

D. Tollingerova distinguishes between huge and isolated errors, acceptable and unacceptable, necessary and accidental, “smart”. The researcher calls errors huge if their cause is the erroneous methodological activity of the teacher, while a single error occurs from the incorrect activity of the student. An acceptable error “does not concern the subject of assimilation, but only accompanies its progress,” i.e. indicates incomplete assimilation. An unacceptable error is a symptom of an incorrect understanding of the goals and subject of action when working with educational material.

A necessary error is legally determined by the logic of the educational action, in contrast to a random error, the occurrence of which has a low probability. Elimination of necessary errors can be planned, thereby freeing the student from encountering them. “In contrast, the success of dealing with random errors depends on the teacher’s ability to plan his control and correction activities, but rather on his ability to improvise.”

1.2 Psychological theories in the study of pedagogical errors

For the first time, the systematization of existing approaches in psychology to human errors was carried out in the work of N.A. Nosov, which became the basis for the development of the psychology of virtual realities. Despite some differences in the analyzed approaches, in general, an error is defined as the result of an action performed inaccurately or incorrectly, contrary to the plan, but most importantly, the result that is obtained does not correspond to the intended or required one. And although the study was carried out on the problems of human operator errors, it turned out that much of the presented material can be extrapolated to the human-to-human system. For example, it was shown that a whole class of errors, consisting of deviations from performing actions that a person knew how, could and had intentions for, fell out of the field of view of researchers. In addition, it is shown that both the theoretical and practical analysis of errors does not take into account the psychological state of a person at the time he made an error.

A fairly complete concept of errors in the context of safety theory was developed by A.N. Buryak. Within the framework of the theory, an error is defined as a failure to fulfill its basic assumptions, as a non-compliance with the rules for constructing a structure, a lack of connections between elements, and the absence of the elements themselves, etc. In this context, the author examined the factors of errors, proposed a new classification of them, highlighted the levels of errors, the factors that cause them, and considered situations conducive to errors. It is interesting that the author included deliberate shortcomings, secret sabotage, and stupidity among non-errors.

A. Buryak, determining the place of the theory of errors, starts from the theory of activity, because Any activity is carried out by trial until the first correct decision. Determining that the manifestation of errors in different types of activities is not the same, the researcher considers the conditions for the admissibility or inadmissibility of human errors. In general, errors are unacceptable, because activity is carried out until the first error. It is possible to make mistakes, but in this case there should be few of them. If errors are permissible in large quantities, the effect of correct decisions should outweigh the losses from erroneous ones. The author identifies phases of activity in the aspect of making mistakes: normal activity, erroneous activity, identifying an error, correcting an error, correcting the consequences of an error, analyzing an error and improving the organization of work to reduce it; frequency and severity of errors in the future.

Studies of errors in cognitive psychology are aimed at the general principles of describing their generation. To do this, the essence of the task, the conditions for its implementation, the mechanisms of human activity, his intentions, etc. are taken into account. In D. Reason's fundamental research, error is separated from unsuccessful planning and unsuccessful implementation, i.e. Error accounts only for “any situation in which a certain chain of mental actions does not achieve the desired goal and this failure cannot be attributed to chance.” The author identifies two models of error causation - a personal approach and a systemic approach. The first model focuses on the errors of individuals, i.e. their forgetfulness, inattention or moral failure. The systems approach identifies the circumstances of the system in order to understand the origin of the error and formulate remedies to prevent or mitigate the consequences. It is clear that the personal approach dominates in the analysis of human errors.

Z. Freud believes that the mistakes made by a person are not random and do not express the limitations of his abilities. He showed that seemingly insignificant and meaningless erroneous actions serve to realize unconscious desires. These are compromise formations created by the corresponding conscious intention and the partial simultaneous implementation of an unconscious desire. He divided erroneous actions into four groups:

Slips of the tongue, misspellings, misspellings, mishearings;

Forgetting (forgetting proper names, other people's words, one's intentions, impressions);

Losing and hiding things;

Actions by mistake.

3. Freud viewed errors as the interference of two desires, a clash of intentions. Moreover, psychoanalysis claims that the mental processes of feeling, thinking, and desire can manifest themselves in the form of unconscious thinking and unconscious desire. Freud analyzed such erroneous actions as slips of the tongue, slips of the tongue, etc. He recognized the influence of ill health, circulatory disorders, states of exhaustion as conditions conducive to slips of the tongue, etc., but did not attribute them to the cause of erroneous actions, because slip of the tongue is possible, as he wrote 3. Freud, both in blooming health and in a completely normal state. Consonance, similarity of words, and habitual verbal associations pave the way for slips of the tongue, but this is not the reason for erroneous actions. To understand them, one must turn to desires. The author believed that errors manifest what the subject would like to repress, for example, mental escape from troubles.

It should be noted that 3. Freud identifies the causes of errors in external circumstances: the breakthrough of a repressed desire, which comes into compromise with another desire. This is not only a narrow approach, but also a metaphysical one, since with this approach the cause is not considered as a complex formation, as an interaction of internal and external.

In behaviorism - the leading direction in American psychology, which has had a significant influence on all disciplines related to the study of man. Behaviorism is based on an understanding of human and animal behavior as a set of motor and reducible verbal and emotional responses (reactions) to influences (stimuli) of the external environment. The main thesis of behaviorism: psychology should study behavior, not consciousness, which, in principle, is not directly observable; behavior is understood as a set of connections “stimulus - response” (S - R). The founder of behaviorism is E. Thorndike. The program of behaviorism and the term itself were first proposed by J. Watson (1913), who in his practical work relied on the “trial and error” method. The essence of his activity was that, as a result of repeated trial and error, the animal accidentally finds one of the reactions it has that corresponds to the irritant - the stimulus. This coincidence produces satisfaction, which reinforces the response and associates it with the stimulus. If a similar stimulus is repeated, then the reaction will be repeated. This is the first and fundamental law of E. Thorndike - the law of effect. He also created the readiness effect, which is also based on the theory of trial and error.

K. Koffka, a representative of Gestalt psychology, notes that repeated meaningless repetition can only bring harm, that it is necessary to first understand the path of action, its structure, or Gestalt, and then repeat this action. Consequently, he absolutely disagrees with E. Thorndike's theory of trial and error.

So, the psychological analysis of theories of errors allowed us to draw the following conclusion: there are many theories of understanding errors in activity, from animals to humans. Everyone makes mistakes, but some make them a little, and some make a lot. Some errors cannot significantly affect anything, and you can continue to work with them; others will correct them. But there are errors, which in turn cause more errors, and those in turn cause other errors to appear, and the result is a typhoon of errors. Typhoons of this kind are detrimental to the activities of teachers; if they are not corrected in time, a whirlwind of errors can destroy many years of systematic work of teachers. Errors are a specific component of any human activity.

1.3 Manifestations of communicative and pedagogical errors of teachers in relationships with younger students

It is human nature to make mistakes, but one should not be overly afraid of possible mistakes, because even experienced teachers are not immune from them. When a school teacher first enters a classroom, many things are unexpected. But although the new environment around him is sometimes full of ambiguities, he must make decisions immediately. At this moment, the teacher can be compared to a driver who finds himself in busy traffic for the first time: he is stunned by cars rushing in different directions. Naturally, in such a situation a person experiences tension and a state close to panic. He tries to focus on his own operations, while at the same time not losing sight of the actions of the people around him. He still cannot avoid certain mistakes, but as he gains experience and skills, many actions will be performed automatically. His reactions and assessment of the situation will become more adequate, he will feel a certain liberation, and will be able to focus on the main thing: achieving maximum efficiency in his actions and smooth progress.

In teaching work, many mistakes can be made - both in teaching and in interpersonal relationships. They occur quite often and therefore require special consideration, as well as practical recommendations in order to avoid and overcome them. Let's consider the communicative and pedagogical errors that arise in the work of a teacher:

1. Voice production. Many teachers sometimes find it difficult to objectively judge the characteristics of their voice. Thus, you have to deal with people who speak so quietly in the classroom that students have great difficulty understanding what is said or do not hear anything at all. In a classroom where students do not hear the teacher’s words, questioning glances and puzzled noise arise. If these shortcomings are pointed out to teachers, it turns out that they, as a rule, do not realize the seriousness of the situation. And in vain. Checking the volume of your voice is easy. It is enough to ask those sitting in the last rows if everyone can clearly hear what the teacher is saying. The teacher should not wait until one of the students asks him to speak louder, but this is exactly what happens. In some cases, the teacher, on the advice of more experienced colleagues, deliberately lowers his voice, thereby hoping to force students to listen to him more attentively. Wrong advice! This technique is undesirable, since the students' attention should be focused on the subject of the explanation, and not on the teacher's voice.

Sometimes a teacher conducts a lesson in such a way that his voice booms throughout the whole class. Although it would seem that students do not have any difficulties in perceiving the teacher’s speech, nevertheless, this manner of conducting a lesson suffers from no less shortcomings than the one described above. Usually, even a novice teacher is able to control his voice properly if he pays attention to it. If he continues to experience difficulties, then he should seek help from voice training specialists.

2. Overly complicated vocabulary. Quite often, beginning teachers make a common mistake, peppering their speech with phrases and terms that are familiar to them, but incomprehensible to students. Unless we are talking about the terminology of the subject being taught, then the teacher should use a more elementary vocabulary. This does not mean that the teacher should go to the opposite extreme and, adjusting to his students, artificially make his speech primitive in lexical terms. A little practice and observation will help a novice teacher find the “golden mean”. But in all cases when the teacher uses a word with which, in his opinion, the students are unfamiliar, he should write this word on the board, explain its meaning to the whole class, and then call one of the students and make sure that that the meaning of this word is correctly understood.

3. Actually communication errors. When communicating with students in the classroom, teachers often speak either too quickly or too slowly. In the first case, students simply do not have time to understand what the teacher says. In the second, they look forward to the teacher continuing to explain the material. In both cases, the learning process is essentially disrupted. More experienced colleagues will help the novice teacher find a pace of presentation of the material that would correspond to the capabilities of the given class. More often, the first of two mistakes is observed: the teacher strives to convey to students too extensive information at an unnecessarily fast pace.

During a lesson, a teacher should not behave as if he were speaking from a “speaking platform.” He should speak simply, tell, and not express. A relaxed manner of communicating with the class is most appropriate. When addressing students, the teacher should look at them, and not look at the board, floor or ceiling. Some teachers find it difficult to make eye contact with their students; they say it makes it difficult for them to concentrate. A psychologically constrained novice teacher can be offered the following way of visual contact with the class: not fixing attention on one or another student, but looking as if between them, glancing over the faces in the classroom. Then the students get the impression that the teacher is in constant visual contact with each of them. As a new teacher gains self-confidence, it becomes easier to look directly into the eyes of each individual student.

It is generally accepted that teachers have an excellent knowledge of the norms of grammar and literary language. However, it happens that a teacher makes a grammatical mistake directly during communication with the class. But, even having caught himself doing this, he does not dare to correct his mistake. It’s a gross miscalculation - there will always be students in the class who noticed the teacher’s speech error. They will immediately conclude that the teacher does not have a competent form of oral speech.

The above also applies to what the teacher writes on the blackboard. Before heading to class, you should look through the dictionary so that there are no unfamiliar words for the teacher. But elementary mistakes also happen. What to do with them? There can be only one piece of advice: the teacher should carefully re-read everything he wrote on the blackboard.

4. Bad habits. Teachers are sometimes not fully aware of how they conduct themselves in the classroom. There is a type of “nervous” teacher who paces the classroom space from corner to corner. At the same time, such a teacher will certainly tap his heels rhythmically. Another person definitely needs to twirl the chalk in their hands or throw it from palm to palm. The third one will put his hand in his pocket during the lesson and begin to jingle change. The fourth every now and then resorts to overly emotional gestures. There are teachers who constantly play with glasses, curls of their own hair, buttons, belts, etc. All these manipulations attract students’ attention to the external features of the teacher’s behavior and thereby distract them from the lesson. Teachers should strive to eliminate such bad habits as quickly as possible from the moment they become aware of them through self-observation or with the help of colleagues.

5. Neglect of personal hygiene. As a rule, school teachers come to class neatly dressed and smart - they are pleasant to look at. However, there will always be a teacher who, although dressed with taste, nevertheless does not quite get along with personal hygiene. Some people need to be reminded that they need to keep their clothes in order and refresh their skin more often. Bad breath—perhaps the result of an oral or stomach condition, excessive smoking, or excessive consumption of spicy foods—can cause students to shun their teacher, both figuratively and literally. Whatever the reason, a new teacher should address such deficiencies.

6. Sense of tact. From time to time, teachers make careless remarks and remarks in front of and outside the classroom. One carelessly spoken word can have an excessively wide resonance. This negatively affects students, directly the teacher himself, the teaching staff of the school in which he tries his hand, and sometimes even on the microclimate of the local community. Thus, one teacher, working in a mining village, allowed himself to make very reckless statements when discussing a controversial bill in class on the issue of the labor rights of miners. The students, upon arriving home, did not fail to convey the teacher’s words to their families. Phone calls followed. Parents expressed bewilderment and protest to the school. The school demanded an explanation from the college that sent this trainee teacher to them. In a word, the young man became the center of everyone's attention, the target of attacks from the local community. One thing is clear: since the bill in question contained many controversial issues, the teacher should have refrained from expressing his subjective opinion in front of a classroom audience that was so sensitive to this issue, and even more so to unfavorable assessments of the miners. It would have been wiser to objectively analyze the merits and demerits of the ill-fated bill without haste, and then give the students the right to draw their own conclusions and conclusions.

A teacher without knowing the individual characteristics of his students cannot count on success. Despite the fact that professional pedagogical training and the daily work of a teacher are focused on frontal forms of work with the class, he should not forget about the individual approach to students, about their personal characteristics and problems. Some teachers are not sufficiently aware of this need and view their students more as a faceless mass. This is certainly a wrong approach, because it is no one other than the school teacher who is obliged to help each student discover his potential as a unique individual.

As hard as it may be to believe, the fact remains: sometimes a new teacher knows his students so little that he is unable to call them by name even after several weeks of working with the class. Such mistakes are unacceptable. Most teachers remember the names and surnames of their future students during the period of preliminary observation of the work of the class. During this period, the teacher can glean a lot of information from students’ personal files, in conversations with colleagues, and finally, through his own observations. A teacher who has worked independently for two or three weeks at school, but for whom his students still all look the same, loses authority in the eyes of the class. Conversely, can there be any doubt about how much more favorable the reactions and emotional state of students become when they are addressed by name?

Excessive emphasis on individual approach. Most school teachers pay close attention to each of their students. But it also happens that individual work with one student is to the detriment of his classmates. A fairly typical case: a teacher does not spare his working and free time, helping only one student. This is unfair to others, who may have had less obvious difficulties in their academic work. The teacher must plan his time in such a way as to have time to provide all possible assistance to everyone who needs it.

Conclusions on Chapter I

Thus, the analysis of the theoretical analysis of the problem of psychology of communicative and pedagogical errors of primary school teachers allowed us to draw the following conclusions:

1. Error is a general name for a bare class of concepts associated with distortion, with a defect in activity in each of three fields: subject, logical and the field of relationships, meanings.

2. Pedagogical errors, in our opinion, can be considered the actions and personal manifestations of a teacher related directly to the organization of activities, to the methods of its implementation and leading to losses in the quality, effectiveness and efficiency of professional teaching activities.

3. There are various classifications of errors: according to the degree of awareness by teachers, errors can be divided into conscious, or consciously made (I know that this is not possible, but I do it), and unconscious errors (we do not know what we are doing); errors according to the reasons for their occurrence: qualification errors, forced errors, random errors (errors-omissions), errors of professional degradation, etc.

4. Communicative and pedagogical errors that arise in the work of a teacher include:

Voice acting, when the teacher can teach the lesson too quietly, due to which the students hear practically nothing. Sometimes a teacher conducts a lesson in such a way that his voice booms throughout the whole class. Although it would seem that students do not have any difficulties in perceiving the teacher’s speech, nevertheless, this manner of conducting a lesson suffers from no less shortcomings than the one described above;

An overly complicated vocabulary is a common mistake of novice teachers who complicate their speech with terms;

Bad habits of the teacher, manifested in walking from corner to corner, turning chalk in his hands or throwing it from palm to palm, etc. All these manipulations attract students’ attention to the external features of the teacher’s behavior and thereby distract them from the lesson. Teachers should strive to eliminate such bad habits as quickly as possible, from the moment they become aware of them through self-observation or with the help of colleagues, etc.

Chapter II. Empirical study of the psychology of pedagogical errors of teachers and junior schoolchildren

2.1 Organizations and research methods

To study communicative and pedagogical errors, the following methods were used:

– diagnostics of a person’s predisposition to conflict behavior by K. Thomas. This technique was chosen because it can be used to identify how inclined a person is to competition and cooperation in a group, in a school team, whether he strives for compromise, whether he avoids conflicts or, conversely, tries to aggravate them. The technique also allows us to assess the degree of adaptation of each team member to joint sports activities;

– methodology “Pedagogical situations”. This technique allows us to judge a person’s pedagogical abilities, manifested in communicative reactions. The subjects were offered a number of situations that characterized their professional and pedagogical activities. In these situations, options for communicative reactions are presented. According to the results of the study, a high level of pedagogical abilities correlates with adequate teacher behavior, and a low level can be interpreted as a manifestation of communicative and pedagogical errors.

Research methods: observation, questioning, testing, pedagogical situations, mathematical processing of the data obtained.

20 teachers took part in the study.

Identification of communicative and pedagogical errors among primary school teachers was carried out in stages:

The first stage (May-August 2010) - determining the purpose of the empirical study, selecting psychodiagnostic tools that correspond to the purpose and objectives of the study;

The second stage (September-November 2010) - determination of the sample, preparation of forms for subjects;

The third stage (November - January 2010) - processing and interpretation of research results, preparation of course work.

2.2 results research on pedagogical errors of primary school teachers

In order to identify the forms of behavior in teachers and their disposition to conflict behavior, the method of diagnosing a person’s predisposition to conflict behavior by K. Thomas was used. Research methods: observation, questioning, testing, mathematical processing of the data obtained.

The results of the study processing are presented in Figure 1.

Rice. 1. Results of the method of predisposition to conflict behavior by K. Thomas

From Fig. Figure 1 shows that in the group under study, the dominant form of social behavior in a situation of conflict is adaptation, 158 choices. This suggests that the tendencies of relationships in this team in conflict behavior are developing in such a way that teachers prefer to find a compromise in the existing conflict situations, because accommodation as a form of interaction encourages people to be patient with other people and social groups, to reconcile with other views and points of view.

Also among the subjects there are methods of avoidance (118 choices) and compromise (116 choices). The accommodation style encourages one to enter into the position of the other party, sacrificing one's own interests for the sake of the interests of the other party. This style is based on the desire to cooperate with others, but without introducing one’s own strong interest into this cooperation. This style, like “no win - win”, is assessed positively by others, but as in weak natures. The style of compromise involves moderate consideration of the interests of each party, and hence the need to make certain concessions. In general, this style is assessed favorably and belongs to the “non-loss - non-loss” type. In many situations, the compromise style allows for a quick resolution of the conflict, especially in cases where one of the parties has a clear advantage.

The least number of choices was noted for the cooperation and competition modes (68 and 66 choices, respectively). Resolving conflict through cooperation. Both the style is characterized by a high degree of personal involvement in it and a strong desire to cooperate with others to resolve interpersonal conflict. With this approach, both sides benefit. Such people are considered dynamic, and others have a favorable impression of them. They correctly believe that each participant in the conflict has equal rights in resolving it and everyone’s point of view has the right to exist.

Rivalry is the resolution of a conflict by force, as a style characterized by great personal involvement and interest in resolving the conflict, but without taking into account the positions of the other side. This is a "win-lose" style in interpersonal conflict. To use this style, you must have power or physical advantages. This style can in some cases help achieve individual goals.

In order to identify the level of development of teachers’ pedagogical abilities, the “Pedagogical Situations” methodology was carried out.

Let us display the obtained data in Figure 2.

Rice. 2. Pedagogical abilities of primary school teachers, manifested in the form of communicative reactions

From Fig. 2 shows that among the subjects there is a predominance of highly developed pedagogical abilities of teachers, this suggests that the majority of teachers quite successfully solve pedagogical situations in practice.

15% of the surveyed teachers have an average level of development of teaching abilities, which suggests that they are not successfully solving pedagogical situations in practice.

5% of teachers have a low level of development of teaching abilities. This indicates a tendency to act ill-considered. Such people treat others with disdain and by their behavior provoke conflict situations that they could well have avoided.

Let's consider each difficult pedagogical situation that is most relevant for our research; it is worth considering that the first communicative reactions proposed in the methodology are inadequate and can be correlated with communicative and pedagogical errors. Whereas the last answers correspond to an adequate response. The results obtained for situation 1 are presented in Figure 3.

Fig.3. Communicative response of primary school teachers to the situation of ridicule by students

From Figure 3 it can be seen that 10% of the subjects reacted to the situation inappropriately, answering “Well, for God’s sake!” and “What’s funny to you?”, the remaining reactions were adequate, respectively, by 40% of the subjects and 50% of the subjects. In general, a high level of solving pedagogical situations prevails.

In response to the second situation, the following results were obtained, which are shown in Figure 4.

Fig.4. Communicative response of primary school teachers to indications of teacher unprofessionalism

From Figure 4 it can be seen that 5% of the subjects responded to the situation inadequately, answering “You just don’t want to study”, the remaining reactions were adequate - 25% of the subjects and 70% of the subjects. In general, a high level of solving pedagogical situations prevails.

Based on the results of assessments for situation 3, the following results were revealed, which are presented in Figure 5.

Fig.5. Communicative response of primary school teachers to student refusal to complete assignments

Analyzing Figure 5, we can say that 5% of the subjects responded to the situation inadequately, answering “Are you aware of how this could end for you?”, the remaining reactions were adequate - 40% of the subjects and 55% of the subjects. In general, a high level of solving pedagogical situations prevails.

The results obtained in responses to situation 4 are presented in Figure 6.

Fig.6. Communicative response of primary school teachers to a situation where a student doubts his abilities

From Figure 6 it can be seen that 25% of the subjects reacted to the situation inadequately, giving the answers: “Oh yes, of course, you can be sure of that,” “You have excellent abilities, and I have high hopes for you,” “Why do you doubt in itself?" the rest of the reactions are adequate: “Let’s talk and figure out the problems” - 25% of the subjects and “A lot depends on how we work with you” - 50% of the subjects. In general, a high level of solving pedagogical situations prevails.

Based on the results of assessments for situation 5, the following results were revealed, which are presented in Figure 7.

Fig.7. Communicative response of primary school teachers to the situation of refusal to attend classes

From Figure 7 it can be seen that 50% of the subjects responded to the situation inadequately, the remaining 50% of the subjects gave objective answers. In general, the average level of solving pedagogical situations prevails.

The results obtained from responses to situation 6 are presented in Figure 8.

Fig.8. Communicative response of primary school teachers to the situation of a student pointing out the tired and tired appearance of the teacher

From Figure 8 it can be seen that 15% of the subjects reacted sharply to the situation, giving the answers: “Yes, I don’t feel well,” “Don’t worry about me, it’s better to look at yourself,” the rest of the reactions were adequate - 45% of the subjects and 40% of the subjects, respectively . In general, the average level of solving pedagogical situations prevails. Based on the results of assessments for situation 7, the following results were revealed, which are presented in Figure 9.

Fig.9. Communicative response of primary school teachers to the situation of a student pointing out the teacher’s incompetence

The figure shows that 10% of the subjects responded to the situation incorrectly, the remaining 90% of the subjects gave objective answers. In general, a high level of solving pedagogical situations prevails. The results obtained from responses to the situation are presented in the figure.

Fig. 10. Communicative response of primary school teachers to student’s overconfidence

Analysis of Figure 10 shows that 20% of the subjects show subjective, inadequate reactions, saying: “I don’t doubt it, because I know that if you want, you will succeed.” 80% of subjects adequately assess students' capabilities, without giving them false hope and encouraging their self-confidence. The results obtained from responses to situation 9 are presented in Figure 11.

Fig. 11. Communicative response of primary school teachers to a teacher’s remark

An analysis of Figure 11 shows that 20% of subjects show inadequate reactions, 80% of subjects respond adequately to students’ statements.

Based on the assessments for situation 10, the following results were revealed, which are presented in Figure 12.

Fig. 12. Communicative response of primary school teachers to students’ failure to complete assignments

From Figure 12 it can be seen that 25% of the subjects responded to the situation incorrectly, which could lead to further failure to complete the teacher’s tasks, the remaining 75% of the subjects gave objective answers. In general, a high level of solving pedagogical situations prevails.

Based on the assessments for situation 11, the following results were identified, which are presented in Figure 13.

Fig. 13. Communicative response of primary school teachers to a situation in which a student asks to be treated better

An analysis of Figure 13 shows that 10% of subjects exhibit subjective, inadequate reactions, saying: “I would like to know why I should single you out from the rest of the students.” 90% of subjects react adequately to the situation. The results obtained from the answers to the 12th situation are presented in Figure 14.

Fig. 14. Primary school teachers' communicative response to student anxiety

From Figure 14 it can be seen that 10% of the subjects responded to the situation inadequately, which can lead to the child’s withdrawal and further maladjustment, the remaining 90% of the subjects gave objective answers. In general, a high level of solving pedagogical situations prevails.

Based on the assessments for situation 13, the following results were identified, which are presented in Figure 15.

Fig. 15. Communicative response of primary school teachers to a situation in which a student does not agree with the moral principles of the teacher

Figure 15 shows that 50% of the subjects responded to the situation inadequately, which is manifested in their defending their personal opinion without taking into account the child’s opinion, the remaining 50% of the subjects gave objective answers. In general, the average level of solving pedagogical situations prevails.

The results obtained from the answers to the 14th situation are presented in Figure 16.

Fig. 16. Communicative response of primary school teachers to a student’s bad attitude towards a classmate

Analysis of the data presented in Figure 16 indicates that 30% of the subjects show subjective, inadequate reactions, saying: “But he also won’t want to study with you after this,” “Why?” 70% of subjects react adequately to students’ statements.

Thus, having analyzed each situation separately, we can say that among the subjects there is a predominance of highly developed pedagogical abilities of teachers, this suggests that the majority of teachers quite successfully solve various pedagogical situations in practice.

2.3 Identification of the relationship between communicative and pedagogical errors and conflict resolution competence of teachers

In order to find the relationship between pedagogical errors and conflict resolution competence of teachers, we found the values ​​of the data obtained during the study and determined their significance. The results are presented in Table 1.

Table 1 The value of the rank correlation of pedagogical errors and conflict resolution competence of teachers

Table 1 shows that teachers find a close connection between the following indicators: student indications of the teacher’s tired and tired appearance, students’ failure to complete assignments, teachers’ incompetence when characterizing teachers’ conflict management competence.

And there is an inverse relationship between such indicators as: communicative response of primary school teachers to the situation; student’s indications of the teacher’s incompetence; indications of the teacher’s unprofessionalism; conflict management competence.

Rice. 17. Significant relationships between signs when assessing communicative and pedagogical errors and conflict resolution competence of teachers

From Figure 17 it is clear that the second sign (the student’s indications of the teacher’s tired and tired appearance) is interconnected with the eighth (communicative and pedagogical reaction to failure to complete the task), which allows us to conclude that teachers believe that because of their tired and Tired-looking students may not complete any assignment or task. Perhaps they think so because it is the appearance that plays an important role in the perception of the teacher, since if you don’t like the teacher, then students rarely strive to complete his tasks, realizing the need for a specific subject.

The seventh sign (conflict competence) is associated with the tenth (incompetence of teachers), i.e. The higher the level of incompetence of teachers, the higher the level of conflict management competence of teachers.

An inverse relationship was established between indicators 1 (conflictological competence of teachers), 7 (communicative response of primary school teachers to the situation of a student pointing out the teacher’s incompetence) and 5 (pointing out the teacher’s unprofessionalism). This indicates that teachers believe that the higher the communicative response of teachers to the situation of indicating a student’s indication of the teacher’s incompetence and unprofessionalism, the higher the teachers’ conflictological competence will be

Thus, the results of the study show that teachers can identify significant relationships between indicators when assessing communicative and pedagogical errors and conflictological competence, and, therefore, this indicates that our hypothesis that there is a connection between communicative and pedagogical errors and conflictological competence competence has been confirmed.

Conclusions on Chapter II

Data processing allowed us to draw the following conclusions.

1. In the group under study, the predominant form of social behavior in a situation of conflict is adaptation. This suggests that the tendencies of relationships in a given team in difficult conditions develop in such a way that teachers prefer to find a compromise in the existing conflict situations.

2. Among the subjects, there is a predominance of highly developed teaching abilities of teachers, this suggests that the majority of teachers quite successfully solve various pedagogical situations in practice.

3. As a result of the research conducted using the following methods:

– diagnostics of a person’s predisposition to conflict behavior by K. Thomas;

– the “Pedagogical Situations” methodology, we came to the conclusion that the hypothesis we put forward that there is a connection between communicative and pedagogical errors and conflict management competence has been confirmed.

Similar documents

Theoretical aspects of the formation of gaming competence of future teachers. Development and testing in practice of a model for effectively preparing teachers for the use of gaming technologies in the process of studying psychological and pedagogical disciplines.

dissertation, added 09/07/2012


Motivation as a component of pedagogical activity. Psychophysiological prerequisites and structure of activity of a primary school teacher. Grouping of pedagogical skills and abilities. Analysis of the predominance of internal motives in the activities of a teacher.

course work, added 08/28/2011


Concept and goals of innovation. Analysis of the results of teachers' work on the use of innovative pedagogical technologies in mathematics lessons. A study of the attitude of children and teachers to didactic games, their use in studying the topic “Three-digit numbers.”

course work, added 01/14/2014


The basic structure of pedagogical activity. Essence and classification of pedagogical innovations. Characteristics of positive and negative qualities of a teacher. Forms of overcoming stereotypes of one’s own thinking. Analysis of typical mistakes of teachers.

abstract, added 12/04/2008


Preparing future teachers to use elements of problem-based learning in the study of mathematics. Experimental testing of technology for training primary school teachers to use elements of problem-based learning in the study of basic quantities.

thesis, added 08/20/2014


Increasing the efficiency of education quality control. Creation of modern adaptive learning and control systems using computer and software-pedagogical test technologies. Primary school teachers' experiences in using testing.

course work, added 02/06/2015


Analysis of the professional training of a future specialist teacher. Problems of professional training of future specialists in pedagogical universities. Peculiarities of the professional orientation of the personality of future specialist teachers of "Technology".

thesis, added 03/17/2011


The essence of eco-pedagogical education and its significance for human life and the formation of environmental culture. Organization of an experiment on eco-pedagogical education of students of the primary school faculty, pedagogical technologies used.

thesis, added 02/16/2018


The problem of professional training of teachers, the formation of their moral, ethical and aesthetic culture. The structure of pedagogy. Approaches to defining pedagogical innovations and methods for identifying and studying innovations in the pedagogical process.

abstract, added 02/18/2008


Analysis of the problem of competency-based education. The essence of the theory and practice of developing the professional competence of a future fine arts teacher. Study of general pedagogical and special artistic competencies of a teacher.

Ural State Pedagogical

university

30 mistakes

educational process

in a secondary school.

Ekaterinburg, 1998

Common errors.

Lack of a unified pedagogical position in the team of teachers.

Each teacher presents his or her position as a teacher: communication style, methods of influencing students, views on politics, art, attitude towards people, the world, material and spiritual values. Individuals of people are so diverse that the team of teachers sometimes does not develop a single pedagogical position that would unite people in their ideas about the goals and objectives of not only the educational process, but also the educational process.

Result-consequence: Contradictions arise in the approach to children, in the methods of education in the formation of moral values. The underestimation by some teachers of the humanistic values ​​of society and their subjective representation introduces distortions into the educational process and leads to hidden conflicts among teachers. Children are involved in both pedagogical and non-pedagogical situations (discussing the irritation, irony of various demands and contradictory attitudes towards the world).

Causes:The administration's shortcomings in recruiting personnel on the basis of humanistic values, and not just in the methodological aspect. The lack of reflection on the principles of educational influence at teachers' councils, the emphasis on the educational and methodological aspect, which leads to a breakdown in the system of the educational process.

qLack of uniform requirements for teachers.

There is no agreement between teachers: availability of diaries on the desk; late admission form; mandatory recording of homework; statements while sitting or standing; requirements for org. moment; the child's rights to recess; about the arbitrariness of transferring students; about subordination in a conversation with a teacher; compliance with the first request; greeting the teacher while standing; about worker cleanliness places;

Result-consequence:

Adaptation of children to various requirements lies, lack of composure, stubbornness, insubordination. The skills of certain actions and style of communication with the teacher are not developed. The socialization of children is decreasing. A lot of time is wasted organizing the process. Conflict situations are provoked. “Group egoism” of students arises as a defense against overcoming difficulties. Discipline is not developed as a character trait.

Causes: Lack of a system of educational process. The administration underestimates the development of skills among the teaching staff in presenting uniform requirements to all students by each teacher. There is no tracking of the educational aspect in the learning process. Understanding the democratization of learning as anarchy.

qBackwardness of forms and methods of education.

Excessive regulation, obsessive admonitions, petty supervision, moralizing. Frequent use of demands emphasizes the authority of the teacher; an imperative demand for respect.

Result-consequence: ignoring the teacher’s comments, advice and demands. The emergence of a semantic barrier, irritability in communication. Formal attitude to business.

Causes:teacher conservatism, decreased reflection, ambition , lack of creative growth. Imperative (open) education in the form of influence. Presentation of the student as an object of education, underestimation of his subjectivity. Authoritarian style.

qSchool motivation is not formed.

Educational activity presupposes a goal that is formed by internal motives. Encouraging learning is the main task of a teacher, associated with satisfying cognitive interest. Motives are formed indirectly, taking into account the age characteristics of children.

Result-consequence: The motive to communicate with the teacher and classmates is lost.

There is no sustainable motive to understand the world through a school subject. There is no motive to achieve and overcome school difficulties. Misunderstanding of the motive for development and improvement during the school period of childhood. The motive of the “schoolchild’s position” is poorly developed. Motives to go to work and leave school are spontaneously formed. Utilitarian motives - get a certificate faster. Learn a subject if you like the teacher. Learn to avoid punishment, reproaches, scandals. Learn how to buy something.

Causes:pedagogical incompetence. Teacher conservatism, underestimation of psychology in teaching children. Inability to form motives, lack of mastery of pedagogical technologies and methods.

qAbuse of frontal work methods.

Survey of 1-2 students. The rest of the students copy from the board without engaging in mental activity. Formal visibility of the educational process.

Result-consequence: The activity of students is external, mechanical. Perception is reduced, school motivation is lost. The state of laziness, lies, inertia is an external indicator of behavior. Unsystematic completion of homework. Loss of cognitive interest in the subject, violation of discipline.

Causes:Poverty of forms and methods of teaching. Conservatism of the teacher, lack of creativity. Formal approach to work. Stereotypical traditional authoritarian style teaching.

qOverload with monotonous activities during the learning process.

Each lesson includes a type of independent work. Several tests in one day. Listening to information over many lessons. Long-term activities designed for memory. Abuse of written work in all subjects in one day.

Result-consequence: decreased perception of students, appearance of irritability, mental and physical fatigue, decreased motivation to learn, disorganization of discipline. Poor health of students.

Causes:Reproductiveness of teaching. Inconsistency of the educational process. Psychological incompetence. Indifference to professional activities. Formal approach to teaching. Poverty of teaching methods and forms.

Abuse of authoritarian methods of influencing the student’s personality. Exceeding measures in methods of influence. Strict compliance with requirements. Functional approach: “I am a teacher, you are only a student, nothing more.”

Result-consequence: Initiative, activity, and creativity are suppressed. Manipulating students. Lack of empathy and personal approach. The development of many child functions is inhibited. Strict differentiation between “capable” and “untalented”. Training of a “lighter” contingent. Education of a reproductive personality.

Causes:a consequence of the totalitarian system in the state and school. Decreased empathy, lack of creativity. Conservatism, ambition, stuck in the role of a leader. Strong-willed overwhelming beginning. Thirst for power. Decreased spiritual potential. Complexes. Heightened self-esteem.

qDecreased cognitive interest among students. Suppression of initiative and curiosity.

“If you know a lot, you will soon grow old”; “Don’t ask stupid questions”; “Don’t ask, better listen in class”; “Stop being smart, you know too much.”

Result-consequence: Conditions of students. Decrease in school motivation. Speech constraint in answers. Rudeness towards the teacher. Sublimation of cognitive activity in another area.

Causes:Psychological and pedagogical incompetence. Formal approach to teaching. Reduced reflection.

qInability to regulate students' interpersonal relationships.

The teacher believes that he is not obliged to manage student contacts or teach them pedagogical relationships based on humanistic values. Conflicts that arise among schoolchildren are attributed to their character traits or parents. The 1st component predominates in the educational process.

Result-consequence: Interpersonal contacts are spontaneously built, and an attitude towards a classmate, people, and the world is formed. The educational process is not controlled, pedagogical situations are out of control. The teacher begins to struggle with the consequences, not understanding the real reason for the children’s irritability, aggression, anxiety and passivity. Academic performance is declining, and the level of culture among students is falling.

Causes:psychological and pedagogical incompetence. Underestimation of the sphere of communication as a means of socialization of students. Formal and functional approach to teaching activities. Ignorance of methods of pedagogical interaction related to the formation of relationships. Underestimation of the sensory-emotional sphere of a schoolchild's personality. Ignoring the lack of inclusion of adolescents in relationships with peers. Lack of knowledge of scientific methods for tracking interpersonal connections in class society. Inability to build interpersonal relationships with colleagues.

qStudent objectification:

Suppression of student activity and creativity. There is no focus on developing the consciousness of students (emphasis on the development of memory, intelligence, abilities). A situation of freedom of choice is not created.

Result-consequence: The appearance of passivity and laziness. Lack of responsibility. Reproductive learning of material. Loss of school motivation. Violation of self-organization, self-control, introspection. Reduced student reflection. Unconditional submission to an adult, fear of expressing one’s opinion, or vice versa - opposition to the world of adults. Inhibition of social maturity. Activity in activity is mechanical, external.

Causes:Authoritarian learning style. A clear system of punishments as a means of controlling the mass of students. The teacher’s lack of understanding of the consequences of deformations for society. Stereotypes of the former totalitarian system. Fear of situations of “freedom of choice” or the feeling of it, fear of criticism and freedom of thought.

Particular errors in the educational process.

qLack of psychological protection and support from the teacher.

The conditions for a “success situation” are not created. There is no positive stimulation of behavior; repressive or prohibitive measures predominate. There is a negative pedagogical prognosis. All shortcomings of the child are brought to the attention of the parents. The teacher is not a reference (trusted) person.

Result-consequence: The student becomes anxious and tense. The mechanism of addiction is at work, the feeling of guilt, and pedagogical repression act with fading force. Resistance to pedagogical influences arises. Lying, refusal to work, disorganization of discipline in the classroom, foul language, etc. may occur. school motivation is lost.

Causes:The teacher's functional approach to work. Underestimation of the psychological and pedagogical aspect, fixation on didactic goals. Decreased teacher empathy, inability to find a personal approach.

qSubjective marking,

which is noticeable to other students. There is no brief comment on the mark. Students do not know the marking criteria; there is no analysis of the mark on the part of students.

Result-consequence: Instilling in students the arbitrariness of grades on the part of the teacher, their fatality. School motivation to study and prepare better is lost. This creates a situation of “imaginary success” for some or a situation of “constant failure” for others.

Causes:Transferring the appearance or abilities of a child, the status of his parents to the student. The rancor of the teacher's character. Pedagogical incompetence.

qInability to separate personality from qualities.

“You are lazy, cruel, irresponsible, a bully, lying, etc. “(It is necessary to criticize laziness, cruelty, irresponsibility, deceit as individual qualities, without transferring them to the individual).

Result-consequence: A process of “meeting expectations” occurs. The personality is projected as negative. Indirect suggestion occurs. The child begins to carry out the given program (iferno - vicious circle). The appearance of passivity or aggression as a defense against stressors.

Causes:Psychological and pedagogical incompetence. Rigidity of the teacher, difficulty in changing the intended attitude towards the child. Inertness of emotional responses to the changing character of the child. Decreased reflection.

qInability to positively project personality , advance missing qualities, for example:

“You are doing better than yesterday”; “you have qualities that you don’t suspect”

“Your endurance is enviable”; “You have abilities, but you haven’t shown them yet.”

Result-consequence: Children may be unsure of themselves and afraid to overcome difficulties. The potential of opportunities is not revealed. Tightness, irritability, unconstructive self-affirmation at the expense of others.

Causes:Weak pedagogical preparation of the teacher (with good methodological orientation). Authoritarian style. Lack of mutual visits with subject colleagues.

qComparison of classes with each other.

Result-consequence: It fosters elitism, singularity and arrogance in some, and uncertainty and diminished abilities in others. The feeling of disadvantage and the development of inferiority can grow into disorganization of lessons, disobedience to the demands of adults, deviations in behavior in large numbers (smoking, lying, absenteeism, tardiness, refusal to work, rudeness).

Causes:Psychological and pedagogical incompetence of the teacher. Teachers’ self-affirmation of the abilities of certain students. Non-pedagogical methods of influencing children.

qCommunication with children from top to bottom.

Result-consequence: Children develop a sense of guilt and inferiority. The importance of the “I” of the student’s personality decreases. The development of subjectivity and the ability to think freely are inhibited. Natural activity is suppressed.

qPraising the child.

Result-consequence: The child develops inadequate self-esteem, develops the qualities of arrogance, uniqueness from others, and painful self-esteem. The concept of “I” is deformed. Relationships with classmates are disrupted, especially in adolescence. Contradiction between the desire and inability to communicate with peers, narrowing the circle of friends. There is a reluctance to overcome difficulties in learning, but the demand for improved results remains.

Causes:Psychological and pedagogical incompetence of the teacher, transfer of the status of parents to the merits of the child. Failure to take into account the different developmental conditions of children in families. Teaching mainly attractive and “easy” children (capable, healthy) at the expense of “at-risk” children.

qLoud emotional speech from the teacher (the impression of a scream is created; the timbre of the voice, tonality, and sound strength do not change).

Result-consequence: Students get tired easily. Disorganization of neurotic children. Decreased verbal perception and assimilation of material. Nurturing students' affective behavior. Decrease in the level of communication culture. Deterioration of students' health (headaches, gastrointestinal tract). Students' feelings of oppression.

Causes:Neuroticism of the teacher. Level of communication culture. Lack of pedagogical skill in voice production. Lack of hearing. Inability to control the pedagogical situation and children's attention. The number of difficult-to-educate children exceeds the ceiling of teacher competence.

qStereotypes ( stuck in subjective ideas).

Each student is indoctrinated into a certain role, the child falls into a stereotype and begins to justify the behavior that is expected of him.

Result-consequence: An emotional and semantic barrier arises with some students and the situation is exploited by others. Opposition to the teacher, loss of school motivation, unmotivated irritation, deformation of character traits in those who are underestimated. Children who are overestimated find themselves in a situation of “imaginary success”, do not like to overcome difficulties, and get used to undeserved praise.

Causes:Teacher reflection and conservatism are reduced, and the locus of control (externality) is expanded. Inability or unwillingness to find a personal approach to the child, getting stuck on an individual approach to children. Formal attitude towards the student’s personality.

qOverprotection.

Result-consequence: Students are inert and lazy. Self-organization, introspection, and control are impaired. Children cannot overcome difficulties on their own. At home, adults need help. General mental and volitional development is also slowed down. Decrease in school motivation. Inhibition of student subjectivity (student activity, awareness, freedom of choice).

Causes:lack of faith in the capabilities and strength of children. Inadequate representation of students' ages. Increased responsibility only for the final result, underestimation of the process of activity itself as a creative principle. Getting stuck in the role of “caregiver.” Weak pedagogical preparation of the teacher.

qAbuse of the method of reproach.

Result-consequence: Decreased self-esteem of the student, feeling of constant guilt, lack of confidence in himself and his abilities. Decrease in school motivation, state of laziness. Unmotivated irritability, feelings of oppression in younger schoolchildren and opposition in adolescents.

Causes:Lack of awareness of “reproach” as a method of influencing students. Reduced reflection, pedagogical incompetence. The teacher gets stuck in the role of “persecutor.”

Non-pedagogical errors.

qHumiliation of a student in front of the whole class.

Result-consequence: The student’s self-esteem decreases, worthlessness is instilled in him, and uncertainty in his abilities is formed. The teacher shows his ability to disrespect those who are dependent (weak).

Ø Comparing students with each other.

Result-consequence: Alienation of students in one class society is fostered. Self-esteem increases in some and decreases in others. The reason for students' irritability and conflict is laid down.

Causes:Misunderstanding of the “zones of proximal development” of students. The different abilities and individuality of the student are not taken into account. Conditions in the family, frustrating conditions. Formal attitude in teaching, functional approach (you are a student - nothing more). Psychological and pedagogical incompetence.

Ø Application of the suggestion method (indirect suggestion with negative text).

Result-consequence: The process of “meeting expectations” occurs. An attitude towards oneself, people, and the world is set. Self-esteem and assessment of the object are formed. Develops an inferiority complex, lack of confidence in people and in oneself. Requires long-term re-education.

Causes:Ignorance of methods of influencing the individual. Psychological and pedagogical incompetence. Authoritarian style.

qThe level of teacher communication culture has been reduced.

Result-consequence: Decreased emotional and psychological climate. The emergence of irritation and aggression, opposition to the teacher. The perception of the material is reduced. Decreased motivation for the subject. Fostering a low communication culture among students.

Causes:Professional incompetence. Decreased reflection. Lack of spiritual qualities. Neurotization or mental deformation. Job dissatisfaction.

qCriticism of another teacher.

Result-consequence: Faith in the power of adults is lost. The authority of the teacher in general declines. School motivation decreases. “Group egoism” of students and lies may arise.

Causes:The teacher's inability to control his speech. Ambition. Self-affirmation at the expense of colleagues. Low level of culture.

qHumiliation of parents in front of children.

Result-consequence: Irritation, unwillingness to accept the teacher. Frustration states and inferiority complex in children. Failure to complete this teacher's homework, refusal to work, rudeness, disorganization of discipline.

Causes:Professional unsuitability of a teacher.

qRelieving personal stress (frustration) on children.

Result-consequence: Nervousness of children, tightness of some and excitement of others, decreased perception, confused answers, decreased learning outcomes, desire to avoid stressors, conflicts.

Causes:Inability to regulate one's mental state, teacher's neuroticism, stress at home or at work, comments to the teacher before classes (lack of teaching hygiene at school).

qCounter transfer (learning impairment) .

Negative personal entry into the student’s situation, the teacher’s stereotype of the child based on past experience, getting stuck. Anger is often taken out on the innocent student

Result-consequence: A clear distinction of a child from others, either in a negative or positive aspect. Forgetting about the presence of a child or excessive perception (vigilance to all his actions). Constantly postponing the survey until last (or vice versa). The opportunity is created for the student to fall behind on assignments. Gossiping about a student and his parents. Frequently irritation and arguments with students. Excessive pickiness, searching for accusations.

Causes:The teacher's constant dissatisfaction with something in life. Frustrating and neurotic states of the teacher. Unwillingness or inability to forgive an offense. Excessively increased empathy. Lack of understanding of one’s mental state and characteristics (externality-extended locus).

qNeuroticism of the teacher (didactogeny).

Result-consequence: Disorganization of the lesson, noisy behavior of students. Overexcitement of children, decreased perception of learning, loss of control over the situation. Children making fun of the teacher, provoking him to breakdown.

Causes:Lack of control over your health, increased sensitivity. Weak methodological preparation for teaching. Reduction or absence of strong-willed and suggestive qualities in the teacher. Emotionally sensitive poverty. Unsettled family life, lack of proper rest.

Features of brain activity and nervous system functioning (strength, balance, mobility) affect the child's perception and learning capabilities. There is nothing you can do about it, and you just have to adapt the loads to the real capabilities of the person. Students' abilities in different subjects can differ by 40 times.

“The total surface area of ​​the basal temporal region varies individually within much greater limits than the frontal region (Blinkov, 1936). This systemic polymorphism of an entire department was the result of enormous individual differences in the fields and subfields of the region. Individual subfields of this brain area can vary between people by 1.5-41 times. 40-fold individual quantitative differences in the morphofunctional centers of the brain create behavioral changes unprecedented in depth and scale. [...] Individual variability has also been carefully studied in the parietal areas of the cerebrum. The variability of the entire superior parietal region was small and amounted to only 20%. However, the size of the fields within the region varied over a much wider range. The maximum quantitative differences were found closer to the occipital areas and ranged from 300 to 400% (Gurevich, Khachaturian, 1938). [...] Similar results were obtained when studying the variability of the superior limbic region (Chernyshev, Blinkov, 1935). The maximum variability in the sizes of the selected sectors or subregions was 1.5 - 2 times, and individual field differences reached 800%.“

Problems and difficulties in child development are largely explainable. There will always be reasons for unwanted behavior and there will always be solutions to level out the characteristics of such a child.