New understanding of the ideas of personality oriented paradigm of education, taking into account the current level of social and economic relations – a symbolic feature, and a sign of the process of modernization of the national education system. It is appropriate and important to consider the use of foreign education experience, built in most Western countries on the ideas of constructivist pedagogy. The historically established education system is debugged by many years of successful and efficient operation. Therefore, the direct, “blind” import foreign educational concepts and systems is undesirable and harmful.
As a consequence, the problem of identifying and comparing the features and characteristics of the personality oriented education and ideas of constructivist didactics. This article aims to contribute to the resolution of this problem. It develops the author’s ideas, presented earlier in [8; 9].
In the research, we use the methods of theoretical research: terminology and comparative analysis of historical, informative and functional characteristics of the two paradigms – the personality oriented education and pedagogy of constructivism. There are many approaches to understanding personality. We shall consider the person as a “the member of historical and evolutionary process, which bears the social role and has the possibility to choose their way of life in which he transforms nature, society and himself” [7, p. 134]. Personal oriented approach includes the principle of targeting and appropriateness of pedagogical influence.
Therefore the content of the term “personal-oriented approach” is primarily the creation of a system of educational environment conducive to the formation of personality.
Category “constructivism” originates from the Latin constructivus (associated with the construction) and constructio (connection, construction). Designing in the process of learning is defined as “a means of deepening and broadening of theoretical knowledge and development of creative abilities, interests and aptitudes of students” [7, p. 127]. In the context of personal-oriented approach means of personality development is the system of pedagogical support. It is significant that the “construction” can be understood as a kind of general system, which includes interrelated and interdependent parts and systems [1]. With regard to the pedagogical process, the construction – is a single integrated system with equal subsystems-entities “teacher” and “student” (in terms of effect on the existence of the system and its integrity).
Consequently, terminological analysis shows: the concept of “creating a system of pedagogical conditions = “construction” of pedagogical conditions of the system” and “construct = a single integrated system of interaction of subjects of educational process” lexically related. These concepts, in a sense can be used as synonyms.
The similarity of personality oriented education paradigm and constructivist pedagogy we see also in the analysis of the historical foundations of the origin and development of the two concepts.
Personal approach ideas can be traced in a humane attitude towards the teaching and education of the child (Confucius, M. Montaigne, J. Rousseau et al.). Humanism arose as contrast to authoritarian foundations of training and education, implying the object approach and imperious attitude towards the student, as well as the uniformity of content and organization of educational process. Humanism – is the foundation of learning concepts D. Dewey, pedagogical school of L.N. Tolstoy, the views of representatives of humanistic psychology (Carl Rogers, Abraham Maslow, A. Combs, R. Mey, R. Burns et al.). The basis of personality-oriented approach is the desire to take into account the individuality of each student.
Humanism and the desire for individualization can be seen in pedagogy constructivism.
Educational philosophy of constructivism is the antithesis of behaviorism philosophy. The basis of constructive ideas constitute the ideas of activity and taking into account the individual, “subjective” experience of the learner. Ideas constructivist didactics originated in the writings of J. Piaget, J. Bruner, J. Dewey, G. Gardner and were embodied in many of the author’s method of “self-development” and “flexible education” (M. Montessori, R. Steiner, C. Freinet, etc.)
The defining characteristic of the essential personality-oriented learning and constructivist didactics is the active approach and support of the activity of the student. Learning Technologies, which rely the ideas of pedagogy constructivism (R. Kersten, L.A. Pongratz, N. Mandl, R. Mayer, J. Sweller et al.), related technologies of modern project-based learning (J. Dewey et al.), the concept of self-realization of human (B. Gershunsky et al.), appropriate education of the individual (A. Hutorskoy) and et al. They rely on the provisions of the underlying personality oriented paradigm of education: the theory of the decisive significance of the child’s activity in his mental development (P. Galperin, V. Zinchenko, Leontiev, A. Leontiev, A. Luria, S. Rubinstein et al.), Vygotsky’s conclusions about the relationship of language and intellectual development, the idea of the personal approach (K. Abulkhanova-Slavskaya, E. Bondarevskaya, V. Davydov, J. Kolominsky, A. Mudrik, A. Petrovsky, V. Serikov, J. Yakimanskaya et al. ) and developmental education (M. Makhmutov, P. Pidkasistyi, I. Lerner, S. Amonashvili et al.).
These arguments show that the original basis of the two paradigms are the same idea: the humanistic nature of education, taking into account individual characteristics, activity approach, the activity of student. “Both directions “grow” out the most important values of humanistic psychology and pedagogy, which are the antithesis of the traditional, authoritarian pedagogy” (E. Polat) [6, p. 16]. As a consequence, there is a reasonable expectation of improving the efficiency of the pedagogical process, built on the ideas of unity of integration of ideas these concepts.
Let us examine their content and functional aspects more detailed.
Traditionally, personality-oriented approach is understood in the framework of developmental education and assumes the maximum account of the individual learner – the unique identity of each person performing their vital functions as the subject of development throughout life [4, p. 9]. I. Yakimanskaya rightly accentuate that “Individuality – generalized characteristic features of a person, a stable manifestation of which ... determines the individual style of activity as a personal education” [4, p. 19]. Personality-oriented approach is “consistent ratio of teacher to pupil as an individual, as a self-conscious subject in charge of their own development, and as an object of educational interaction”. The purpose and objectives of personally focused training are to assist the pupil to realize himself as a person, “in the identification, disclosure of its capabilities, the formation of self-consciousness, in the implementation of personally meaningful and socially acceptable self-determination, self-realization and self-affirmation” [7, p. 134].
The teacher’s role in the organization of developmental education is the creation of conditions conducive to the disclosure of the identity of each student. The system of principles that reflect modern ideas about the organization of personally oriented training, includes the following provisions:
– each student is unique and individual; training school subject is not an end in itself but a means to the development of abilities and inclinations of the learner;
– the student – the subject of the educational process; support for training in the subjective experience of the learner; accounting value opinions and academic achievements of each student, a tolerant attitude towards them;
– providing the student the freedom to choose the content (in accordance with the academic plan), the means and methods of studying the educational material, the organization of study;
– ensuring through cooperation, co-creation, motivation to succeed positive emotional of contact in the systems “teacher-student” and “student-student”;
– evaluation of the student’s academic achievements not only to meet the educational standards, but also as the individual stages of personal growth.
Thus, the implementation of personality-oriented approach to teaching makes possible the development of the personality of each student to the fullest, taking into account its individual characteristics. The same goal of constructivist didactics: the maximum possible development of the personality and individuality of the pupil.
Constructivism rejects the idea of objectivism and instructionism theory, considers the learning process as the transfer of knowledge from the knowledgeable to those who know little. This radical constructivism as major theses recognizes the position that the process of perception does not reflect any reality, and man creates (constructs) its relative and subjective reality, the doctrine – fully self-organized and self-governing process, pedagogical influence from the outside in the acquisition of knowledge is not a determining and effective. More flexible is understood mechanism of knowledge within a pragmatic (dialectical) constructivism, which attempts to link the design and instructions, self-managed knowledge and training. Constructivist didactics is now considered primarily within the framework of pragmatic constructivism.
Conceptual provisions of constructivism pedagogy – is: purposeful self-development and “self-construction” of personality during its active interaction with society and the environment throughout the life of man; activity of the person in the learning and the ineffectiveness of the transfer of knowledge to the student in the finished form; the importance of knowledge, endowed with personal meaning; the need to create conditions for self-regulated learning, cooperation; and “soft” management of the teacher of the cognitive activity of student; and others. Constructivism is considering the position of the student as an active, self-governing, built mainly on own constructive activity, only situationally controlled externally teacher [5, p. 27]. Modern approaches to foreign researchers and trainers to the organization of educational process consists in the fact that the teacher creates the conditions for self-development of the student, giving him assistance in case of need, but does not provide ready-made knowledge, models, algorithms and methods for solving problems. Activities of the teacher aimed at the formation of autonomy of each student through self-construction control of their experience [3, p. 30].
The system of the basic principles of constructivist pedagogy consists of the following provisions (according to E. Polat [6, p. 40–41], M. Choshanov [2]):
– cognitive activity is an active process of construction of students their new knowledge to on the basis of the previously generated experience;
– knowledge is inconceivable without the motivation and perception of purpose of knowledge;
– the process of learning a particular phenomenon occurs simultaneously with the comprehension of the phenomena of the system. As a result, designing the content of training is conducted relying on generalized concepts, system knowledge and integrative skills;
– basis for the formation of the cognitive experience of student It is its cognitive activity. Necessary pedagogical stimulation of his mental activity (thinking out loud encouragement, statements of assumptions, hypotheses, and others.);
– learning process is based and is effective when there is a communication and social activity of the student;
– cognitive activities linked with the real life of the student;
– cognitive activity takes time and rethinking what assimilated;
– training is based on the creation of conditions (choice of methods, forms of learning, assessment tools), emphasizing the intellectual dignity of each student, a special value in his view, personal approach to solving the problem, a unique view of the situation, the individual style of thinking.
In summary, analysis of the main provisions of constructivist didactics shows that it can be understood as a pedagogical philosophy, “ideologically” close standing to personally oriented approach (E. Polat [6, p. 39]). The affinity of paradigm personally oriented learning and paradigm of constructivist pedagogy can be traced for several positions: lexical interpretation of terms and categories, the historical foundations this concepts, the content and functionality fullness. The pedagogy of constructivism and the paradigm of personally oriented training a major figure of the educational process is a student. Objectives of personality-oriented learning and constructivist didactics – to create conditions for the development of the personality and individuality of each student.
At the same time, informative and functional fullness of concepts personality-oriented approach and pedagogy of constructivism have specificity, originality and distinction. Considering learning as an active process in which the student with situational interaction with the teacher constructs their own knowledge, constructivist didactics specifies the goals of personality-oriented approach in training and offers ways of achieving them. At the same time the principles of the organization of training remain the same: activity, relying on the subjective experience and the independence of the student – the main factors of developmental education. Focusing on the development of personality and individuality, pedagogy constructivism offers a way to achieve the goal of developing education, reflecting the tactics of the educational process within the framework of the strategic provisions of personally oriented education paradigm.