Communication style between teachers and children. Practical hour “Pedagogical communication styles and their influence on the emotional sphere of a preschooler Studying the teacher’s communication style with children table

Pedagogical communication of a preschool teacher: his styles and models

Komandin E.N.,

educational psychologist

highest qualification category

MBDOU kindergarten No. 24 “Zvezdochka”

Pyatigorsk

The professional activity of a teacher is impossible without pedagogical communication. Pedagogical communication is a system of interaction between a teacher and children with the aim of providing an educational influence on them, forming pedagogically appropriate relationships and self-esteem of the child, and creating a microclimate favorable for mental development.

The teacher must strive to ensure that his pedagogical communication with children is effective and contributes to their mental development to the greatest extent. To do this, he needs to know what his pupils expect from communicating with him, take into account their changing need for communication with adults throughout childhood, and develop it. By interacting with children in the “zone of proximal development,” a teacher can help realize their potential. Communication with adults prepares the emergence of new, more complex activities. So, for example, business communication contributes to the development of object-tool-based activity - leading at an early age; extra-situational-personal communication - educational, leading at primary school age (Lisina M.I., 1978).

The form and content of the educator's pedagogical communication are largely determined by the specific tasks that he is trying to solve in the process of directing the activities of children.

The effectiveness of pedagogical communication depends on the teacher’s ability to take into account the age and individual characteristics of children. Various forms of influence are chosen by the teacher to communicate in similar situations with children of different temperaments and ages. He often expresses special warmth towards the little ones, using affectionate forms of address that the baby is accustomed to in the family. The teacher also shows sensitivity and interest in working with older children. But here, in order to create the optimal nature of the relationship, he is required to be able to joke and, if necessary, talkseriously, strictly. The content of the teacher’s communication with different children also differs - their interests, inclinations, gender, and characteristics of the family microenvironment are taken into account.

In the process of interaction with children, the teacher uses both direct and indirect influences.

Usually, direct influences are understood as influences that are directly addressed to the student, in one way or another related to his behavior, relationships (explanation, demonstration, instruction, approval, censure, etc.). Indirect influences are considered to be through other persons, through the appropriate organization of joint activities, etc.

The essence of this method of influence is that the manager does not create any obstacles and does not give any instructions regarding the desired direction of behavior, but he changes the surrounding conditions in such a way that each individual individually chooses exactly the form of activity that was desired by the manager.

The most effective in working with children, especially younger and middle-aged children, are indirect influences, primarily influences through play and playful communication.

During the walk, children from the middle group rode wooden horses and airplanes. They were especially attracted to a horse that had recently been exhibited on the property. We rode, as agreed with the children, in turns - first the girls, then the boys. Now it was Kolya A’s turn. But Lyuda S. continued to ride, and had no intention of giving up the horse to him. “This is my horse, I will ride it,” she answered sharply in response to the boy’s request. Kolya pulled her pigtail, the girl began to cry and ran to complain to the teacher. The teacher watching the children did not scold any of them. She walked with them closer to the horse. “Look, children, how sad the horse has become. She's probably offended by you. She doesn't like it when children quarrel among themselves. Then she doesn’t want to roll them. The horse will be happy to give you a ride when you play together and have fun. And now the horse is probably already tired. She wants to eat and drink. Let’s feed her and give her something to drink, and she’ll give you rides again.” The children responded with pleasure to the teacher’s proposal (from materials by E. A. Panko).

By entering into playful communication, the teacher gets the opportunity to manage children’s activities, their development, regulate relationships, and resolve conflicts in an economical way, without unnecessary pressure or moralizing.

The optimality of pedagogical communication also depends on the teacher’s ability to use fairy tales and art as a means of indirect influence on the child. Properly organized pedagogical communication creates the most favorable conditions for the development of children's creative activity. It has been revealed that it is personal-business communication, which simultaneously satisfies the need for cooperation and empathy, mutual understanding, that most contributes to the creation of a favorable psychological climate in kindergarten and school.Teachers supervise the activities of children, but the forms of their influence on children are different. Most often, “democratic” and “authoritarian” forms of leadership are distinguished. The productivity of the “democratic” and the harmfulness of the “authoritarian” style, the inadmissibility of the latter in working with children, has been proven in a number of studies (A. A. Bodalev, K. Levin, V. S. Mukhina, L. N. Bashlakova, etc.).

Characterizing the optimal pedagogical communication of a teacher, A. A. Leontiev rightly notes that it “allows for maximum use of the teacher’s personal characteristics in the educational process.” This opportunity is also created by optimal pedagogical communication between the teacher and children of childhood. The interests, inclinations, abilities, and pedagogical attitude of the educator are reflected in the style of his professional communication.

The teaching styles of kindergarten teachers are varied. They are currently being studied. However, we can already talk about the indisputable advantage of a positive harmonious style, when positive motivation is combined with positive forms of communication with children, with a high level of professional skills. Education and self-education of this style is one of the important means of increasing the effectiveness of pedagogical communication.

In improving pedagogical communication, as well as all the activities of the teacher, the psychological climate in the teaching staff of the kindergarten plays an important role.

Pedagogical communication styles

"INDIFFERENT"

Teachers of this group in their activities do not show a clearly defined focus in guiding any specific types of children’s activities. As a rule, educators of this type are indifferent to children and perform their duties formally. And they take into account the individual characteristics of the child in their work and do not make special demands on parents. When assessing children, they are based on their achievements in everyday activities and when performing routine tasks. Close contact with children is difficult to establish. They do not achieve high success in educational work.

"GAME"

Teachers of this group show an increased interest in children’s play activities and know how to manage play. Playful communication is often used at work. Characterized by the widespread use of indirect methods of influencing him outside of situational communication with a child. There is a relatively high level of understanding of children, taking into account their age and individual characteristics. When assessing a child, they primarily rely on his behavior during play activities, ability to communicate with peers, and do not lose sight of the child’s achievements in other types of activities.

"FORMAL - PRAGMATIC TYPE"

Educators in this group often show quite high persistence and responsibility in performing their functions, and are demanding of the child and parents. In their relationships with children and parents, they proceed, first of all, from formally put forward requirements for them without taking into account individual characteristics, a specific situation, and its uniqueness. At the same time, he does not show tact or delicacy; there is no deep interest in the child’s inner world. When making a general assessment of a student, they usually proceed from their success in mastering everyday activities and the nature of their fulfillment of the requirements that ensure the normal flow of routine moments. Warm relationships with children do not arise often.

"DIDACTIC"

Teachers of this type are characterized by a focus on educational activities.

They often show high and average levels of skill in a given problem. When assessing a child, they are most often based on his achievements in educational activities. Business communication prevails.

"ART"

Teachers of this group take a special interest in children's artistic activities and their guidance. Often children brought up by such a teacher achieve extensive results in artistic activities. In their work they use indirect methods of influence such as fiction, songs, riddles, etc.

Models of pedagogical communication (A. Tallen)

Model No. 1 "SOCRATES"

This is a teacher with a reputation as a lover of discussion and debate, deliberately provoking it in a group of children. He often takes on the role of "devil's advocate", defending unpopular views. He is characterized by high individualism and lack of systematicity in the educational process. Due to constant confrontation, reminiscent of cross-examination, children, as a result, strengthen the defense of their own positions and learn to defend them.

Model No. 2 "MASTER"

The teacher acts as a role model, subject to unconditional copying by children, primarily not so much in the educational process, but in relation to life in general

Model No. 3 “HEAD OF GROUP CONSENT”

He considers the main thing in the educational process to be achieving agreement and establishing cooperation between children, assigning himself the role of a mediator for whom the search for democratic agreement is more important than the result of the discussion itself.

Model No. 4 "GENERAL"

He avoids any ambiguity, is emphatically demanding, strictly seeks obedience, because he believes that he is always right in everything, and the child, like an army recruit, must unquestioningly obey the orders given. According to the author of the typology, this style is more common in practice than the others combined

Model No. 5 "MANAGER"

A style that has become widespread in radically oriented educational institutions and is associated with an atmosphere of effective group activity, an individual approach to children, and encouragement of their initiative and independence. The teacher strives to discuss with each child the meaning of the task he is solving, quality control and evaluation of the final result.

Model No. 6 "TRAINER"

The atmosphere of communication in the group is permeated with the spirit of team affiliation. Children are like members of a single team - each individual is not important as an individual, but together they can move mountains. The teacher is not assigned the role of inspirer of group activities; for him, the main thing is the final result, brilliant success, victory.

Model No. 7 "GUIDE"

The embodiment of a walking encyclopedia. Laconic, precise, restrained. He knows the answers to all questions in advance, as well as the possible questions themselves. Technically flawless, which is precisely why it is too often... downright boring.

7 communication styles of teachers (M. Shein)

ForFIRST COMMUNICATION STYLE characterized by activity, contact and high efficiency of communication, pedagogical optimism, reliance on the positive potential of the child’s personality and the children’s team, a combination of benevolent demands and trust in the child’s independence, confident openness, sincerity and naturalness in communication, selfless responsiveness and emotional acceptance of the partner, the desire for mutual understanding and cooperation, an individual approach to solving pedagogical situations. In-depth and adequate perception and understanding of children’s behavior, their personal issues, taking into account the multi-motivational nature of their actions, holistic impact on the personality and its value and semantic positions, transfer of experience as lived knowledge, high improvisation in communication, the desire for one’s own professional personal growth, quite high and adequate self-esteem, a developed sense of humor.

ForSECOND STYLE communication is characterized by subordinating oneself to the tasks of professional activity, complete dedication to work and children, combined with distrust of their independence, replacing their efforts with one’s own activity, the formation of dependence in children (“enslavement” with good intentions), the need for emotional intimacy (sometimes as compensation for loneliness in personal life), responsiveness and even sacrifice combined with indifference to understanding oneself from the outside, lack of desire for one’s own personal growth, low degree of reflection of one’s own behavior.

THIRD STYLE - superficial, de-problematized and conflict-free communication with insufficiently clearly defined pedagogical and communicative goals, turning into a passive response to changing situations, lack of desire for an in-depth understanding of students, replacing their orientation with uncritical agreement (sometimes reducing the necessary distance to a minimum, familiarity), external formal goodwill with internal indifference or increased anxiety, focus on reproductive activity, the desire to meet standards (to be no worse than others), compliance, uncertainty, lack of demands, labile or low self-esteem.

FOURTH STYLE OF COMMUNICATION - cold detachment, extreme restraint, emphasized distance, focus on superficial, role-playing communication, lack of need for emotional involvement in communication, isolation, indifference to children and low sensitivity to their states (“emotional deafness”), high self-esteem combined with hidden dissatisfaction process of communication.

FIFTH COMMUNICATION STYLE - egocentric personality orientation, high need to achieve success, emphasized demands, well-disguised pride, high development of communication skills and their flexible use for the purpose of covert control of others, good knowledge of strengths and weaknesses combined with one’s own closeness, insincerity, a significant degree of reflection, high self-esteem and control.

SIXTH STYLE OF COMMUNICATION - desire for dominance, orientation towards “education-coercion”, predominance of disciplinary methods over those being organized, egocentrism, ignoring the point of view of the children themselves, intolerance to their objections and mistakes. Lack of pedagogical tact and aggressiveness, subjectivity in assessments, their rigid polarization, rigidity, orientation towards reproductive activity, stereotyping of pedagogical influences, low sensitivity and reflection, high self-esteem.

SEVENTH COMMUNICATION STYLE - rejection of communication and one’s professional role, pedagogical pessimism, irritable-impulsive rejection of children, complaints about their hostility and “incorrigibility”, the desire to reduce communication with them to the imaginary and manifestation of aggression when it is impossible to avoid it, “emotional breakdowns”, infantile attribution of responsibility for failures in communicating with children or with objective circumstances, low self-esteem and poor self-control

Literature:

Fominova A.N., Educational psychology

NewdictionarymethodologicaltermsAndconcepts( theoryAndpracticetraininglanguages). - M. : Publishing houseICAR. E. G. Asimov, A. N. Shchukin. 2009 .

Tokpaeva M.A. Pedagogical communication is an important condition for the effectiveness of the educational process [Text] // Theory and practice of education in the modern world: materials of the III international. scientific conf. (St. Petersburg, May 2013). - St. Petersburg: Renome, 2013. - pp. 110-112.

The term "style" » appeared for the first time in ancient rhetoric to characterize the expressive means of language, and, as historians testify, it was widely used in literature, linguistics, and art.

An analysis of the definitions of the concepts of “style” at the philosophical, general scientific, psychological, pedagogical levels allowed us to draw the following conclusion: with all the diversity, the following conclusion can be drawn: with all the diversity of the concepts of style, there is a common semantic field of its definitions. This similarity is that in these definitions the concept of style includes “a way of organizing” and “a way of functioning of a system.”

This makes it possible to give the following definition of “style of pedagogical communication” at the pedagogical level.

Pedagogical communication style – this is a stable unity of methods and means of activity of the teacher and students, their subject-subject interaction.

The style of pedagogical communication expresses the characteristics of the teacher’s communicative capabilities, the established nature of the relationship between the teacher and students, and the creative individuality of the teacher; characteristics of students. The style of communication inevitably reflects the general and pedagogical culture of the teacher and his professionalism.

A generally accepted classification of pedagogical communication styles is their division into authoritarian, democratic And conniving .

At authoritarian style communication, the teacher alone decides all issues relating to the life of both the class team and each student. Based on his own attitudes, he determines the goals of interaction and subjectively evaluates the results of activities.

In its most pronounced form, this style is manifested in an autocratic approach to education, when students do not participate in the discussion of problems that are directly related to them, and their initiative is assessed negatively and rejected. The authoritarian style of communication is implemented using the tactics of dictatorship and guardianship. Schoolchildren’s resistance to teacher pressure most often leads to the emergence of persistent conflict situations.

Teachers who adhere to this style of communication do not allow students to show independence and initiative. Their assessments of students are inadequate, based only on performance indicators. An authoritarian teacher focuses on the student’s negative actions, but does not take into account the motives for these actions. External indicators of the success of authoritarian teachers (academic performance, discipline in the classroom, etc.) are most often positive, but the socio-psychological atmosphere in such classes is usually unfavorable. The role position of these teachers is objective. The personality and individuality of the student turns out to be outside the interaction strategy.

Conniving (anarchic, ignoring) style of communication is characterized by the teacher’s desire to be minimally involved in the activity, which is explained by the removal of responsibility for its results. Such teachers formally perform their functional duties limited to teaching. The permissive communication style is based on non-interference tactics, which are based on indifference and disinterest in the problems of both the school and students. The consequence of such tactics is the lack of control over the activities of schoolchildren and the dynamics of their personality development. Academic performance and discipline in the classes of such teachers are, as a rule, unsatisfactory.

The common features of permissive and authoritarian communication styles, despite the apparent opposite, are distant relationships between the teacher and students, lack of trust between them, obvious isolation, alienation of the teacher, and his demonstrative emphasis on his dominant position.

An alternative these styles communication is collaboration style participants in pedagogical interaction, more often called democratic . At In this style of communication, the teacher is focused on increasing the subjective role of the student in interaction, on involving everyone in solving common problems.

Teachers who adhere to this style are characterized by an active and positive attitude towards students, an adequate assessment of their capabilities, successes and failures. They are characterized by a deep understanding of the student, the goals and motives of his behavior, and the ability to predict the development of his personality. In terms of external indicators of their activities, teachers with a democratic communication style are inferior to their authoritarian colleagues, but the socio-psychological climate in their classes is always more favorable. Interpersonal relationships in them are characterized by trust and high demands on themselves and others. With a democratic style of communication, the teacher stimulates students to creativity, initiative, and organizes conditions for self-realization.

The characteristics of the above pedagogical communication styles are given in their “pure form”. In real teaching practice, “mixed” communication styles most often occur.

A teacher cannot completely exclude from his arsenal some private techniques of an authoritative style of communication. As studies have shown, they sometimes fail to be quite effective, especially when working with classes and individual students with a relatively low level of socio-psychological and personal development. But even in this case, the teacher should be generally focused on a democratic style of communication, dialogue and cooperation with students, since this style of communication allows for the maximum implementation of the personal development strategy of pedagogical interaction.

In addition to the main ones, there are intermediate styles of pedagogical interaction , in relation to which it should be assumed that educational forces are always generated by personal relationships, i.e. entirely depend on the personality of the teacher.

V.A. Kann-Kalik established and characterized such styles of pedagogical communication as communication based on passion for the joint creative activities of teachers and students; communication based on friendship; communication-distance; communication-intimidation; communication-flirting.

The most productive is communication based on passion for joint creative activities. This style of communication characterized the activities of V.A. Sukhomlinsky.

It is quite effective style of pedagogical communication based on friendly disposition, which can be considered as a prerequisite for the above style. Friendly disposition acts as a stimulus for the development of relationships between the teacher and students. Friendliness and passion for working together unite these styles with each other. However, friendliness must be pedagogically appropriate, since a certain measure of distance preserves the status positions and sovereignty of each of the subjects of the interaction process.

One of the fairly common communication styles is communication-distance , which is fully used by both experienced teachers and beginners.

Research shows that a fairly exaggerated (excessive) distance leads to the formalization of interaction between teacher and student. The distance must correspond to the general logic of their relationship and is an indicator of the leading role of the teacher, but must be based on authority. The transformation of the “distance indicator” into the dominant feature of pedagogical communication sharply reduces the overall creative level of collaboration between the teacher and students. This leads to the strengthening of the authoritarian style of their relationship.

Communication-distance in its extreme manifestations transforms into a more rigid form - communication-intimidation . It is most popular among novice teachers who do not know how to organize productive communication based on passion for joint activities. For a personal development strategy of pedagogical interaction, communication-intimidation is unpromising.

An equally negative role in acts of interaction between teachers and students is played by communication-flirting, which is also mainly used by young teachers. Trying to quickly establish contact with children, to please them, but not having the necessary communicative culture for this, they begin to flirt with them, that is, flirt, talk about personal topics in class, and abuse rewards without proper grounds.

Communication styles such as intimidation, flirtation and extreme forms of communication-distance, in the absence of the teacher’s communication skills necessary to create a creative atmosphere of cooperation, when used frequently, become cliches, giving rise to ineffective methods of pedagogical communication.

Depending on the style of pedagogical communication, American psychologists have identified three types of teachers.

"Proactive" The teacher is proactive in organizing communication in the class (both group and paired). He clearly individualizes his contacts with students. His attitudes change in accordance with experience, i.e. such a teacher does not seek mandatory confirmation of his existing attitudes. He knows what he wants and understands what his own behavior contributes to achieving this goal.

"Reactive" the teacher is also flexible in his attitudes, but he is internally weak, subordinate (to the elements of communication). The difference in his attitudes towards individual students is not a difference in his strategy, but a difference in the behavior of the schoolchildren themselves, i.e. It is not he himself, but the students who dictate the nature of his communication with the class. He has vague goals and adapts and adapts to the students.

"Overactive" the teacher, noticing individual differences, immediately builds an unrealistic model that exaggerates these differences many times over and believes that this model is reality. His behavior is based on stereotypes, into which he fits real, non-stereotypical students.

Among the classifications of pedagogical communication styles developed abroad in recent years, the typology of teacher professional positions proposed by M. Talen seems interesting. He specifically points to the basis laid down in the typologization: the choice of role by the teacher based on his own needs, and not the needs of the students.

Model 1 – "Socrates". This is a teacher with a reputation as a lover of controversy and discussion, deliberately provoking it in the classroom. He is characterized by individualism, unsystematicism in the educational process due to constant confrontation; Students strengthen their defense of their own positions and learn to defend them.

Model 2 – "Group Discussion Leader" He considers the achievement of agreement and the establishment of cooperation between students to be the main thing in the educational process, assigning himself the role of a mediator for whom the search for democratic agreement is more important than the result of the discussion.

Model 3 – "Master. The teacher acts as a role model, subject to unconditional copying, and above all not so much in the educational process, but in relation to life in general.

Model 4 – "General." He avoids any ambiguity, is emphatically demanding, strictly seeks obedience, because he believes that he is always right in everything, and the student, like an army recruit, must unquestioningly obey the orders given. According to the author of the typology, this style is more common than all of them combined in teaching practice.

Model 5 – “ Manager". A style that has become widespread in radically oriented schools and is associated with an atmosphere of effective class activity, encouraging initiative and independence. The teacher strives to discuss with each student the meaning of the problem being solved, quality control and evaluation of the final result.

Model 6 – “ Trainer". The atmosphere of communication in the classroom is permeated with a corporate spirit. Students in this case are like players of one team, where each individual is not important as an individual, but together they can do a lot. The teacher is assigned the role of inspirer of group efforts, for whom the main thing is the final result, brilliant success, victory.

Model 7 – “ Guide» The embodied image of a walking encyclopedia. Laconic, precise, restrained. Answers to all questions. Technically impeccable and that is why it is often downright boring.

Markova and Nikonova based the distinction between a teacher’s pedagogical communication style on the following grounds: content characteristics of the style (the teacher’s predominant orientation to the process or result of his work, the teacher’s deployment of indicative and control-evaluative stages in his work); dynamic characteristics of the style (flexibility, stability, switchability, etc.): effectiveness (the level of knowledge of schoolchildren’s learning skills, as well as the students’ interest in the subject). Based on this, a number of individual styles were identified, described below:

Emotional-improvisational style (EIS). Teachers with EIS are distinguished by a predominant focus on the learning process. He constructs an explanation of new material in a logical and interesting way, but during the process of explanation he often lacks feedback from his students. During a survey, such a teacher quickly interviews a large number of students, mostly strong ones, who are of interest to him, asks informal questions, but allows them to say little, without waiting for them to formulate an answer on their own. A teacher with EIS is characterized by insufficiently adequate planning of the educational process: he selects the most interesting educational material for practice in the lesson; less interesting, although important, is left for students to independently analyze. In its activities, consolidation and repetition of educational material, control of students’ knowledge are not sufficiently represented. A teacher with this style is distinguished by high efficiency and the use of a large arsenal of various teaching methods. He often practices collective discussions and stimulates spontaneous statements from students. A teacher with EIS is characterized by intuitiveness, which is expressed in the frequent inability to analyze the characteristics and effectiveness of his activities in the lesson.

Emotional-methodical style (EMS). A teacher with EMS is focused on the process and results of learning; he is characterized by adequate planning of the educational process, high efficiency, and a certain predominance of intuitiveness over reflexivity. Taking into account both the process and the results of learning, such a teacher adequately plans the educational process, works out all the educational material step by step, carefully monitors the level of knowledge of all students (both strong and weak), his activities constantly include consolidation and repetition of educational material , control of students' knowledge. Such a teacher is distinguished by high efficiency, he often changes the types of work in the lesson, and practices collective discussions. Using the same rich arsenal of methodological techniques when practicing educational material as a teacher with EMS, a teacher with EMS, unlike the latter, strives to activate children not with external entertainment, but to firmly interest them in the features of the subject itself.

Reasoning-improvisation style(RICE). A teacher with RIS is characterized by an orientation towards the process and results of learning, and adequate planning of the educational process. Compared to teachers with emotional styles, a teacher with RIS shows less ingenuity in selecting and varying teaching methods, is not always able to ensure a high pace of work, uses collective discussions less often, and the relative time of spontaneous speech of his students during lessons is less than that of teachers with an emotional style. A teacher with RIS speaks less himself, especially during a survey, preferring to influence students indirectly (through hints, clarifications, etc.), giving respondents the opportunity to formulate their answer in detail.

Reasoning-methodical style (RMS). Based primarily on learning outcomes and adequately planning the educational process, a teacher with RMS is quite conservative in the use of means and methods of teaching. High methodology (systematic reinforcement, repetition of educational material, control of students’ knowledge) is combined with a small standard set of teaching methods used, preference for students’ reproductive activity, and rare collective discussions. During the questioning process, the teacher with RMS addresses a small number of students, giving each a lot of time to answer, paying special attention to weak students. It is generally characterized by reflexivity.

Download:

Preview:

Pedagogical communication of a preschool teacher: his styles and models

Komandin E.N.,

educational psychologist

highest qualification category

MBDOU kindergarten No. 24 “Zvezdochka”

Pyatigorsk

The form and content of the educator's pedagogical communication are largely determined by the specific tasks that he is trying to solve in the process of directing the activities of children.

The effectiveness of pedagogical communication depends on the teacher’s ability to take into account the age and individual characteristics of children. Various forms of influence are chosen by the teacher to communicate in similar situations with children of different temperaments and ages. He often expresses special warmth towards the little ones, using affectionate forms of address that the baby is accustomed to in the family. The teacher also shows sensitivity and interest in working with older children. But here, in order to create the optimal nature of the relationship, he is required to be able to joke and, if necessary, talk
seriously, strictly. The content of the teacher’s communication with different children also differs - their interests, inclinations, gender, and characteristics of the family microenvironment are taken into account.

In the process of interaction with children, the teacher uses both direct and indirect influences.

The most effective in working with children, especially younger and middle-aged children, are indirect influences, primarily influences through play and playful communication.

The optimality of pedagogical communication also depends on the teacher’s ability to use fairy tales and art as a means of indirect influence on the child. Properly organized pedagogical communication creates the most favorable conditions for the development of children's creative activity. It has been revealed that it is personal-business communication, which simultaneously satisfies the need for cooperation and empathy, mutual understanding, that most contributes to the creation of a favorable psychological climate in kindergarten and school.
Teachers supervise the activities of children, but the forms of their influence on children are different. Most often, “democratic” and “authoritarian” forms of leadership are distinguished. The productivity of the “democratic” and the harmfulness of the “authoritarian” style, the inadmissibility of the latter in working with children, has been proven in a number of studies (A. A. Bodalev, K. Levin, V. S. Mukhina, L. N. Bashlakova, etc.).

In improving pedagogical communication, as well as all the activities of the teacher, the psychological climate in the teaching staff of the kindergarten plays an important role.

Pedagogical communication styles

"INDIFFERENT"

"GAME"

"FORMAL - PRAGMATIC TYPE"

"DIDACTIC"

Teachers of this type are characterized by a focus on educational activities.

They often show high and average levels of skill in a given problem. When assessing a child, they are most often based on his achievements in educational activities. Business communication prevails.

"ART"

Models of pedagogical communication (A. Tallen)

Model No. 1 "SOCRATES"

Model No. 2 "MASTER"

The teacher acts as a role model, subject to unconditional copying by children, primarily not so much in the educational process, but in relation to life in general

Model No. 3 “HEAD OF GROUP CONSENT”

Model No. 4 "GENERAL"

Model No. 5 "MANAGER"

Model No. 6 "TRAINER"

Model No. 7 "GUIDE"

7 communication styles of teachers (M. Shein)

For FIRST COMMUNICATION STYLEcharacterized by activity, contact and high efficiency of communication, pedagogical optimism, reliance on the positive potential of the child’s personality and the children’s team, a combination of benevolent demands and trust in the child’s independence, confident openness, sincerity and naturalness in communication, selfless responsiveness and emotional acceptance of the partner, the desire for mutual understanding and cooperation, an individual approach to solving pedagogical situations. In-depth and adequate perception and understanding of children’s behavior, their personal issues, taking into account the multi-motivational nature of their actions, holistic impact on the personality and its value and semantic positions, transfer of experience as lived knowledge, high improvisation in communication, the desire for one’s own professional personal growth, quite high and adequate self-esteem, a developed sense of humor.

For SECOND STYLE communication is characterized by subordinating oneself to the tasks of professional activity, complete dedication to work and children, combined with distrust of their independence, replacing their efforts with one’s own activity, the formation of dependence in children (“enslavement” with good intentions), the need for emotional intimacy (sometimes as compensation for loneliness in personal life), responsiveness and even sacrifice combined with indifference to understanding oneself from the outside, lack of desire for one’s own personal growth, low degree of reflection of one’s own behavior.

THIRD STYLE - superficial, de-problematized and conflict-free communication with insufficiently clearly defined pedagogical and communicative goals, turning into a passive response to changing situations, lack of desire for an in-depth understanding of students, replacing their orientation with uncritical agreement (sometimes reducing the necessary distance to a minimum, familiarity), external formal goodwill with internal indifference or increased anxiety, focus on reproductive activity, the desire to meet standards (to be no worse than others), compliance, uncertainty, lack of demands, labile or low self-esteem.

FOURTH STYLE OF COMMUNICATION- cold detachment, extreme restraint, emphasized distance, focus on superficial, role-playing communication, lack of need for emotional involvement in communication, isolation, indifference to children and low sensitivity to their states (“emotional deafness”), high self-esteem combined with hidden dissatisfaction process of communication.

FIFTH COMMUNICATION STYLE- egocentric personality orientation, high need to achieve success, emphasized demands, well-disguised pride, high development of communication skills and their flexible use for the purpose of covert control of others, good knowledge of strengths and weaknesses combined with one’s own closeness, insincerity, a significant degree of reflection, high self-esteem and control.

SIXTH STYLE OF COMMUNICATION- desire for dominance, orientation towards “education-coercion”, predominance of disciplinary methods over those being organized, egocentrism, ignoring the point of view of the children themselves, intolerance to their objections and mistakes. Lack of pedagogical tact and aggressiveness, subjectivity in assessments, their rigid polarization, rigidity, orientation towards reproductive activity, stereotyping of pedagogical influences, low sensitivity and reflection, high self-esteem.

SEVENTH COMMUNICATION STYLE- rejection of communication and one’s professional role, pedagogical pessimism, irritable-impulsive rejection of children, complaints about their hostility and “incorrigibility”, the desire to reduce communication with them to the imaginary and manifestation of aggression when it is impossible to avoid it, “emotional breakdowns”, infantile attribution of responsibility for failures in communicating with children or with objective circumstances, low self-esteem and poor self-control

Literature:

Kolominsky Ya. P., Panko E. A., Igumnov S. A.. Mental development of children in normal and pathological conditions: psychological diagnostics, prevention and correction. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2004. -480 p., 2004
Fominova A.N., Educational psychology
New dictionary of methodological terms and concepts(theory and practice of language teaching). - M. : Publishing house ICAR. E. G . Azimov, A. N. Shchukin. 2009.
Tokpaeva M.A. Pedagogical communication is an important condition for the effectiveness of the educational process [Text] // Theory and practice of education in the modern world: materials of the III international. scientific conf. (St. Petersburg, May 2013). - St. Petersburg: Renome, 2013. - pp. 110-112.

The professional activity of a teacher is a process of continuous communication with preschoolers. The effectiveness of educational work in kindergarten largely depends on the nature of pedagogical communication. The teacher’s communication with children significantly influences the formation of the child’s personality and the characteristics of his relationship with others. In this regard, the study of the problem of pedagogical communication and the creation of scientifically based recommendations for organizing communication between a teacher and preschool children at the present stage of intensive development and improvement of public preschool education is of particular relevance.

In accordance with the central purpose of pedagogical influence, communication performs three functions.

The first function - “opening” the child to communication - is designed to create comfortable conditions in the classroom (in a state of psychological liberation, children develop more actively, strive to express themselves, and are not afraid to seem funny). Without the implementation of this function, it is not possible to identify the child’s attitude to what is happening around him. While knowing the true attitude of a preschooler to the environment helps the teacher plan further work together with him.

The second function - the “participation” of the child in pedagogical communication - is manifested as a result of an analysis of the process of interaction between the teacher and children. By implementing this communication function, the teacher helps the child cope with the difficulties that he encounters on his path of “ascent to the culture of humanity.”

The third function - the “elevation” of the child in pedagogical communication - is understood not as an inflated assessment, but as the stimulation of new value formations.

The problem of “leadership styles”, “communication styles” of a teacher with children was first raised abroad in the 30s by the American psychologist K. Levin. The classification of communication styles he proposed is the basis for the works of American scientists R. Lippitt and K. White, who distinguish three styles of professional communication:

The democratic style of communication is considered the most effective and optimal. It is characterized by broad contact with pupils, the manifestation of trust and respect for them, the teacher strives to establish emotional contact with the child, and does not suppress with severity and punishment; Positive assessments predominate in interactions with children. A democratic teacher feels the need for feedback from children on how they perceive certain forms of joint activity; knows how to admit mistakes made. In his work, such a teacher stimulates mental activity and motivation to achieve cognitive activity. in groups of educators whose communication is characterized by democratic tendencies, optimal conditions are created for the formation of children's relationships and a positive emotional climate of the group. The democratic style ensures friendly mutual understanding between teacher and student, evokes positive emotions and self-confidence in children, and gives an understanding of the value of cooperation in joint activities.

Teachers with an authoritarian communication style, on the contrary, display pronounced attitudes and selectivity towards children, they are much more likely to use prohibitions and restrictions in relation to children, and abuse negative assessments; severity and punishment are the main pedagogical means. An authoritarian educator expects only obedience; it is distinguished by a large number of educational influences with their uniformity. A teacher’s communication with authoritarian tendencies leads to conflict and hostility in children’s relationships, thereby creating unfavorable conditions for the upbringing of preschoolers. The teacher’s authoritarianism is often a consequence of an insufficient level of psychological culture, on the one hand, and a desire to accelerate the pace of children’s development, despite their individual characteristics, on the other. Moreover, teachers resort to authoritarian methods with the best intentions: they are convinced that by breaking children and achieving maximum results from them here and now, they can more quickly achieve their desired goals. A pronounced authoritarian style puts the teacher in a position of alienation from the students; every child experiences a state of insecurity and anxiety, tension and self-doubt. This happens because such teachers underestimate the development of such qualities in children as indiscipline, laziness and irresponsibility.

Liberal communication style.

A liberal educator is characterized by lack of initiative, irresponsibility, inconsistency in decisions and actions, and indecisiveness in difficult situations. Such a teacher “forgets” about his previous requirements and, after a certain time, is able to present completely opposite requirements to the requirements he himself had previously given. Tends to let things take their course and overestimate the capabilities of children. Does not check whether its requirements are met. The assessment of children by a liberal teacher depends on their mood: in a good mood, positive assessments predominate, in a bad mood, negative assessments predominate. All this can lead to a decline in the authority of the teacher in the eyes of children. However, such a teacher strives not to spoil relations with anyone; his behavior is affectionate and friendly with everyone. She perceives her students as proactive, independent, sociable, and truthful.

The style of pedagogical communication as one of the characteristics of a person is not an innate (biologically predetermined) quality, but is formed and cultivated in the process of practice on the basis of the teacher’s deep awareness of the basic laws of development and formation of a system of human relations. However, certain personal characteristics predispose to the formation of a particular communication style. For example, people who are self-confident, proud, unbalanced and aggressive tend to have an authoritarian style. The democratic style is predisposed by such personality traits as adequate self-esteem, balance, goodwill, sensitivity and attentiveness to people.

Research has shown that after the departure of a teacher - an “autocrat” - it is not recommended to appoint a “liberal” - an “autocrat” - to the group - it is possible. Any predecessor can be appointed as a “Democrat”.

In life, each of the named styles of pedagogical communication in its “pure” form is rarely encountered. In practice, it is often found that an individual teacher exhibits a so-called “mixed style” of interaction with children. A mixed style is characterized by the predominance of two styles: authoritarian and democratic or democratic style with inconsistent (liberal). The features of authoritarian and liberal styles are rarely combined with each other.

The theory and practice of pedagogical activity considers communication as a specific “face-to-face” interaction using a variety of communicative means (speech, facial expressions, pantomimic). It can be either included in other activities or manifest itself independently. In some cases, it is aimed at effectively solving problems of joint activity, in others - at establishing or implementing personal relationships.

Pedagogical communication is considered broadly and includes both the communicative influence of the teacher on children and various methods of educational influence, as well as the teacher’s attitude towards children.

N.E. Shchurkova offers the following characteristics of a teacher’s professional position (communication styles).

The first position is remote - determining the spiritual distance between the subjects of interaction. Here we can distinguish three main signs: “far”, “close”, “nearby”.

Distance “far” means a lack of sincerity in relationships, a formal fulfillment of one’s duties. A teacher who chooses a “close” distance is a “friend” for his students, realizing creative ideas with them. It is most realistic to consider such a position from a teacher in the field of art, sports, and science. The “nearby” distance presupposes a respectful attitude towards one’s professional responsibilities, towards one’s wards, and acceptance of their interests and aspirations.

The second position - level - characterizes the hierarchical relationship between the teacher and students in their interaction, i.e. This is the location of subjects to each other “vertically”: “on”, “under”, “equally”.

The position “above” is characterized by administrative pressure on the child, since “he is small, inexperienced, incompetent.” The “under” position is a reverence for the nature of childhood, a fear of interference in the child’s development process; More often than not, such a teacher “turns into an attendant” who indulges the child’s every whim. The position “on an equal basis” is the recognition of the Person in the child and in the teacher; At the same time, mutual respect for the individual on both sides is characteristic. Only in exceptional cases does the teacher allow himself to take a position “above”, i.e. subjugate the will of the child due to the responsibility and experience of an adult.

The third position - kinetic (kinetics - movement) - presupposes the position of a person in relation to another in joint activity, in joint movement towards a goal: “in front”, “behind”, “together”.

The position “in front” expresses the vanguard role of the teacher, i.e. he leads his students. The role of the follower is expressed by the characteristic “behind”. “Together”: both entities develop a strategy for joint action to achieve a common goal. It seems that there can be no unambiguous choice here. In the main, the teacher is “in front”, in the little things - “behind”, in general - “together” with the children, he goes through life, overcoming its obstacles with them, teaching them to be independent, to take responsibility for their choices. This position is dynamic.

Thus, from the point of view of the purpose of the profession “teacher”, the reference position can be considered: “next to”, “on an equal footing”, “together”, but slightly “ahead”.

At the request of the Federal State Educational Standard for Preschool Education, the position of the teacher in organizing the lives of children is that of a partner. Partnership activities include:

transferring the content of the socio-historical experience of humanity: in the process of communication, the teacher provides children with new information, suggests methods of cognitive activity, and stimulates independent knowledge; in communication with peers, the process of mutual enrichment of children with new cognitive experiences and forms of interaction is of great importance;
transferring experience of various types of activities and ensuring their development: partnership is a condition for children to master various types of activities: work, play, cognitive, research, etc.
exchange of thoughts, experiences about the internal and surrounding world, encouraging interlocutors to act in a certain way to achieve a result: in the process of partnership, emotional interaction between the teacher and the child, children with each other is established, which allows them to influence each other’s behavior, mood, and state.

In the process of communication, whether communication partners realize it or not, they implement four main functions: managerial, informative, emotive and factual (related to establishing contacts). The leading function, as a rule, is the management function: the main goal is the intention of its participants to influence each other, to influence the behavior of the communication partner.

The implementation of the informative function is carried out using language and other familiar systems. The communication process is usually divided into verbal and non-verbal communication.

Verbal is carried out through speech, which is a universal, but not the only means of communication. Nonverbal communication involves:

visual types of communication, i.e. gestures, facial expressions, postures;
spatiotemporal organization of communication, eye contact;
an acoustic system, including paralinguistic (voice timbre, range, tonality) and extralinguistic (pauses, coughing, laughter, crying, etc.) components;
tactile system (touching, shaking hands, hugging, kissing).

Partnership is not just an action - it is precisely an interaction: it is carried out between participants; Moreover, everyone is a carrier of activity and assumes it in their partners.

Activity can be expressed in the fact that a child, when communicating, proactively influences a partner - a peer or an adult. At the same time, the partner perceives its influences and responds to them, showing his own subjectivity. When two people communicate, they act alternately and perceive each other's influences, thereby learning and enriching each other.

The structure of partnership communication includes the following components:

1. The subject of communication is another person, a communication partner as a subject. For a preschooler, this could be an adult, a peer, an older or younger child, an acquaintance or a stranger. Each of the possible partners requires special methods and forms of interaction, the manifestation of specific communication skills.

2. The need for communication consists of the desire to know and evaluate other people and - through them and with their help - self-knowledge and self-esteem. Expanding the circle of social communication gradually leads the preschooler to the knowledge of the diversity of personal manifestations of his interlocutors, their assessment and awareness of his personal characteristics and capabilities. The need for communication is determined by communicative motives.

3. Communicative motives are what communication is undertaken for. For children of primary preschool age, this motive becomes the need to communicate with an adult for the sake of doing a common task - playing with a toy, stringing pyramid rings, feeding and putting a doll to bed. For children in the middle group, the leading motive for communication is the need to learn new interesting information from an adult. Older preschoolers strive to realize in communication the need to understand the relationships between people, the reasons for their actions, relationships, and behavior. The child is interested in the qualities of a person, for the sake of knowing and assessing which he interacts.

4. Objectives of communication - the goal towards which, under given conditions, various actions performed in the process of communication are aimed. The motives and objectives of communication may not coincide with each other.

5. Products of communication are formations of a material and spiritual nature that are created as a result of communication. For preschoolers, these are the results of joint productive activities, for example, a collective application, a collage compiled together with parents or children in a group, a fairy tale, a riddle composed during communication, a moral choice made by children after a joint discussion of a literary work or someone else’s action.

A partnership between an adult and children involves:

development of the child’s needs in accordance with his age capabilities to communicate with adults and peers. With acquaintances and strangers, with children of different ages;
developing the ability to engage in the communication process (request, greeting, congratulation, invitation, polite address);
developing the ability to navigate partners and communication situations (start talking to acquaintances and strangers; follow the rules of communication culture in relationships with friends, with adults; understand the situation in which partners are placed, as well as the intentions and motives of communication);
development of the ability to correlate the means of verbal and nonverbal communication (useduse words and signs of politeness; express thoughts emotionally and meaningfully using gestures, facial expressions, and symbols; receive information and provide information about yourself and other people and in cabbage soup);
developing the ability to coordinate one’s actions, opinions, and attitudes with needs. interlocutors (self- and mutual control of activities, justification of jointly performed tasks in a certain logical sequence, determination of the order and rational ways of performing joint actions);
cultivating a desire to trust, help those with whom you communicate, and support them (help those in need of help, give in, be honest, do not shy away from answers, talk about your intentions, give advice and listen to the advice of others, trust the information you receive, your communication partner, adults, teacher);
application of individual skills in solving joint problems (use of speech, singing, jokes);
developing the ability to notice the emotional state of a partner and respond adequately to him;
cultivating a desire to show sensitivity, responsiveness towards partners, and to empathize with them.

Techniques of influence in communication are constructive, such as: persuasion, argumentation, request.

Children who are proactive and sociable encourage the teacher to communicate more extensively and diversified. By constantly drawing adults into the center of their activities, they encourage them to be more active, which contributes to the accumulation and expansion of the experience of mutual understanding and finding a “common language.” Here's an example.

Maxim, a pupil of the group, built a plane, and while waiting for the teacher, he makes sure that none of the children destroy it. Tatyana Viktorovna approaches Maxim, there is a smile on her face, and her animation is noticeable. She says affectionately: “Max, were you waiting for me? I see what a beautiful plane you built. Well done. Yes, this is not a simple plane. This is a new design aircraft." Let you be the pilot, and the guys and I will be passengers and we’ll all go on a trip together. The teacher rejoices with the child, and he strives for emotional contacts because he experiences pleasure from this communication.

For a child, a teacher is the bearer of social requirements, rules, and various evaluations (encouragement, censure, prohibition). Therefore, in connection with the experience of the established relationship between the teacher and the child, the latter develops recognition or non-recognition of the teacher, a trusting or distrustful attitude towards him and his assessment, the ability to express his feelings to him, gratitude, a desire to communicate with him, to report joys and failures. This is how the teacher and children become partners in games and independent activities of the child. Partnership, on the part of the child and on the part of the teacher, contributes to better mutual understanding in the process of communication. We often use the “I am a statement” model (“I think that you, Kirill, will learn this; I want; I wish; I would prefer that they play together, share toys and help each other in difficult situations”)”

The nature and intensity of communication is determined not only by the activity of children, but also by the extent to which adults create favorable conditions for the development of communication as the child grows up. This position is clearly realized when studying the relationship between preschoolers and teachers.

To achieve the teacher's favor, to draw his attention to himself, to be noticed by him - this is the main concern of the child. And if some children do not achieve this, it is not at all because they do not strive to communicate with the teacher, but due to a lack of communication skills, which prevents them from being able to emotionally “express themselves” and their desire to communicate with us.

Partnership is also manifested in cultural and leisure activities, teachers and children perform certain roles, contribute to the creation of an environment of common joy, good mood, and a sense of involvement in the events that take place in the country, in kindergarten, is formed. We foster a joyful and friendly atmosphere in the children's team. For example, the teacher takes on the role of “Grandmother the Storyteller,” “Forest Forester,” “Sea King,” and children play the roles of other heroes related to each other.

Literature:

1. Order of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia No. 655 of November 23, 2009. “On the approval and implementation of Federal state requirements for the structure of the basic general education program of preschool education.” - 2009

2. Zakharov A.I. How to prevent deviations in a child’s behavior. - M., 2009

3. Mastyukova E.M. Therapeutic pedagogy. - M., 2009

4. An approximate basic general education program for preschool education “From birth to school.” Ed. Veraksy N.E. - M., 2010

5. Approximate basic general education program for preschool education “Success”.

6. Psychological and pedagogical counseling and support for child development / ed. Shipitsina M.L. - M., 2003

Portal for schoolchildren. Self-preparation

Download:

Preview:

RELATED ARTICLES