Mental technologies of modern educational processes
The article focuses on latent requirements (semantic nuances) for mental technologies that ensure success in key groups of disciplines of the modern educational system. The methodological basis of the study is the interdisciplinary semiosocio-psychological concept of social communication, in which the educational process is considered as a communicative and cognitive activity. The criterion of the conclusions and recommendations is the conformity of the promoted mental technologies with the tasks of harmonious development, socialisation and social adaptation of the younger generation. A predominant focus on memorisation is advisable only in the mastery of informative-cognitive disciplines. In the natural-mathematical and socio-communicative disciplines, not only the ability to memorise is important, but also the ability of deep understanding based on multi-level mental operation, which allows to achieve the desired constant result. Science and mathematics curricula have traditionally focused on the development of mental operations based on clear laws, dependencies and interdependencies. However, programmes in social-communicative disciplines, based on postmodern ideas about the multiplicity of meanings, devalue the mental search for semantic (motivational-target) dominants in perceived works/materials; the technologies promoted here are associated with memorisation, the search for personal-pragmatic aspects, or with arbitrary interpretation. The social costs of such an approach are the inability of individuals, groups, communities to negotiate on a constructive and honest basis and the increased opportunities for manipulation. The costs of the personal plan are associated with difficulties in socialisation and social adjustment. The search for ways to improve the domestic educational system is connected with moving away from the influence of postmodern ideas, taking into account the positive experience of the Soviet school, using the developments of domestic science that allow to "see" the deep meanings in any works/materials, propaganda and advertising campaigns.
While nobody left any comments to this publication.
You can be first.
Adamнants, T. Z. (2014), “Concepts of Understanding in Communication: In Search of a Platform for Mutual Understanding”, Social Sciences and Contemporary World (ONS), 4, 121-131 (in Russ.).
Adamyants, T. Z. (2024), Sotsialnie kommunikatsii: uctebnik dla vuzov [Social communications: textbook for universities], 2nd ed., Yurayt, Moscow, (in Russ.).
Adamyants, T. Z. (2023), “Understanding in the field of social communication as a mental technology”, Chelovek [Man], 9, 51-67, DOI: 10.31857/S023620070024827-6 (in Russ.).
Dilthey, W. (1996), Opisatelnaya k [Descriptive Psychology]. Transl. from German by Zaitseva, E. D., ed. by Shpet, G. G. 2nd ed., Aletheia, St. Petersburg, Russia (in Russ.).
Dridze, T. M. (2000b), “From hermeneutics to semio-sociopsychology: from the «creative» interpretation of the text to the understanding of the communicative intention of the author”. Sotsialnaya kommunikatsiya i sotsialnoe upravlenie v ekoantropotsentricheskoy i semio-sotsiopsikhologicheskoy paradigmakh: v 2 knigakh, kniga 2. [Social communication and social management in ecoanthropocentric and semiosociopsychological paradigms: in 2 books, book 2, IS RAN, Moscow, Russia, 115–137 (in Russ.).
Dridze, T. M. (2000a), “Two New Paradigms for Social cognition and Social Practice”, Sotsialnaya kommunikatsiya i sotsialnoe upravlenie v ekoantropotsentricheskoy i semio-sotsiopsikhologicheskoy paradigmakh: v 2 knigakh, kniga 1. [Social communication and social management in ecoanthropocentric and semiosociopsychological paradigms: in 2 books, book 1], IS RAN, Moscow, Russia, 5–42 (in Russ)
Duke, N. K., Juzwik, M., Caughlan, S. and Martin, N. (2012), Reading and writing genre with purpose in K-8 classrooms, Heinemann, Portsmouth, NH, USA.
Foucault, M. (1994), Slova i veshchi: Arkheologya gumanitarnykh nauk [The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences (Les mots et les choses)]. Translated from French; introduction by Avtonomova, N. S., A-sad, Talisman, St. Petersburg. (in Russ.)
Gadamer, H.-G. (1976), Philosophical Hermeneutics, Transl. and ed. by. D.E. Linge, Univ. of California Press, Berkeley, USA.
Lombina, T. N. and Yurchenko, O. V. (2020), “The problem of understanding the text in primary school”, Proceedings of the VI All-Russian Sociological Congress (Tyumen, October 14–16, 2020) Sotsiologiya i obshchestvo: traditsii i innovatsii v sotsialnom razvitii regionov [Sociology and society: traditions and innovations in the social development of regions], ed. by Mansurov, V. A. and Ivanova, E. Y., RAS, FNISC RAS; Moscow, 1876-1881, (in Russ.)
Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P. & Drucker, K. T. (2012), PIRLS 2011 International results in reading. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA, USA
Peirce, Ch. (1956), Collected Papers.Vol. 6. The Belknap Press of Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Poincare, A. (1909), “Mathematical creativity”, Vestnik oputnoy fiziki i elementartoj matematiki [Bulletin of Experimental Physics and Elementary Mathematics], 483, 57-63 (in Russ.)
Tolstoy, L. N. (1936), “On public activities in the field of public education”, Polnoye sobranie sochineniy [Complete set of works], vol. 8, Khudozhestvennaya literatura, Moscow, 159-196 (in Russ.)