Female infidelity is a rather complex phenomenon. First, with the social ...
A correct understanding of the most complex problems of modern science necessarily includes the knowledge of how and why certain phenomena arose, and now retaining the echo of previous disputes, traces of all kinds of influences, the imprint of those historical conditions in which they originally took shape.
In 1936, prominent figures in education were declared "pseudoscientists", and the science developed by them was declared "reactionary pseudoscience." These accusations and this stigma placed on psychologists persisted until the end of the 1980s. Meanwhile, their works have not lost their significance for today's pedagogical and psychological thought. The name of this "pseudoscience" is pedology.
Having arisen at the end of the XIX century. in the West (Stanley Hall, Preyer, Baldwin, etc.), pedology (in exact translation - the science of children) at the beginning of the XX century. spreads in Russia as a broad pedological movement, which received significant development in the years immediately preceding October. The work of psychologists A.P. Nechaev, K.I. Povarnin, N.E. Rumyantsev, physiologists and hygienists P.F. Lesgaft, F.F.Erisman, psychiatrists G.I. Rossolimo, I.A. Sikorsky. Questions of pedology were reflected at congresses on educational psychology and experimental pedagogy. The interest in pedology is evidenced by the organization of Pedological courses and the Pedological Institute in St. Petersburg, in the creation of which V.M.Bekhterev took an active part.
After 1917, pedological work gained momentum. An extensive network of pedological institutions is being developed - central, regional and grassroots, which are mainly under the jurisdiction of three people's commissariats: the People's Commissariat of Education, the People's Commissariat of Health and the People's Commissariat of Railways (the latter had numerous, well-established railway general education schools). It will not be an exaggeration to say that during this period all the work on the study of the psychology of children was carried out under the auspices of pedology and all leading psychologists (as well as physiologists, doctors, teachers) who worked on the study of the child were regarded as pedological cadres. As expected, such a combination of efforts would give a comprehensive study of the child. However, this task did not lend itself to any simple solutions.
Indeed, pedology in the form in which it developed in our country in the 1920s did not yet correspond to the notions of a complex science. To carry out the synthesis of knowledge about the child, a stage of preliminary methodological analysis of the data of psychology, physiology and anatomy was necessary, for which she was not yet ready at that time. Theoretical pedologists in practice turned out to be some psychologist (L. S. Vygotsky, M. Ya.Basov), some a defectologist or psychiatrist (A.S. Griboyedov), some a pediatrician (E.A. M. Shchelovanov), a hygienist, a sociologist, etc., and the "synthesis of sciences" ended with them in the last lines of the prefaces to the books.
Describing the situation in which the activity of pedologists developed in the 1920s, one cannot hush up the mistakes she made in understanding the role of the hereditary factor in the development of a child and simplified assessments when considering the influence of the social environment on the formation of his personality. A significant miscalculation practical work pedologists used tests of intellectual development, which then did not differ in due reliability and validity. Pedology during these years was at the initial stage of development. The indicated shortcomings of it cannot be understood otherwise than as "growing pains". However, the formation of pedology as a science proceeded quite successfully in the early 30s.
So, everything that was said above refers to the early stage in the development of pedology. Already in the early 30s. significant changes are taking place in pedological science. Even then, pedology as a science was building its activity on the basis of following four most important principles that significantly changed the approaches to the study of children that had developed in the past.
The first principle- refusal to study the child "in parts", when something is revealed by age-related physiology, something is psychology, something is child neuropathology, etc. you get (because of the inconsistency of the initial theoretical attitudes and methods, and sometimes because of the diversity of research in time and place of their conduct, etc.), pedologists tried to get, as already mentioned, precisely the synthesis of knowledge about children. The dramatic short history of pedology is a chain of attempts to get away from what the pedologists themselves called a "vinaigrette" of disparate, inconsistent information about children, gleaned from different scientific disciplines, and come to a synthesis of knowledge, from different sides addressed to the child. However, the tragic circumstances of the development of pedology soon stopped these attempts.
The second reference point of pedologists- genetic principle. A child for them is a developing being, and it is possible to understand him only by taking into account the dynamics and development tendencies. Perhaps the best application of this principle can be demonstrated by the example of disclosing the mystery of inner speech, which is long-standing for psychology.
It's not a secret for anyone that a person is able to talk "to himself", to use inner speech. As it is obvious, it differs from the external one, pronounced aloud. Through self-observation, we can establish that we do not utter some words, we omit them. Obviously, the word can be replaced by specific images or practically performed actions. It has been experimentally established that inner speech is accompanied by rudimentary movements of the vocal apparatus. But at the same time, it is also obvious that this is not just "speech minus sound". Thought processes are largely accomplished with the help of inner speech. The genetic principle of studying the psyche came to the rescue.
L. S. Vygotsky approached the question of the essence of the structure of inner speech from a completely different angle.
Has anyone ever watched the kids playing in the sandbox? While playing, they say something, exclaim, but if you look closely, their speech is not addressed to anyone. Other children do not listen to their speeches, they, in turn, building and destroying houses of sand, explain their plans, discuss the technology of their execution, again not addressing anyone. This phenomenon is called egocentric speech. Its share in the total speech flow in young children has been steadily decreasing every year, almost completely disappearing by school age. Vygotsky put forward and was able to confirm the hypothesis according to which, on the threshold of school age, egocentric speech does not die away, but passes, develops into inner speech. Thus, relying on the genetic principle, he saw in the egocentric speech of the child the key to the study of the inner speech of an adult, which acts as a means of thinking.
The third principle pedology is associated with a radical turn in the methodology of childhood research. Psychology, anthropology, physiology, even if they turned to the study of the child, the subject of research was traditionally seen in himself, taken outside the social context in which the child lives and develops, outside his life, environment, generally outside the social environment. It was not taken into account that a different social environment often significantly changes not only the psychology of the child, but also noticeably affects the anthropomorphic parameters of age development.
Hence, for example, the interest of pedologists in the personality of a difficult teenager. With quite favorable natural inclinations, but as a result of general physical weakness from systematic malnutrition, under the influence of prolonged neglect or other social reasons, the behavior and mental activity of such a teenager is disorganized, and the level of learning decreases. Considering that the pedologists of the 1920s. dealt with children crippled by the vicissitudes of post-revolutionary times and civil war, "irreconcilable class struggle", then the full significance of such an approach to the child is obvious.
Pedology showed no less interest in gifted children, highlighting the factors that contribute or hinder the development of their talents.
And finally fourth principle pedology - to make the science of the child practically significant, to move from knowing the child and his world to changing it. That is why pedagogical and pedagogical counseling was launched, pedologists worked with parents, and the first attempts were made to establish psychological diagnostics of the child's development. Despite significant difficulties and undoubted miscalculations of pedologists with the widespread introduction of psychodiagnostic methods into school practice, this was a serious step in the development of the applied functions of the science of children. There was an acute question about the methods of studying children, and in particular about the use of tests.
The textbook "Pedology" by G. A. Fortunatov and M. V. Sokolov (signed for publication in February 1936) characterizes the methods of studying mental development children: the method of objective observation, laboratory and natural experiment, clinical conversation, etc. Regarding the test method, GA Fortunatov wrote: “On the basis of tests alone, it is impossible to characterize a child, since they give only fragmentary, superficial knowledge about him. A gross mistake is the situation when, after taking a child through tests according to Binet or another system of tests, they make an categorical conclusion about his abilities. Tests can and should be used as one of the methods, critically regarding its results and checking them with the help of other methods "( p. 141).
A correct understanding of the influence of heredity and the environment on the development of the child was essential for the development of pedology. Leading pedologists P.P. Blonsky, G.A. firmly stood on the point of view that the social (habitat) and biological (heredity) are dialectically inseparable. This is evidenced by the analysis of two textbooks of pedology, later in time of publication: "Pedology" edited by AB Zalkind (Moscow, 1934) and the already mentioned "Pedology" by GA Fortunatov, MV Sokolov.
These books present a generalized theoretical and practical experience of the work of pedologists, which had developed by this time. "It is impossible to imagine the influence of the environment as an external layer, from under which the internal unchanging biological nucleus can be expelled," - said in the textbook "Pedology" edited by A. B. Zalkind.
Suffice it to say that in the book by A. V. Petrovsky, M. G. Yaroshevsky "Foundations of Theoretical Psychology" (1998), the authors found it possible to literally reproduce the section "The Role of Heredity and the Environment in Mental Development", published in the textbook "Pedology", the authors of which were G. A. Fortunatov and M. V. Sokolov. All this testifies to the fact that the theoretical views of pedologists relating to the most important problem of the relationship between heredity and the environment in the development of the child's psyche have stood the test of time.
On July 4, 1936, the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks adopted a resolution "On pedological perversions in the system of the People's Commissariat for Education", which condemned pedology as a "pseudoscience", abolished it and at the same time "restored pedagogy and teachers in their rights." Let's reproduce a picture reflecting the adoption of this decision.
At this time, clouds were already gathering over the People's Commissariat for Education, about a year remained until the arrest of the People's Commissar of Education A.S. Bubnov, Deputy People's Commissar N.K. By this time, the promising education reforms of recent years had already been officially condemned. The aforementioned "methodological projecting" was successfully expelled from the school, self-government was excluded, teachers were asked to use only "proven in practice" teaching methods. Creative search was blocked. The school began to acquire the features of an old gymnasium (unfortunately, assimilating not its strengths, but only formal attributes), not moving one step along the path of democratization.
The widespread criticism of pedological works and of pedology itself, which unfolded after July 1936 (in the next six months alone, more than 100 brochures and articles devoted to the defeat of pedology were published), took place in very difficult circumstances. It was a period of massive repression, arbitrariness, violations of the law, abuse of power, suspicion and mistrust. Therefore, any "mistakes" by the leaders of the People's Commissariat for Education, including the support of pedology, were viewed as "counter-revolutionary intent." Many theorists in the field of psychology, pediatrics, and developmental physiology have faced heavy political accusations. Pedology was called nothing other than "pseudoscience", and pedologists - "pseudoscientists", therefore criticism of pedology was accompanied by hanging political labels and indiscriminate denial of everything positive that had been done by these people earlier.
I am not convinced that many today can say specifically and fully enough what it is - pedology. But I am sure of one thing: there is a certain negative emotional connotation in the perception of this term. There is no need to be surprised. Discriminatory assessments, wherever they come from, somehow settle at the bottom of human consciousness. Let us recall the book "Two Captains" by V. Kaverin. Who are the main villains in it?
Pedologists! Nikolai Antonovich Tatarinov and his accomplice Romashka. Everyone quickly and well learned that pedologists are saboteurs who mock Soviet children, apologists for reactionary bourgeois science, who made their way into the People's Commissariat for Education with the criminal connivance of its leaders, British and Japanese spies.
As a result, some critics declared that almost all scientific products in the field of child and educational psychology, defectology, and school hygiene were harmful and reactionary. For such monstrous accusations, it was enough to establish the fact that the author in the past belonged to some "pedological institution" or to convict him of using any "pedological term." A stream of accusations, slander and filth hit pedology with all its might. All pedological institutions and faculties were completely liquidated, as well as this specialty itself. Was followed by expulsion from the party, dismissals from work, arrests, heart attacks, "repentance" at all kinds of meetings.
In one of the critical articles in the journal "Soviet Pedagogy" (1937. No. 1) V.N. S. Vygotsky "Thinking and Speech" and K. Koffka "Fundamentals of Mental Development", the work of P. P. Blonsky "Memory and Thinking"; reviewed the books by P. P. Blonsky "Psychological Essays" and L. V. Zankov "Course of Pedology", "Collection of Articles on Pedology of Difficult Childhood" and similar "pedological works". At the same time, the author of the article did not explain why, for example, the wonderful books "Thinking and Speech" and "Memory and Thinking" he refers to "pedological works". Kolbanovsky in the same article is declared a "conductor of theoretical pedology" only because he saw a significant event for science in the publication of Vygotsky's book Thinking and Speech.
Speaking out against the indiscriminate denial of all the values contained in the works of L. S. Vygotsky, V. N. Kolbanovsky in his closing speech at the Meeting of Heads of Pedagogy Departments and Teachers of Psychology at Pedagogical Universities on August 26, 1936 dared to object:
“Vygotsky is a dead man, he cannot defend himself. But you can look into some of his remaining works and see how Vygotsky himself defines the zone of proximal development. Is he responsible for all the nonsense that is attributed to him. adversary - to ascribe nonsense to him and then easily refute it. "
Unfortunately, not all psychologists of that difficult time were able to find the strength to rebuff unfair accusations. So, for example, KN Kornilov in the newspaper "For Communist Education" of December 16, 1936 calls "reactionary, bourgeois methods" not only tests and questionnaires, but also the so-called objective observation, natural and laboratory experiment, comparative genetic method, etc.
If we turn to the publicly available publications dating back to 1936, it is easy to understand that for almost half a century after 1936 the official position in relation to pedology has not changed.
"Pedology is an anti-Marxist, reactionary, bourgeois science about children ..." (TSB. 1st ed. 1939. V. 44. P. 461). "The counterrevolutionary tasks of pedology were expressed in its" main "law - the fatalistic conditioning of the fate of children by biological and social factors, the influence of heredity and some unchanging environment" (Pravda, 1936, July 5). "The anti-Marxist statements of pedologists completely coincided with the ignorant anti-Leninist" theory of the withering away of the school ", which also ignored the role of the teacher and put forward the influence of the environment and heredity as a decisive factor in teaching and upbringing" (ibid.). "Comrade Stalin's role is exceptionally great in raising schools, in the development of Soviet pedagogical theory. Comrade Stalin personally pays great attention to pedagogical issues in caring for children, on the communist orientation of upbringing and education. the so-called pedology and pedologists in school practice "(TSB 1st ed. 1939, p. 439). 16 years have passed, and in the second edition of TSB (1955, vol. 32, p. 279), a definition is given that does not differ in any way from what was written before. In this respect, there are no discrepancies between encyclopedias, historical and pedagogical works, university textbooks on the history of pedagogy.
Has the attitude towards pedology, which was formed on the basis of previous discriminatory assessments, changed? In one of the textbooks of pedagogy in 1993, it was written that in 1936 the Central Committee of the Party adopted a resolution demanding an end to the spread in our country of "pseudoscience" of pedology, which distortedly interprets the influence of the environment and heredity, and contributed to the strengthening of the position of Soviet pedagogy as a science about the communist education of the younger generations.
In 1987, the program on the history of pedagogy for pedagogical universities continued to provide guidance to teachers and students: "Resolution of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks" On pedological perversions in the system of the People's Commissariat for Education "(1936) and its role in the further development of the Soviet school and pedagogy."
This was the position of the historian of pedagogy, who, 12 years ago, did not allow himself to "compromise the principles" he had perceived in the era of Stalinism. The work of a historian of psychology looked differently.
The first attempt in 25 years to give an objective analysis of the works of pedologists and the relationship between pedology and psychology was undertaken in 1964 in a number of articles by the author of this book, who no longer considered pedology as a "pseudoscience", as was customary to do traditionally, but as a complex not related disciplines that study the developing child; characterized by real mistakes, and not "sabotage intentions" allegedly hatched by pedologists: it was recognized that "the idea of a holistic approach to the child" was correct, as was the call of pedologists "to synthesize knowledge about the child, to comprehensively study him as a developing personality." This first attempt was far from an exhaustive assessment, many formulations partly still retained the imprint of the usual phraseological stereotypes of the past years (for example, where one should say "mistakes", the stamp was used: "vices"; instead of the words "caused criticism" there was a cliché: " were strongly condemned ", etc.). However, after many years, during which the activities of pedologists were regarded as hostile to Soviet science and school, and any mention of it was accompanied by a mandatory set of appropriate epithets with the prefixes "anti", "pseudo", "false", etc., and that was enough not an easy and responsible step.
Thus, only in the early 60s. finally, there was an opportunity to discuss a topic that had been considered forbidden for historical and psychological analysis for so long, and to talk about the situation that developed then for psychology and psychologists, most of them in one way or another involved in pedological theory or practice.
A break in the development of the science of children, even if at first it was very imperfect, is in many ways a defining circumstance, and we have to overcome the negative consequences of reprisals against pedology. And they were truly tragic.
The July resolution also threw out the subject of attention of the "pseudoscientists" - the child.
The accusations (which were never removed over the next fifty years by the history of pedagogy) that pedology allegedly always recognized for the fate of the child the "fatal role" of heredity and "unchanging" environment (whence this word "unchanging" arose in the Central Committee's resolution, has not been clarified). That is why pedologists were attributed, according to the templates of that time, "aiding racism", discrimination against children of proletarians, whose heredity was allegedly burdened, according to the "main law of pedology," by the fact of the exploitation of their parents by "capitalists".
The background to this main accusation is easily recognizable: it meant that the "Soviet man" is a kind of new individual born of the efforts of communist ideologists. It should be a "blank board" on which you can write anything.
The accusation of fatalizing the "environment" of the child's existence turned out to be no less difficult results. Political motives are also clearly visible in this. The study of the environment in which children grew up actively developed by pedologists was dangerous and fraught with unwanted conclusions. In 1932-1933. famine broke out in a number of regions of the country, millions of people were in poverty, housing in cities was extremely difficult, a wave of repression arose ... In such circumstances, the party leadership did not consider it possible to allow an objective study of the environment and its influence on the development of children. No one could afford to agree with the pedologist's conclusions that the village child is lagging behind in school because he is malnourished.
From this, the only conclusion followed: if a student does not cope with the requirements of the program, then only the teacher is to blame. Neither the living conditions in the student's family, nor individual characteristics, even mental retardation or temporary developmental delays, were taken into account. The teacher was responsible for everything.
The destruction of pedology as a phenomenon of repression of science in the era of Stalinism had a significant resonance and was reflected in severe complications and inhibition of the development of a number of related areas of knowledge, and above all all branches of psychology, pedagogy, psychodiagnostics and other spheres of science and practice.
The accusation of "dragging in pedology" hung over psychologists, teachers, doctors and other specialists, often not at all connected with "pseudoscience." If we talk about the fate of psychology since the mid-30s. this circumstance extremely constrained the initiative and creativity of scientists. The fate of psychology textbooks is typical and indicative in this respect.
So, in one actually directive material, published in the form of a brochure by the influential functionary Lobov, who worked at that time in the apparatus of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, it says about teaching psychology: , especially in relation to the child, the question is completely undeveloped, what should be the course of psychology in our, Soviet pedagogical school. A possible danger here lies in the fact that representatives of psychological science, after exposing and eliminating the pseudoscience of pedology and its carriers, pedologists, may show a great desire to declare their "monopoly" on the study of the child. We cannot allow such a monopoly on the study of a child either on the part of psychology or on the part of representatives of other sciences (anatomy, physiology, etc.) who study children. Some psychology professors are not averse now to come up with "projects" of teaching in pedagogical educational institutions instead of pedology of such separate courses as "child psychology", "educational psychology", "school psychology", etc., etc. In our opinion , now there is no need to engage in the development of any "new" special courses that would replace the old "universal" science of children - pedology ... To create ... new, some "special" courses in child psychology, educational psychology , school psychology, etc. would mean going backward by restoring "pedology" - only under a different name. "
The warning was unequivocal and, at that time, fraught with grave consequences: psychology turned out to be "castrated," attempts to "restore" pedology. For a very long time, the students of the pedagogical institute received practically emasculated psychological knowledge. The accusations of pedological errors constantly hung over psychologists. Training courses, programs and textbooks on child and educational psychology were received by pedagogical universities only 35 years later.
Despite the instruction in the decree on the need to create a "Marxist science of children", no theoretical platform has been developed that could integrate the knowledge about the child obtained by developmental psychology, developmental physiology, sociology and ethnography of childhood, pediatrics and child psychopathology. Until now, a systematic approach to developing the human body and personality. We do not have a scientific concept of integrating data from different sciences, which, of course, will not happen by itself due to their isolation from each other.
The real difficulty of organic synthesis of the content, methods and results of numerous human sciences (humanities) lies in the equal aspect and different levels of research carried out by each of them based on their goals, objectives, available methodological and methodological tools, features of historical development, accumulated and assimilated amount of knowledge etc. For a sufficiently complete synthesis of human studies, in which pedagogy is more interested in any other area of theory and practice, an adequate choice of the problematic centering knowledge about a person is necessary.
After the defeat of pedology, pedagogy had to be "restored to its rights." However, having defeated pedology, pedagogy won a "Pyrrhic victory." She was unable to use the obtained rights. Isn't one of the reasons for accusing pedagogy of its “childlessness” for many years now, in the tendency to see in a child only a point of application of forces, not a boy, or a girl, but not a thinking, rejoicing and suffering person? , a developing personality with whom you need to cooperate, and not just teach her, demand and drill? Pedagogy, having put an end to pedology, threw out, along with the "pedological water", the child whom she, albeit not always successfully, but purposefully began to study. The study of what a child is, was increasingly replaced by the declaration of what he should be. To overcome this approach to the child, it was necessary to be able to diagnose the nature and characteristics of his development. However, the development of psychodiagnostic problems was blocked for many years.
Despite the fact that criticism of the "pedological perversions" of those years was directed against tests that "revealed the coefficient of IQ" (intelligence tests), idiosyncrasy to tests in general became an obstacle in the development of so-called achievement tests, with the help of which it was possible to reveal the real level of learning of schoolchildren , to compare the effectiveness of different forms and methods of teaching. For a long time there was a distrust of "personality tests", various questionnaires and "projective methods", which were based on principles different from those of intelligence tests. Only in recent decades has work begun on the creation of psychological diagnostics, ensuring the reliability and standardization of tests.
The dramatic consequences of the defeat of pedology affected the fate of all applied psychology in the USSR, which developed intensively in the 1920s. and that was suppressed in the mid-30s, during the elimination of another "pseudoscience", in the role of which this time was played by psychotechnics - a special branch of psychology, which saw its task in the implementation of practical goals by psychological means, in the use of the laws of human behavior in production ("subjective factor") for a reasonable impact on a person and regulation of his behavior.
Analysis of the problematics of labor psychology and its specific scientific solutions shows that in the second half of the 20s - the first half of the 30s. psychotechnicians have made a significant contribution to the practice.
In the mid-30s. the development of problems related to the tasks of professional selection, industrial training, as well as problems related to the fight against injuries and accidents, rationalization of the working regime, reconstruction of labor tools and tools, has ceased.
All this led to the freezing for a very long period of the entire problematics of labor psychology and to the withdrawal from use of the very word "psychotechnics".
Psychotechnics was eliminated in the second half of the 30s, and an important circumstance was that I. N. Shpilrein, the permanent editor of the journal "Soviet Psychotechnics" and chairman of the All-Union Society of Psychotechnics and Applied Psychophysiology, was repressed in 1934. Shortly thereafter, the journal ceased to exist, as did the Society, of which it was an organ. The teaching of psychotechnics in universities was also curtailed. The negative attitude towards psychotechnics, which has been called since that time "so-called psychotechnics", and even "pseudoscience", is further intensified during the period of widespread criticism of pedology. Seeing in psychotechnics something in common with pedology (in connection with the use of tests), the "critics" canceled out all the achievements of the psychotechnical movement and led to the elimination of the entire problematics of labor psychology. In 1936, all laboratories for industrial psychotechnics and psychophysiology of labor were closed, and the study of the developmental role of labor was discontinued.
The break in the development of labor psychology lasted 25 years. Its long-term consequences are felt to this day. Engineering psychology has not been developed for many years. Meanwhile, for example, the psychological aspects of preventing industrial accidents now, in the era of nuclear power plants and rocket technology, are cardinal. Whole branches of applied psychology, which passed through the "department" of psychotechnics, have never been restored at all.
Everything that was said above related to the fate of a particular science - pedology and, as is obvious, was not something extraordinary for a totalitarian society. The fact that this is so is confirmed by the brief information that we considered possible to offer, referring to the history of the related pedology of science - psychotechnics.
Started in 1907. This stage is associated with the development of psychodiagnostics, testology, the emergence of pedology. This stage is characterized by the development of various diagnostic tools: tests, questionnaires, questionnaires. According to the law of the French Ministry of Education, in the suburbs of Paris, a laboratory was created for the mass examination of children. Binet and Simon (UK) proposed the concept of intellectual age and the concept biological age... Based on these 2 concepts, the IQ was introduced. Iq = M age (intellectual age) / Ch age (biological). This is a fairly simple method that teachers could use. The use of these tests became a tool for social selection, as children from wealthy families could prepare for testing. In classes for mentally retarded children were children from disadvantaged families. Binet and Simon believed that Iq is a constant, unchanging quantity. Their tests were quite popular.
At the same time, pedology - complex science about the child, including elements of pedagogy, psychology, pediatrics, psychiatry, anatomy, physiology, hygiene and others. At the end of the 19th century, this complex science arose as a result of the work of Meiman, Stanley, Baldwin. Their ideas found support in Russia (Kashchenko, Nechaev, Vygotsky). In 1901, the first laboratory of experimental educational psychology was opened in Petrograd. The First All-Union Congress of Pedologists was greeted by Nikolai Bukharin (Lenin's associate). He believed that pedologists should supplant pedagogy. The main methods of pedology: testing, questionnaires, surveys, and it was believed that tests can be made by school teachers. In 26 - 27 years. all schoolchildren of the USSR completed the tested assignments in all subjects (achievement tests). The main idea of pedology: children are different, each of them requires different methods, methods, means (and this was contrary to the ideology of the party).
Pedology strove to study the child, at the same time to study it comprehensively, in all its manifestations and taking into account all influencing factors. Blonsky defined Pedology as the science of age-related development of a child in a certain socio-historical environment. The fact that Pedology was still far from ideal can be explained not by an erroneous approach, but by the enormous complexity of creating an interdisciplinary science. Of course, there was no absolute unity of views among pedologists.
Still, 4 basic principles can be distinguished:
1. Child - integral system... It should not be studied only "in parts" (something in physiology, something in psychology, something in neurology).
2. The child can be understood only considering that he is in constant development. The genetic principle meant taking into account the dynamics and trends of development. An example is Vygotsky's understanding of the egocentric speech of a child as a preparatory phase of the inner speech of an adult.
3. The child can be studied only taking into account his social environment, which influences not only the psyche, but often also the morphophysiological parameters of development. Pedologists have worked a lot and quite successfully with difficult teenagers, which was especially important in those years of prolonged social upheavals.
4. The science of the child should be not only theoretical, but also practical.
Pedologists worked in schools, kindergartens, various teenage associations. Psychological and pedological counseling was actively carried out; work was carried out with parents; the theory and practice of psychodiagnostics was developed. In L. and M. there were in-you P., where representatives of different sciences tried to trace the development of a child from birth to adolescence. Pedologists were trained very thoroughly: they received knowledge in pedagogy, psychology, physiology, child psychiatry, neuropathology, anthropology, sociology, and theoretical studies were combined with everyday practical work.
In 1936, pedology was destroyed. Textbooks, research results were burned. The pedologists were destroyed. Iq among children of the intelligentsia was higher (and according to the ideology of the party it should be among the workers). In 1936, the word test was banned altogether. The coming to power of the Nazi regimes in a number of European countries led to the fact that the authorities were not interested in pedological research. Aryans are above all and individuality is not needed. Testology, psychodiagnostics began to develop in the mainstream of experimental psychology, and pedology ceased to exist.
Pedology in Russia began to develop at the beginning of the last century. The founder of Russian pedology is considered to be A.P. Nechaev.
Later he was joined by V.M. Bekhterev and other scientists, and by 1920 this science was at the peak of its development. It is customary to understand pedology as such a scientific trend that unites different sciences in the study of the development of children - biology, psychology, medicine, etc.
From the history
Pedology is the science of children, this is the literal translation of this name. It consists of several main components, which include the study of the mental and physiological development of a child, taking into account the characteristics of his body (constitution) and age. The founder of pedology was S. Hall. He created the first pedology laboratory in the late 1880s.
Note that a number of scientists associate the beginning of the science we are considering with the works of a German doctor D. Tiedemann, who was studying the development of mental abilities in children. Later, a representative of the same country - physiologist G. Preyer - also began to study the development of mental qualities in children. Still, Hall is the generally recognized pioneer of pedology, thanks to whose efforts in America about 30 laboratories have been created in several years that comprehensively study the development of children.
Several pedological institutes were established in different regions. But after 1920, with the advent of Soviet power, the principles of pedology became objectionable to the party's policy, which proclaimed a departure from experimentation and a return to traditional teaching methods. Among the main reasons why pedology did not suit the ruling elite were the following:
- According to the results of testing, children born in "hostile" families - children of priests, White Guards, etc., were most often recognized as gifted, and peasant children usually belonged to the category of handicapped students.
- Overestimation of the natural abilities of students and underestimation of cultural and historical components in raising children.
As a result, the Soviet government made the categorical conclusion that pedological practice is inappropriate for our public education. Even a special decree was created, which spoke about the "perversions" of pedology and which completely eliminated this movement. Tests were ordered to be banned, and all pedologists were retrained as teachers.
At the same time, the textbooks of such well-known pedologists as Blonsky, Sokolov and others were categorically banned and withdrawn from libraries. But the Soviet government did not stop there: many scientists were repressed or even executed.
However, we note that the party leaders failed to completely exterminate pedology. A new trend arose in her, which began to be called pedagogical anthropology. Later, she was divided into several separate scientific currents from each other: developmental psychology, educational psychology and age physiology which together constitute pedology.
It turns out that it cannot be called a full-fledged science, but it cannot be classified as a "pseudoscience" either. At that stage, it was only a certain kind of scientific trend, which was not artificially allowed to develop and form into a full-fledged science with its own subject, object, methods, goals and objectives.
Criticism and reality
After pedology began to develop in America, it also appeared in Europe, where it “went deep” and began to develop a methodology for pedagogy. It is noteworthy that the term "pedology" was perceived by many and is currently perceived as a synonym for the hygiene of education, educational psychology, pedagogy and other scientific branches.
Pedology was criticized on several points.
- First, at one time she did not have highly qualified practitioners who could prove the consistency of their views and applied methods.
- Secondly, the goal - to comprehensively study the child - may not always be achieved.
- Thirdly, mass testing of children with poor adaptation of methods can show unreliable, and sometimes directly opposite results.
One can argue for a long time about whether the leaders of the party elite were right, who in our country decided to call pedology a perversion, or not, but this is perhaps pointless. You can't remake history.
Meanwhile, a number of scientists believe that at the time of the collapse of pedology in Russia there was no future as such, so the Soviet government only served as an impetus for the inevitable process. Pedologists failed to form an integrated approach to the study of a child.
The reason is simple: pedology was based on those sciences that at the beginning of the last century in Russia did not reach their maturity or at least formation. These are, for example, pedagogy and psychology. And one more important science- sociology - in Russia then there was no and at all, therefore, there was no very opportunity to build good interdisciplinary ties.
New life
But in fairness, it should be noted that the subject of pedology then, at the time of its appearance in Russia, was not precisely formulated. Scientists simply sought to study children comprehensively, taking into account all possible factors. If we take the provisions of this science in a broad sense, then all the basic pedological principles are reduced to four main ones:
- Each child is an integral system, and he cannot be considered separately as a psychological or physiological object.
- Children can only be understood by considering the fact that they are continuously in the process of development.
- Any child needs to be studied taking into account the environment in which he grows up and is brought up, because it has a huge impact on his psyche.
- The science of children should not only be theoretical, but also have practical methods.
Pedology as a science in our country has established itself and in the 1960s it began to be widely used in children's institutions: schools, kindergartens, teenage clubs. And in the capitals of Russia - Moscow and Leningrad - even whole institutes of pedology appeared, whose employees were engaged in the study of children from birth to adolescence.
Contemporary Russian pedology is developing primarily within the framework of so-called children's research. Scientists are studying the anthropology of childhood, taking as a basis child psychology and pedagogy.
There is a special research group working in Moscow on the basis of the Russian State University for the Humanities. In essence, the main purpose of their research is an interdisciplinary approach to the study of a child's personality. By the way, most of these researchers are not educators or psychologists, but historians. Author: Elena Ragozina
Question 37. Pedology(from Greekπαιδός - child and Greekλόγος - science) is a direction in science that aims to combine the approaches of various sciences (medicine, biology, psychology, pedagogy) to child development.
The term is outdated and currently has only historical meaning. Most of the productive scientific results of pedological research have been assimilated child psychology.
History
In the world
The emergence of Pedology was caused by the penetration of evolutionary ideas into psychology and pedagogy and the development of applied branches of psychology and experimental pedagogy. The first works of a pedological nature date back to the late 19th - early 20th centuries.
Pedology in Russia and the USSR
Since the beginning of the 20th century in Russia, the ideas of pedology have been perceived and developed V. M. Bekhterev, G. I. Rossolimo, A.P. Nechaev and others, B the USSR pedology was at its peak in the 1920s. Practices were actively introduced in schools psychological testing and based on it the assembly of classes, the organization of the school regime, etc. A number of pedological institutes were created throughout the country, under the auspices of the Russian Psychoanalytic Society, a "House of the Child" was organized in Moscow (it was attended by V. Schmidt, S. N. Spielrein and etc.).
However, a strong bias in the activities of pedological laboratories towards sorting students on the basis of their intellectual qualities and, in general, the reformist ideology of this movement after Stalin's Great turning point the late 1920s did not agree with the party's new line of curtailing revolutionary experiments and returning to more traditional forms. The main blow to the pedological movement in the USSR was actually inflicted by the overly formal implementation of pedological methods in the upbringing of children, which showed the vulnerability of the uncritical application of testing students in educational practice on two indicators:
insufficient consideration of the "political moment": according to the results of tests, representatives of "socially close" workers, peasants and the proletariat were more often included in the composition of, as they said, defective students, while the gifted included children of the "rotten intelligentsia", priests, White Guards, etc. "socially alien".
overestimation of the consideration of biological factors (natural abilities of students) in the interpretation of tests and the development of proposals based on their results while underestimating the cultural and historical environment, despite the fact that both of these components, as you know, are absolutely necessary for successful education and training .
The result of disappointment in pedological practice in public education was the decree of the Central Committee of the VKPB " About pedological perversions in the system of the People's Commissariat for Education”(1936), which virtually eliminated pedology as an independent scientific discipline and social movement. According to the decree, the test method was prohibited, and pedologists were recommended to retrain as teachers.
Since the 1950s, a gradual return of some ideas of pedology to pedagogy and psychology began, which was associated with an equally gradual restoration of rights at first cybernetics especially its technical applications for defense, and then genetics... In the 1970s, active work began on the use of tests in pedagogy and education system.
The main representatives of Soviet pedology: A. B. Zalkind, S. S. Molozhavy, P. P. Blonsky, M. Ya.Basov, L. S. Vygotsky.
Pedology
Kapterev PF One of the prominent trends in modern Russian pedagogy reflects the desire to experimentally explore various pedagogical issues and phenomena. Experimental pedagogy goes hand in hand with experimental psychology and shares the same fate with it: whoever attaches great importance to the experimental method in the study of mental phenomena will be inclined to seek the solution of pedagogical questions in the same experimental way.
Thus, for any experiments concerning more or less complex phenomena, and especially for pedagogical ones, the observation by the experimenters themselves of their states is an essential factor in the value of the experiment. Consequently, in the experiment, the psychology and pedagogy of self-observation — the old ones — and the psychology and pedagogy of experience — the new ones — meet and act together. Therefore, there can be no question of denying the old psychology and pedagogy, recognizing them as empty scholasticism and replacing them with new ones. The connection of the former psychology and pedagogy with the new remains, the new ones are the further development of the former, mainly from the methodological side. The significance of experimental psychology and pedagogy as new research methods in science is indisputable and serious.4 By the very essence of knowledge based on simple observation, even if it is long-term and thorough, it does not have complete accuracy and distinctness. Simple observation is put under great pressure by the prevailing views and skills, observation often confirms the existence of something that actually does not exist, that is only in the mind of the observer, which arouses firm faith in him. Experience is very little subject to such distortion by preconceived ideas and faith, it is colder and stricter, it tests subjective assumptions with measure and weight, with precise instruments that are dispassionate, which are alien to love and hate. Therefore, experimental research, whatever it is applied to, disperses fog, uncertainty, it brings light and clear outlines everywhere. The same thing happens when applied to the study of the child's personality. But such research is just beginning, and there are very few independent Russian works in this direction.
Study of personality "the reader can get acquainted with the previous and current methods of studying the child's personality, with the history of the emergence of child psychology, with the classification of children's characters, drawing up characteristics, etc. 5 In addition, the named issue addresses the following issues: about heredity and the environment as factors upbringing; about memory; about attention; about the development of imagination in children; about children's games; about the development of children's speech; about the main periods of the development of the mental life of children. family upbringing of children It should only be noted that articles on the study of the above-mentioned aspects of the mental life of children are not so much independent experimental research as familiarization with works in the field of child psychology by foreign experimenters. the lessons of independent research before thorough acquaintance with foreign works and their critical assimilation. It is therefore clear that the study of the mental manifestations of children continues and through systematic observations, systematic and extensive plans for such observations are published by the figures in the field of experimental psychology themselves (see, for example, the work of A. F. Lazursky "Program for the Study of Personality" and G. I. Rassolimo "Plan for the study of a child's soul in a healthy and diseased state." M., 1909). With the spread of interest in experimental research and in the course of the creation of psychological rooms in secondary educational institutions, the question naturally arose about the possibility and expediency of practical applications of experimental research in schools in teaching and upbringing. There was heated debate on this issue at the congresses on experimental psychology and pedagogy. Some fans of experimental pedagogy assumed that it was already possible to use new psychological data to solve practical pedagogical problems, that with the help of simple psychological rooms and uncomplicated experiments with calculations it would be possible to penetrate into the secrets of mental life, to find out the essence of the personality, the level of its giftedness, its general orientation and inclinations in the future, etc. Obviously, all these are exaggerated hopes, ardent hobbies. Experimental psychology is a new scientific direction that is just beginning to work out its own ways, asks itself questions, tries to solve all kinds of and sometimes very difficult and confusing problems. It is in a period of searching, experimentation; it gropes both tasks and methods. New and new horizons are opening up before him, very vast and very complex. Of course, little has been possible to decide something firmly, to establish any new truths and propositions of experimental psychology, which is completely natural, and therefore naive confidence in the possibility of finding practical applications of experimental psychology today does not have sufficient grounds. So far, this scientific direction is the business of scientists, not practical figures, and psychological rooms at gymnasiums, according to the decree of the last congress on experimental pedagogy in Petrograd, should serve to demonstrate new research methods, and by no means to solve practical pedagogical problems. One of the types of research practiced by new psychologists and educators is questionnaires, that is, questionnaires addressed to the masses. You can ask about famous objects of individuals, selecting them by sex, age, education, cultural living conditions, or without any selection - every acquaintance you meet; you can ask questions at once to the whole audience or to the class, asking them to prepare answers by a certain deadline; printed questionnaires can be sent out and distributed in tens of thousands of copies. The method is simple, but it also requires caution. One must always skillfully and deliberately pose questions, concisely, accurately and at the same time accessible. Quite often, questionnaires violate these basic rules and lower the value of the questionnaire. The respondents must be selected or the answers must be grouped; lumping together the answers of adults and children, educated and uneducated, men and women, means depriving the questionnaire of any scientific value. Finally, you need to be sure that the questions posed were understood by the respondents, that when they answered they did not receive help from anywhere, for example, children - from adults. Here are two very interesting questionnaires conducted by domestic teachers.
Despite the youth and natural imperfection of experimental psychological and pedagogical research, they managed to have a beneficial effect on the organization of school instruction in one significant respect - on the desire to single out from ordinary schools children who are incapacitated, backward and slowly developing. The burden on the class is known for these groups of students; they knew about this, of course, for a long time, but the exclusion of those deprived by nature was considered a natural remedy against evil. With the proliferation of careful study of the personality of students, they came to the conviction that all these so-called disabled and lagging children are not so bad that nothing can come of them. The trouble is that they cannot successfully study in ordinary schools for normal children; but if schools were to be created, adapted to their characteristics, to the level of their abilities, then perhaps there would be success. They made an attempt, it turned out to be successful, and then, following the example of the so-called Mannheim system, they began to talk about the need to divide schools: 1) into ordinary schools - for normal children, 2) into auxiliary ones - for the retarded, and 3) into repetitive schools - for the poorly gifted. Moscow already has parallel departments for retarded children at city schools. The organization of such departments is based on the following principles: a limited number of students (from 15 to 20); strict individualization of upbringing; pursuit not so much for the amount of information as for their high-quality processing; special attention to physical education (good nutrition, staying in the yard for at least an hour, frequent change of classes due to rapid fatigue of children, gymnastics, modeling, drawing); development in children with the help of appropriate exercises of observation, attentiveness, etc. There are similar departments for retarded children in Petrograd - at city schools, the private institution of Dr. Malyarevsky, etc. In view of the importance of this issue, a whole a number of reports on the study of personality traits in general and the determination of the degree of intellectual disability of children in particular, mainly based on foreign models, and even discussed some particular questions about how best to educate the disabled - in a boarding school or newcomers, in what proportion should there be a message in such schools scientific information and exercises in the craft, is it possible to indicate simple and practical ways to the recognition of such children, etc. Finally, the opposite question arose: shouldn't talented children be singled out from the general mass of schoolchildren? (Report by V.P. Kashchenko). Gifted children often study in schools almost as poorly as those of the disabled, only for slightly different reasons, although in the end the reason is essentially the same - the teaching does not match personal abilities and needs. If now they consider it the duty of justice to single out those who are not able to work from the general mass of schoolchildren, then is it not an even greater moral obligation to single out gifted children from the crowd of mediocrity? In Moscow, there is already a society for the memory of Lomonosov, which has the goal of helping gifted children from the peasant class receive secondary, higher, general and special education. The society has already begun its activity, it has to deal with the selection of children, it uses the method of G.I. Rossolimo. The third method in the new approach to the study of issues of psychology and pedagogy is based on a combination of experiment with observation. We find it in the study of the question of personality, its properties, which G.I. Rossolimo tried to solve in a strictly experimental way. To conduct such a study, it is very important, first of all, to understand the methods leading to the solution of the problem, to collect, indicate the most expedient among them and practically check them. Such a work was performed by a group of employees of the laboratory of experimental educational psychology in Petrograd, and then processed and presented by one of the members of this circle, Mr. Rumyantsev 12. The circle set out to indicate the most simple methods that do not require the use of complex equipment, and at the same time are the most reliable. Having noted the main precautions when performing experiments, the circle described the methods of studying sensations, perception, and memorization. For more complex mental phenomena - the processes of judgment, the activity of the imagination, the manifestations of feelings and will - it was more difficult to indicate the methods than for simple phenomena, since they are less amenable to experimentation, but some instructions are given in this area as well. A similar methodological significance is the Atlas for the Experimental Psychological Study of the Personality (Moscow, 1910), compiled by F. Ye. or tools to investigate the features of the mental life of a chosen person ", and this refers mainly to the manifestation of higher processes. The atlas contains many tables (57) for examining the ability to perceive attention, observation, memory, inclination to suggestibility, fantasy, etc., comments on research methods, description and explanation of tables. The actual study of personality in a new way was carried out by a group of persons working under the leadership of AF Lazursky.13 This study is interesting not so much from the side of the result ...
It seemed very promising Blonsky research area related to an integrated approach to the development that was characteristic of pedology. “As a living source,” he turns to pedology, becoming one of its leading theorists. (The pedological period of his work, according to his autobiography, falls on the years 1924-1928.)
In Blonsky's pedological work, a significant place is given to the characterization of childhood ages. In the 1920s, he associated age-related periodization mainly with biological characteristics (development of teeth, endocrine glands, blood composition, etc.). All the various features of the child's behavior that form the "age-related symptom complex" were explained by the processes of an increase in the amount of matter (an increase in the mass of the organism).
Blonsky soon realized that this was an unproductive path. Subsequently, he stated that "the characteristics of each age stage should be complex: not just one feature, but a kind of connection of features characterizes this or that feature." Blonsky was impressed by the idea of a holistic study of the child inherent in pedology.
Unsuccessful attempts to build a unified theoretical foundations of pedology (especially since most of the practicing pedologists did not seem to need them) led him to disappointment in this scientific and practical direction, and long before an official ban was imposed on it. Already in 1928, Blonsky began to move away from pedology. “Studying pedology,” he wrote at the time, “more and more convinces me of the superficiality of ordinary pedological research. In an effort to deepen them, I go deeper and deeper into psychology. "
Blonsky's pedagogical views
As a result of numerous experiments aimed at clarifying the relationship between perception and thinking in the assimilation of knowledge by schoolchildren of different ages, P.P. Blonsky came to the following conclusions: 1) the older the student, the more his thinking becomes much broader and more detailed, and under the influence of thinking perception expands and assimilation improves; 2) the older and the more developed the subject, the more purposefully he ponders before starting work. Thinking systematically organizes perception, due to which there is a better assimilation of the perceived.
The identification of assimilation with the memory of P.P. Blonsky contrasted the opinion that assimilation and memory are different concepts. He considered it wrong to explain the child's poor performance by his poor memory. With age, memory is used less and less for assimilation. And if a younger student often memorizes what he likes, then adults, as P.P. Blonsky, are not inclined to memorization.
The memory impairment that occurs in adolescence does not affect, according to P.P. Blonsky, on the assimilation of educational material, since at this age thinking intensively develops, which begins to play an ever greater role in assimilation.
Great is the merit of P.P. Blonsky and in the fact that he showed how the relationship between thinking and memory changing with age affects the characteristics of the memorization process. The experiments of P.P. Blonsky, conducted on children of various ages, indicate that the younger and undeveloped student, due to the fact that his memory is better developed than thinking, is more inclined to memorize absolutely everything, willingly uses repetitions. A more mature and developed student remembers selectively and effortlessly. His thinking is already developed enough to energetically participate in memorization, to comprehend in every possible way the material being memorized, to discover and establish connections in it, to control the correctness of the memorized. Memorization in this case is based primarily on logical memory, and only the main thing is reproduced, the main thing, i.e. reproduction becomes semantic reproduction.
P.P. Blonsky showed the enormous role of speech development in the course of the assimilation of knowledge by schoolchildren. His experiments on second-graders showed that sometimes children do not master the tasks offered to them simply because they do not have a good command of coherent speech. In the older schoolchild, in contrast to the younger, there is an intermediate stage between exact memorization, reproduction and complete oblivion - approximate memorization and reproduction, which makes it possible, without remembering exactly what is necessary, to approximately imagine, to indicate its certain features. This is facilitated by the richness of the vocabulary, which allows, in cases where there is no complete memorization, to remember approximately. It also promotes more complete memorization and reproduction of more details. Primary school students do not yet possess the necessary generalized terms, their vocabulary and the stock of higher generic concepts are still poor. Therefore, their reproduction of educational material is sometimes characterized by excessive literalism. As a result of the development of generalizing thinking and the accumulation of a stock of special and general terms, the ability to replace particular ideas and concepts with more general ones appears.
Scientist contribution
In Blonsky's last works, memory and thinking do not appear as self-sufficient functions. He closely connected their development with the general development of man. Analyzing the formation of thinking in primary school age in the book "Development of a Schoolchild's Thinking", he connects this process with the child's games, and in adolescence - with the learning process.
Blonsky intended to carry out an extensive program of research work to study the complex of mental processes - perception, memory, thinking, speech, will and feelings - in their unity and development. Blonsky's works of recent years have forever entered the fund of works that laid the foundations of modern scientific psychology.
However, despite the great respect and popularity that Blonsky enjoyed among students and colleagues, he did not create his own scientific school capable of developing his ideas.
Vygodsky... Pedology also belongs to such sciences of natural wholes. Pedology is the science of the child. The subject of her study is the child, this is a natural whole, which, in addition to being an extremely important object of theoretical knowledge, like the stellar world and our planet, is at the same time an object of influence on him or education, which deals specifically with the child as a whole. That is why pedology is the science of the child as a whole.
Research at every step shows that this psychological development of the child is not independent, but subordinate and conditioned by the general organic development of the child. Thus, a correct philosophical understanding of the nature of child development does not allow us to confine ourselves to studying a child by one child psychology, but obliges us to understand this development as a single material process by its nature. At the same time, child psychology itself becomes only one branch of pedology, one of the pedological disciplines. The age of the child, i.e. a separate stage of its development, is a real unity, i.e. such a combination of individual sides, in which the whole represents a number of such properties and patterns that cannot be obtained from a simple addition of separate parts and sides. Age, i.e. the state of the child at each given moment of development is a combination of various features, reminiscent of a chemical compound. Thus, pedology studies not only the child as a whole, but even more broadly - the child in his interaction with the environment. The main task of pedology is to study those phases and periods through which child development passes. The establishment of these periods allows pedology to distinguish between the passport and the real age of the child. Both of these ages are not the same. So, pedologists distinguish between the real - anatomical, physiological, psychological and cultural age of the child. In its anatomical development, the child goes through a complex process of morphological changes and formation. Not all children go through separate phases of this process at the same time. An example of the difference in anatomical age is the so-called bone age of children. Some have gone ahead, others have lagged behind. The real process of ossification of cartilage did not reach the same point in them. This is exactly the case with real physiological age. If we take a group of children of the same age according to their passport, for example, 7-8 or 12-13 years old, the study will always find that there are children in this group that differ from each other in their real physiological age. Some children, for example, have not yet entered the process of puberty, others are experiencing it, and still others have left it behind. Or, in some children, milk teeth have not yet begun to be replaced with permanent ones, in others this change is taking place now, and, finally, still others have already managed to enter the phase of permanent-toothed childhood. As you can see, the real physiological age again does not coincide with the passport age. Likewise, the psychological development of a child, passing through certain epochs, does not always coincide with chronological development, and the study of a mass of children homogeneous in age reveals that psychologically we also have children whose real intellectual age is far from the same. ... Finally, the cultural age of children, corresponding to one or another degree of mastery of techniques, means of cultural behavior, also may not deeply coincide with their passport age. That is why it is extremely important for a pedologist to establish each time the real age of a given child and the degree of his discrepancy with his passport age. The second factor that determines the real age of a child is the environment or those conditions in which the development and maturation of the child's hereditary rudiments takes place. The environment, exerting its influence on development, slowing down and accelerating it, is also the reason for the greater or lesser discrepancy between the chronological and real age. Finally, since both the influence of heredity and the influence of the environment appear in this case not on a motionless, resting organism, but on a moving and developing organism, it is quite natural that these influences depend primarily on the moment of development. action. The same hereditary data have different effects in infancy and school age; the same environmental conditions have a different effect on uterine development and on puberty. Therefore, the child's real age is a function not only of heredity and environment, but also of a third reason, namely time, i.e. the chronological age of the child. So, heredity, environment and age - these are the three reasons that together determine the real age of the child. (...)
Upbringing should strive to develop, instead of the missing or weakened, another type of activity that could replace the dropped function in behavior. So, for example, in a mentally retarded child, whose verbal thinking is delayed in its development, motor talent and practical intelligence should be developed in every possible way. Conversely, a child with motor retardation should develop higher forms of verbal or cultural thinking.
ESSAY
"PEDOLOGY AND ITS INFLUENCE ON DOMESTIC
EDUCATION"
Performed:
I.A. Smolyakova
Introduction ……………………………………………………………………… ... 3
1 Fundamentals of Pedology …………………………………………………………… 5
1.1 What is pedology ………………………………………………… 5
1.2 Basic concepts of pedology ………………………………………… 6
1.3 The origin of pedology as a science …………………………………… ..7
2 The first pedological research in Russia …………………………… .11
2.1 The emergence and development of pedology in Russia ………………………… 11
2.2 Influence of pedology on national education ……………… ..14
3 Pedology and its importance for pedagogy of the 20th century ………………………… ... 18
3.1 Stages of development of science …………………………………………… ..18
4 Reasons and consequences of the ban on pedology from Russia ……………………… 22
4.1 Strength and weakness of pedology ………………………………………… ... 22
4.2 Preconditions for the prohibition of pedology …………………………………… .24
4.3 Consequences of the defeat of pedology …………………………………… 24
4.4 The legacy of pedology. Pedology today ………………………… ... 26
Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………… .29
References ……………………………………………………………… 31
Introduction
In the 21st century, the problem of educating the younger generation in conditions of the negative influence on the child of environmental factors, such as:
environmental factors. More and more children are born with congenital ailments, chronic diseases, especially in large cities and in the zone of radiation contamination.
criminogenic factors. The growth of crime in cities and criminal arbitrariness, kidnapping, etc.
psychological. The rhythm of life in a metropolis, the need to enter an independent life early, a variety of television programs of various content, the Internet, etc.
All this requires from the teacher a modern approach to the upbringing and education of the younger generation.
Modern pedagogical educational institutions train specialists competent in many areas related to the health, development, psychology of the child. It is generally accepted that this knowledge is necessary for solving various problems of upbringing and education. More and more new methods are being created for the study of the child's psyche, the characteristics of childhood. Developers of modern educational programs rely heavily on the research of specialists in various fields.
As a future teacher, I also became interested in the search for a rational and effective education system that takes into account the age and individual characteristics of the child, as well as based on the material of sciences related to pedagogy and not only. However, in my research, I turned to the past. The subject of the science of pedology seemed to me extremely interesting for knowledge and application, despite a number of visible shortcomings. The purpose of my work: to try to answer a number of questions:
What did pedology give for world pedagogy and psychology?
What sciences today rely on the experience of pedology?
Is the research of pedologists used in modern pedagogy?
Tasks:
1 to trace the path of the emergence of pedologists, the prerequisites for the emergence of science;
2 become familiar with the basic concepts of pedology;
3 to study the influence of pedology on national education;
4 to understand the reasons for the defeat of pedology and its further oblivion.
1Foundations of Pedology
What is pedology
Pedology (from the Greek pais - a child and logos - a word, science) is a direction in psychology and pedagogy that arose at the end of the nineteenth century. under the influence of evolutionary ideas, associated primarily with the name of S. Hall, who in 1889 created the first pedological laboratory. In pedology, the child was considered in a comprehensive manner, in all its manifestations, in constant development and in various, including social, conditions, and the goal was to help the development of all its potencies.
This is the science of children, the doctrine of the development of the child, which attaches decisive importance to biological, physiological and psychological characteristics in the formation of his character and abilities.
Among all the variety of definitions of its subject, the definition of it as a science of the integral development of the child seems to be the most meaningful. In this definition, according to LS Vygotsky, two essential features of pedology as an independent scientific discipline are highlighted - integrity and development (understood as a single process). These signs, in fact, are distinguished as the leading ones by many major psychologists and educators of the 1920s and 1930s, including P.P. Blonsky, N.K. Krupskaya, although in their specific content they differ from each other. The concept of integrity is central here. L.S. Vygotsky understood the holistic approach to the study of the child as a special attitude towards the disclosure of those new qualities and specific features that arise from the combination of individual aspects of his development - social, psychological and physiological - into an integral process. "The study of these new qualities and the new laws corresponding to them, which are presented in the synthesis of individual aspects and processes of development, it seems to me, is the first sign of pedology as a whole and of each individual pedological research."
To reveal such patterns and qualities, which are not reducible to one of the aspects of a child's development, actually meant substantiating the right to exist of pedology as an independent scientific discipline. The solution to this problem in relation to the 20-30s. in many respects turned out to be impracticable, due to which doubts arose about the objective existence of the very subject of pedology, which were later completed by its complete denial as a science. In fact, in the first half of the 30s. pedology "takes the form of a kind of pedagogical anthropology that synthesizes, largely mechanical, scientific data about the child from the point of view of their pedagogical applications." Education and training of students are revealed from the standpoint of a multi-level organization of human development, which involves the consideration of social, psychological and biological properties in unity. Indicative in this respect for the 30s. is "Pedology" P.P. Blonsky, published in 1934.
Basic concepts of pedology
Development. The basic concept of pedology, the only correct one is the Dialectical concept of development.
Height: A child is qualitatively different from an adult. Growth is not only a quantitative addition of matter: quantity turns into quality.
Constitution and character: Growth induces a series of qualitative changes in the growing organism. The totality of the qualitative peculiarities of the organism forms its constitution. The constitution is usually called the physique of an organism.
Wednesday. “If we consider all human behavior as its relationship with the environment, it can be assumed in advance that there can be three main typical moments in this correlative activity. The first is the moment of relative equilibrium that is created between the organism and the environment. "
Childhood divisions. Blonsky divides all school childhood into 3 stages: early prepubertal childhood (7-10 years); late prepubertal childhood (10-12; 13 years old); puberty age (13-16 years old).
Transitional ages. The so-called "Critical ages" - birth, 3 years, 7 years, puberty. They are characterized by extreme impressionability, nervousness, imbalance, unmotivated strange actions, etc.
Pedological and chronological age. Problems of acceleration, inhibition of development, physical and mental. Each of age stages has its own peculiarity, but not every child experiences this stage at the same time.
1.3 The origin of pedology as a science
In the era of feudalism, pedagogy was guided by the principle:
"Break the will of the child so that his soul can live." A more or less systematic study of the child began only in the era of industrial capitalism.
Industrial capitalism, drawing more and more masses of the population into production as hired labor, demanded a certain level of education from them. In this regard, the question arose about universal education. What was needed was a teaching method that would work successfully in inexperienced hands. In an effort to make teaching more accessible and understandable, Pestalozzi tried to build it on the laws of psychology. "The psychologization of education" was continued by Herbart, he introduced psychology into all the main departments of pedagogy. While it was being created practical psychology, namely, in the middle of the 19th century, general psychology was greatly rebuilt, in the era of machine production and the development of technology, it became experimental. Educational psychology has also transformed into experimental educational psychology or experimental pedagogy. So the German psychologist and teacher MEIMAN in "lectures on introduction to experimental pedagogy and its psychological foundations" sets out the age-related psychological characteristics of children, their individual characteristics, the technique and economics of memorization and the application of psychology to teaching literacy, numeracy and drawing. E. Meimann was one of the pioneers of developmental psychology in Germany. He founded a psychological laboratory at the University of Hamburg, which conducted research on the mental development of children. Meiman is also the founder of the first special journal dedicated to pedagogical problems, the Journal of Educational Psychology. In his various activities, he paid the main attention to the applied aspect of child psychology and pedology, since he believed that the main task of pedology is to develop the methodological foundations of teaching children. In his theoretical approaches, Meiman sought to combine Selly's associationist approach with Hall's theory of recapitulation. Meiman believed that child psychology should not only study the stages and age characteristics of mental development, but also investigate individual options development, for example, issues of children's giftedness and backwardness. Congenital tendencies of children. At the same time, education and upbringing should be based on both knowledge of general laws and an understanding of the characteristics of the psyche of this particular child.
However, pedagogy has a number of very important problems that cannot be solved by means of pedagogical psychology (the goals of education, the content of educational material), therefore, pedagogical psychology cannot replace pedagogy. Mayman believed that such a general picture of a child's life should be provided by a special science - the science of young age (Jugendlehre), and for this, in addition to psychological data about the child, acquaintance with the child's physical life, knowledge of the dependence of the growing person's life on external conditions, knowledge of conditions education. So the development of educational psychology and experimental pedagogy leads to the recognition of the need to create a special science - the science of young age.
Relatively early, at the end of the 19th century, in the circles of the American psychologist, STANLEY HALL began to realize that it was impossible to study the mental development of a child separately from his physical development. As a result, it was proposed to create a new science - PEDOLOGY, which would give a more complete picture of the age-related development of a child. American psychologist Hall is the founder of pedology - a complex science of the child, which is based on the idea of pedocentrism, that is, the idea that the child is the center of research interests of many professionals - psychologists, educators, biologists, pediatricians, anthropologists, sociologists and other specialists. Of all these areas, pedology includes the part that has to do with children. Thus, this science, as it were, unites all branches of knowledge related to the study of child development.
The idea of the need to study child development became firmly established with the penetration of evolutionary ideas into psychology. The application of these ideas to the study of the psyche meant the recognition of its genesis, development, as well as its connection with the process of adaptation of the organism to the environment. One of the first to revise the subject and tasks of psychology from this point of view was the English psychologist G. Spencer. However, he was mainly interested in methodological and general theoretical problems of mental development. Hall, first of all, drew attention to the importance of studying the development of the child's psyche, the study of which can be genetic method for general psychology.
Hall associated the importance of studying child psychology with the theory of recapitulation developed by him. The basis of this theory is Haeckel's biogenetic law, which Hall applied to explain child development.
Naturally, such a rigid and straightforward transfer of biological laws into pedagogy could not but be criticized, and many of the provisions of Hall's pedological concept were revised pretty soon. However, the very science of pedology, created by him, very quickly gained popularity all over the world and existed almost until the middle of the 20th century. Popularity was brought to Hall and the methods he developed for studying children, primarily the questionnaires and questionnaires published by him for adolescents, teachers and parents, which also made it possible to compile a comprehensive characterization of the child, analyze their problems not only from the point of view of adults, but also the children themselves.
Thus, S. Hall expressed the idea of creating an experimental child psychology that was hovering in the air, combining the requirements of pedagogical practice with the achievements of biology and psychology that were timely to him.
The first pedological research in Russia
2.1 The emergence and development of pedology in Russia
Feudal Russia, with its pre-construction pedagogy, was as little interested in the psychology of the child as the Feudal West. As there, the origin and development of educational psychology in Russia is associated with the democratic movement:
The first who looked from a philosophical point of view at the matter of education was N.I. Pirogov. The principle of upbringing in a person, first of all, in a person, put forward by him, caused the need to pose and discuss many theoretical problems. He transferred pedagogy to a new plane. It was a demand for sound pedagogy based on psychology. Having shown that a person is a person, and not a means to achieve other goals, Pirogov raised the question of the need for a comprehensive, primarily psychological study of a person, knowledge of the patterns of his development, identification of conditions and factors that determine the formation of the child's mental sphere. With this approach, psychology came to the fore and became a necessary basis for solving pedagogical problems. He considered the task of studying the laws of child development to be paramount and urgent. Noting the originality of childhood in general, Pirogov recognized the need to take into account the individual differences of children, without this it is impossible to influence the formation of the moral world of the individual, to develop the best human traits.
A new understanding of the tasks of upbringing inevitably entailed a new approach to the interpretation of the essence of upbringing, a new look at the factors of upbringing and the means of pedagogical influence.
A huge contribution to the development of these problems was made by K.D. Ushinsky. He gave his own interpretation of the most complex and always topical questions about the psychological nature of education, about its limits and possibilities, about the relationship between education and development, about the combination of external educational influences and the process of self-education. According to Ushinsky, the subject of education is a person. "The art of education is based on the data of anthropological sciences, on the complex knowledge of a person who lives in a family, in society, among the people, among humanity and alone with his conscience." In the basis of his theory of education, Ushinsky put two main concepts - "organism" and "development". From this he deduced the need for a harmonious combination of mental, moral and physical education. The works of these outstanding teachers of the 19th century helped to look at the problem of education in a new light, to recognize the importance of psychology for education, to pave the way for the further development of educational psychology in Russia.
The enthusiasm for experimental pedagogy flares up in the era of 1905. An attempt to create, instead of pedagogical psychology, experimental pedagogy and a special science - pedology - found a response in Russia. Rumyantsev was an especially ardent propagandist of pedology in pre-revolutionary times.
For the early period of Soviet pedology, the names of the then largest pedological universities and departments were already characteristic: the medical-pedological institute, the pedologist - the defectological department. This influence of doctors on the nascent Soviet pedology was mainly beneficial: it turned out to be easier and easier to connect the doctrine of the growth and physical development of the child with his psychology. It became easier and easier for pedology to take shape as a special independent science, moreover, a materialistic one. Works are beginning to appear that claim to give a general concept of childhood. Among these works one can note: "Preschool age" by Arkin, "Pedology" by Blonsko, "Reflexology of childhood" by Aryamov.
Relying on natural science, the young Soviet pedology waged an energetic struggle against idealism and more and more resolutely took the path of materialism. But that natural-scientific materialism, which then imbued pedology, was not yet dialectical, but mechanistic materialism. He viewed the child as a kind of machine, the activity of which is entirely determined by the influence of external stimuli. This mechanistic concept was especially clearly manifested in the works of pedologists who gravitated towards reflexology. Thus, the problem of studying the laws of child development escapes the mechanists in pedology.
If in the first years of its existence, Soviet pedology was under the influence of natural science and medicine, then later pedagogy was decisively influenced by it. Pedology became more and more resolutely a pedagogical science, and a pedologist began to enter as a practical worker in children's institutions. Pedology became more and more a social science, biology was subjected to intense criticism, they recognized the huge role of the influence of the surrounding social environment and, in particular, upbringing. Scientific and pedagogical production has also grown (works by Molozhavy, Blonsky, Basov, Vygotsky, Schelovanov, Aryamov, Arkin).
Pedology turned its face to pedagogy. However, such a strong influence of pedagogy on pedology sometimes grew into the identification of these sciences, hence such incorrect definitions as “pedology is a part of pedagogy” or “pedology is the theory of the pedagogical process”. The problems of pedagogy and pedology are not identical (in pedagogy - as a teacher should teach, in pedology - as a child learns).
The problem of growth is one of the most basic pedological problems. Of course. She uses the achievements of psychology, but she also uses data from various other sciences.
The development problem is a philosophical problem. Pedology not only should not be alien to philosophy, but it is philosophy that forms the basis of pedology.
The study of the development of the child is not limited only to the present, without knowing the history of mankind, it is impossible to understand the history of the development of the child. Thus, history is one of the most basic sciences for pedology.
Knowledge of the activity of the nervous system is necessary for pedology. She generally needs knowledge of the characteristics of the child's organism: pedology in the study of child development uses a lot of biological material.
Pedology is the science of age-related development of a child in a certain socio-historical environment.
Representatives of science at the beginning of the twentieth century. are Rumyantsev, Nechaev, Rossolimo, Lazursky, Kashchenko. Later, pedological ideas were developed by Abramov, Basov, Bekhterev, Blonsky, Vygotsky, Zalkind, Molozhavy, Fortunatov, and others.
2.2 Influence of pedology on national education
A distinctive feature of the Soviet period in the history of culture and pedagogy is the enormous role played by the party and the state in its development. The state took upon itself the financing of all branches of culture: education, material and technical support, all types of art, having established the strictest censorship over literature, theater, cinema, educational institutions, etc. A harmonious system of indoctrination of the population was created. The mass media, finding themselves under the most severe control of the party and the state, along with reliable information used the method of manipulating the consciousness of the population. The idea was instilled in the people that the country is a besieged fortress, and only the one who defends it has the right to be in this fortress. The constant search for enemies became a distinctive feature of the activities of the party and the state.
In the mainstream of the class struggle, bourgeois culture was constantly opposed to a new, proletarian culture. In contrast to bourgeois culture, the new, socialist culture, according to the communists, should express the interests of the working people and serve the tasks of the class struggle of the proletariat for socialism. From these positions, the communists also determined their attitude to the cultural heritage of the past. Many values were excluded from the cultural process. In the special depositories there were works of writers, artists and other representatives of culture, not pleasing to the communists. Noble estates were destroyed, temples, churches and monasteries were destroyed, the connection of times was destroyed.
20-30s XX century were the heyday of extracurricular work. It was then that interesting pedagogical undertakings were introduced into life, original forms of organizing children's life appeared, the scientific and methodological base of extracurricular and extracurricular work was intensively established, serious scientific research and observation of the development of children's amateur performance, the creative abilities of the individual, her interests and needs were carried out. Collective and group forms of work were studied. Among the most famous educators who have contributed huge contribution in the establishment and development of out-of-school education in our country, let us call E.N. Medynsky, P.P. Blonsky, S.T. Shatsky and V.P. Shatskaya, A.S. Makarenko, V.N. Tersky. It should also be noted that N.K. Krupskaya and A.V. Lunacharsky "not only enriched pedagogy with their works on this problem, but also helped to solve it at the state level, influencing the education policy of the USSR."
School and out-of-school directions of education began to receive a certain design and concretization. Moreover, out-of-school education then played an even more prominent role, since it was in the practice of out-of-school work that ideas related to the upbringing of children in new socio-cultural conditions were born.
In 1918, the first out-of-school institution was opened - the Biological Station for Young Nature Lovers under the guidance of a talented teacher and scientist B.V. Vsesvyatsky. Soon the number of different out-of-school institutions increased dramatically.
In the mid-30s. children's sports schools and stadiums were created. Later there were children's highways, clubs for young sailors with their own fleets and shipping companies. The country entered a period of rapid industrialization, and the development of children's technical creativity became one of the main tasks of out-of-school education in the 1930s. Particular attention was paid to the development of a network of various technical stations for children in connection with the need to train a large number of qualified specialists for all sectors of the national economy, technically competent workers for new buildings.
In 1925 the All-Union Pioneer Camp "Artek" was opened. Later, especially in the post-war years, the pioneer camps were massively developed. They solved the problems of not only improving the health of children, but also social, political and labor education.
Attention was also paid to the development of the general culture of the younger generation, the formation of the artistic interests of children of different ages. For this purpose, such important cultural and educational institutions as children's libraries, theaters, cinemas, galleries were created. Music, art, and choreographic schools appeared, thanks to which conditions were created for the education of young talents.
The increase in the number and diversity of out-of-school institutions is a bright sign of the pre-war years. At that time, teachers began to theoretically comprehend the accumulated experience, which helped to determine the basic principles of extracurricular work: mass and general accessibility of classes based on the voluntary association of children by interests; development of their initiative and amateur performance; socially useful orientation of the activity; variety of forms of extracurricular work; taking into account the age and individual characteristics of children.
The hallmarks of A.S. Makarenko, as well as S.T. Shatsky, considered, first of all, creativity and self-organization. Makarenko believed it necessary to make the leisure and recreation of the Communards meaningful and interesting. The work of the circle, emphasized A.S. Makarenko, should have a real socially useful orientation, be built on the basis of self-organization. The lever of the entire club system of the communards was the principle of obtaining a variety of knowledge and skills that they could use in socially useful activities.
All the club work of A.S. Makarenko and S.T. Shatsky was built on the basis of children's self-government Makarenko emphasized that it is necessary to involve all pupils without exception, including the younger ones, to perform various organizational functions.
The conclusions of these teachers destroyed the prevailing idea of the child only as an object of pedagogical influence. They showed that a child in an out-of-school institution is an active subject of the educational process. This position, and its scientific and methodological substantiation, was very bold for that time.
The striving of youth leaders for centralized management of amateur movements subjugated the youth movement and the technical creativity of the children of the pioneer organization. And then the pioneer organization itself was included in the system of the school's activities. Out-of-school institutions for the most part began to be called houses of pioneers, which, of course, influenced the content and organization of work in them.
8. Kugukina L. Professional pedagogical self-education // Preschool education, 1996, №4.
9. Lunacharsky A. V. About upbringing and education. M., 1976.
10. Makarenko A.S. Pedagogical works, M., 1983-1986. T. 7.
11. Martsinovskaya G.D., Yaroshevsky M.G. Age and educational psychology of pre-revolutionary Russia, Dubna, 1995.
12. Nikolskaya A.A. 100 outstanding psychologists of the world, Moscow - Voronezh, 1995.
13. Petrovsky A.V. History of Soviet Psychology, Moscow, 1967.
14. Slastenin V.A., Maksakova V.I . Foreword // Blonsky P.P. Pedology. M., 1989
16. Ushinsky K.D. Man as a subject of education. Experience in pedagogical anthropology, M., Grand, 2004
17. Shvartsman P.Ya., Kuznetsova I.V. Pedology // Repressive Science, issue 2, ed. Yaroslavsky M.T., St. Petersburg, 1994
18. Shcherbakov A.I. Psychological foundations of the formation of the personality of the Soviet teacher, Leningrad, 1967
