Abstract

In pedagogical training of future pedagogical psychologists, the question of the use of the most effective methods of their training is quite relevant, allowing to reduce the time spent on the educational process, increase the effectiveness of training for increasing the intensity, improve the memorization of information, and motivate students for independent learning activities. In connection with such needs, a transition took place from authoritarian teaching methods, where the teacher prevails, to humanistic pedagogy, which contributes to the disclosure of the internal potential of students, in which the individual characteristics of each student are taken into account, the level of his cognitive activity rises. Students - future educational psychologists will be able to use the received pedagogical approaches and forms of education in their subsequent professional activities

Keywords

teacher-psychologist, active teaching methods, interactive learning, university, student, humanistic pedagogy

References

  1. Zhang, Z., & Xue, Y. (2015). An investigation of how Chinese university students use social software for learning purposes. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 186, 70-78. 

  2. Schweisfurth, M. (2015). Learner-centred pedagogy: Towards a post-2015 agenda for teaching and learning. International Journal of Educational Development, 40, 259-266.

  3. Brackin, M. (2012). Two-year college faculty and administrator thoughts about the transition to a learning-centered college. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 36(3), 179-190. doi: 10.1080/10668920802708561.

  4. Roy, E. B., & McMahon, G. T. (2012). Video-based cases disrupt deep critical thinking in problem-based learning. Medical Education, 46(4), 426-435.

  5. Dmitrieva, E. L., Tinyakov, O. A., Burdastykh, E. N., & Malysheva, N. S. (2014). Application of interactive methods in the educational process of higher education. Scientific Notes: Electronic Scientific Journal of Kursk State University, 1(29).

  6. Zakunova, E. D., Anisimova, A. E., Slyuzneva, K. V., Gordeev, K. S., & Zhidkov, A. A. (2018). The use of interactive teaching methods in higher education. Modern Scientific Research and Innovations, 12. 

  7. Kuryanova, S. A. (2016). Specifics of educational interaction of Chinese students in interactive teaching of Russian language. Problems of Science, 10(52).

  8. Klimenko, E. I. (2016). Interactive teaching methods in the system of higher professional education. Modern Technologies of Civil Defense and Emergency Response, 1(7), 232-235.

  9. Khlybova, M. A. (2015). Application of interactive forms in foreign language classes in postgraduate studies. Bulletin of PGGPU. Series No. 1. Psychological and Pedagogical Sciences, 2, 93-98.

  10. Gushchin, Yu. V. (2012). Interactive forms of education in higher education. Dubna: Psychological Journal of the International University of Nature, Society and Man, 2, 1-18.

  11. Valeeva, M. A. (2009). The use of interactive teaching methods as a condition for the formation of students' socio-professional experience. Siberian Pedagogical Journal, 4, 88-98.

  12. Zotova, I. V., & Umarova, A. M. (2019). Interactive teaching methods in the professional-pedagogical training of future teachers. Problems of Science, 5(138).

  13. Sahlberg, P. (2007). Education policies for raising student learning: The Finnish approach. Journal of Education Policy, 22(2), 147-171.

  14. Baeten, M., Kyndt, E., Struyven, K., & Dochy, F. (2010). Using student-centred learning environments to stimulate deep approaches to learning: Factors encouraging or discouraging their effectiveness. Educational Research Review, 5(3), 243-260.

  15. Vaneeva, V. Yu. (2017). Formation of professional readiness of future speech therapists in practice-oriented learning conditions. Siberian Pedagogical Journal, 4, 75-80.

  16. Bukhtiyarova, I. N., & Zubova, O. G. (2017). The role of interactive teaching methods in the formation of professional competencies of a sociologist. Society: Sociology, Psychology, Pedagogy, 10, 1-4.

  17. Shigapova, E. D., Khabibullina, G. Z., Garnaeva, G. I., Nizamova, E. I., & Akhmedova, A. M. (2018). Organization of the educational process for bachelor-physicists of pedagogical orientation using interactive forms of education. Kazakh Pedagogical Journal, 1(126), 46-51.

  18. Ilkiw, J. E., Nelson, R. W., Watson, J. L., Conley, A. J., Raybould, H. E., Chigerwe, M., & Boudreaux, K. (2017). Curricular revision and reform: The process, what was important, and lessons learned. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education, 44(3), 480-489.

  19. Shadle, S. E., Marker, A., & Earl, B. (2017). Faculty drivers and barriers: Laying the groundwork for undergraduate STEM education reform in academic departments. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(1), 1-13. doi: 10.1186/s40594-017-0062-7.