“Formation of the cohesion of the study group. Participants sign badges

One of the conditions for the formation of a student team is the correct solution of questions about the relationship between the individual and the team. The central point here is the rational correlation of educational work with each individual student and the student team as a whole. Close attention is required by student groups during their adaptation to the conditions of study. It is necessary to study and take into account the age and social composition of students, the experience of their social work, the degree of preparedness for mastering the program, mood, etc.

The educational team has a dual structure: firstly, it is the object and result of the conscious and purposeful influences of teachers, curators, which determine many of its features (types and nature of activities, number of members, organizational structure, etc.); secondly, the educational team is a relatively independent developing phenomenon, which is subject to special socio-psychological laws. The educational team, figuratively speaking, is a socio-psychological organism that requires an individual approach. What "works" in relation to one study group turns out to be completely unacceptable - to another. Experienced teachers are well aware of this "mysterious phenomenon": two or more parallel training groups gradually become individualized, as it were, acquire their own face, as a result, a rather sharp difference appears between them. As the reason for these differences, teachers point out that the "weather" in the study group is made by certain students, who are hardly the official leaders of the educational self-government. It is very important for a leader, teacher, curator to clearly see the structure of interpersonal relationships in a team in order to be able to find an individual approach to team members and influence the formation and development of a cohesive team. A real close-knit team does not appear immediately, but is formed gradually, passing through a series of stages.

At the first organizational stage, a group of students is not a team in the full sense of the word, since it is made up of incoming students with different life experiences, views, and different attitudes towards collective life. The organizer of the life and activities of the study group at this stage is the teacher, he makes demands on the behavior and mode of activity of students. It is important for a teacher to clearly identify 2-3 most significant and fundamental requirements for the activity and discipline of students, not allowing an abundance of secondary requirements, instructions, prohibitions. At this organizational stage, the leader must carefully study each member of the group, his character, personality traits, identifying, on the basis of observation and psychological testing, the "individual psychological map" of the student's personality, gradually highlighting those who are more sensitive to the interests of the team, is an effective asset. In general, the first stage is characterized by socio-psychological adaptation, i.e. active adaptation to the educational process and entry into a new team, assimilation of the requirements, norms, traditions of the life of an educational institution.

The second stage in the development of the team begins when an effective, rather than formal, asset of the team is identified, i.e. the organizers of collective activity, who enjoy authority among the majority of the members of the collective, have been identified. Now the requirements for the team are put forward not only by the teacher, but also by the asset of the team. The leader at the second stage of the development of the team must objectively study, analyze the interpersonal relationships of the team members using the methods of sociometry, referentometry, take timely measures to correct the situation of group members with high and low sociometric status. The upbringing of the group's asset is the most important task of the leader, aimed at developing the organizational abilities of the asset and eliminating negative phenomena: arrogance, vanity, "commanding tone" in the behavior of the asset.

Knowing the structure of informal relationships, what they are based on, makes it easier to understand the intra-group atmosphere and allows you to find the most rational ways to influence the effectiveness of group work. In this regard, special research methods are of great importance, which make it possible to reveal the structure of interpersonal relationships in a group, to single out its leaders.

The position of a teacher, a curator in a student group is specific: on the one hand, he spends a lot of time with the guys and, as it were, is a member of their team, their leader, but, on the other hand, the student group largely exists and develops independently of the teacher, putting forward their leaders and "started". The teacher is hindered from becoming a full member of the student team by the difference in age, differences in social status, life experience, finally. The teacher cannot be completely equal to the student. But perhaps this is not what we need to strive for; students are sensitive to the falsity of statements about "complete equality." This position of the teacher makes it difficult for him to assess the situation within the group, so it is not easy for the curator to be an expert in the relationship between the students of his group.

Involvement of team members in various types of joint activities (work, study, sports, recreation, travel, etc.), setting interesting and increasingly complex goals and tasks for the team that are attractive to many participants, establishing friendly and demanding relationships, responsible dependence between people - this contributes to the strengthening and development of the team at the second stage.

However, at the second stage of development, the team is not yet a close-knit group of like-minded people in the full sense, there is a significant heterogeneity of views. The free exchange of opinions, discussions, the attention of the teacher - leader to the mood and opinions of the team members, the democratic collegial method of decision-making and management creates the basis for creating a cohesive team.

At the third stage of development, the team reaches a high level of cohesion, consciousness, organization, responsibility of the members of the team, which allows the team to independently solve various problems, move to the level of self-government. Not every team reaches this highest level of development.

A highly developed team is characterized by the presence of cohesion - as a value-oriented unity, closeness of views, assessments and positions of group members in relation to objects (persons, events, tasks, ideas) that are most significant for the group as a whole. The cohesion index is the frequency of coincidence of views of group members in relation to the moral and business spheres, in the approach to the goals and objectives of joint activities. A highly developed team is characterized by the presence of a positive psychological climate, a benevolent background of relationships, emotional empathy, and sympathy for each other.

A complex indicator of relationships in a team is its socio-psychological climate - the totality of relations between group members:

- to the conditions and nature of joint activities;
- to colleagues, team members;
- to the head of the team.

The formation of the team of the student group and its cohesion depends on:

- the nature of the organization of educational and cognitive activity of students, control over it and its evaluation;
- the degree of clarity of the functions, tasks and program of the group's activities, from group norms and the features of the refraction of general social norms in them;
- the frequency of contacts and features of communication between members of the group and the features of pedagogical communication in the "teacher-student" system;
- features of microgroups in the group (whether it contributes to the cohesion of the group or opposes itself to the group);
- the nature of the involvement of each member of the group in the performance of group tasks, on the quality of cooperation of forces in the performance of socially significant tasks facing the group;
- the size of the group and the time of its existence;
- qualities of leaders-mentors, interpersonal relations in the "teacher-student" and "student-student" systems.

If people are not satisfied with the nature and conditions of joint activities, if indifferent or conflicting interpersonal relations and unfavorable business relations prevail between them, then a negative socio-psychological climate develops, which worsens the performance of the team, the effectiveness of its activities, negatively affects the well-being and health of some students, causes a desire to leave this group.

The socio-psychological climate of the team largely depends on the personality of the leader and the head of the team, on his relationship with the members of the group, on the style of leadership he uses.

The presence of a capable, cohesive team is a criterion for assessing the educational work of any educational institution. The team acts as an important form of organization of education, as a powerful pedagogical tool. The development and formation of personality can be successfully carried out only in a team and through a team, which is one of the most important patterns of education.

In considering the importance of this regularity, one should bear in mind the following two points. The first of these is that an important goal of education is the formation of a personality in the spirit of collectivism, the development of comradely traits and qualities in it. This goal can be achieved only on the condition that the individual is brought up in a well-organized and healthy in social and spiritual terms, the team. The second provision is connected with the fact that education cannot be limited only by the personal influence of the teacher on each pupil. It must necessarily be supported by the versatile influence of the collective, which not only ensures the freedom and security of the individual, but also acts as a bearer of healthy morality and accumulates a wealth of moral, artistic and aesthetic relations. Therefore, in the process of pedagogical work, it is necessary to create a healthy and cohesive educational team and skillfully use it for the versatile development of the individual. Without such a team it is difficult to count on the high efficiency of education.

Introduction

Relevance. Groups play a role in human relationships. They influence our perceptions and attitudes, provide support in stressful situations, influence our actions and decisions.

The very first and one of the most important steps in the education of students is the formation of a cohesive group with developed socially significant goals, self-government bodies. It is the formed student group that has power and can become a source of transformation of modern reality.

In sociology, a group is defined as two or more individuals who interact with each other in such a way that each individual influences and is influenced by each other. The essential features that distinguish a group from a simple accumulation of people are: interaction, a certain duration of existence, the presence of a common goal or goals, the development of at least a rudimentary group structure, awareness of the individuals included in it themselves as “we” or their membership in the group.

The problem of group cohesion is based on the understanding of the group primarily as a system of interpersonal relationships that have an emotional basis. In addition, there is an approach to the study of cohesion, which is based on the idea that the main integrator of the group is the joint activity of its members. The “stratometric concept of group activity” integrates such factors as interpersonal relationships, value-oriented group unity and joint activity.

Object of study: group cohesion of a student group as a socio-psychological phenomenon.

Subject of research: the influence of interpersonal relations and the nature of the activity on the group cohesion of the student group.

Hypothesis: the factors of group cohesion among junior students are interpersonal relationships, and among senior students it is joint group activity.

To analyze the problem of group cohesion in the works of researchers;

Highlight the characteristics of the student group as a social community;

To study the influence of the nature of activity and interpersonal relations on the group cohesion of students of the 1st, 3rd and 5th year;

Research methods:

To achieve the goal of the study, solve the tasks and test the hypothesis put forward, we used a set of scientific methods that are adequate to the object and subject of the study:

theoretical analysis of general and special literature on the research problem,

empirical methods: Methodology for determining the degree of value-oriented unity of the group (Kondratiev M.Yu.); Questionnaire of interpersonal relations (A.A. Rukavishnikov (OMO)); "Sociometry" (J. Moreno); “Determination of the level of joint activity” (K.E. Lishchuk).

Methodological basis: The most intensive development of the problems under consideration in the works of T. Newcomb, who introduced the concept, introduces a special concept of "consent"; A. Beivelas attached particular importance to the nature of group goals. A.V. Petrovsky developed the "stratometric concept of group activity".

Practical significance: we have selected diagnostic methods aimed at identifying the level of group cohesion, as well as identifying factors of group cohesion in the 1st, 3rd and 5th courses.

Experimental base: Experimental base: MOU VIEPP, Volzhsky, teachers-psychologists of the 1st, 3rd and 5th courses in the amount of 47 people.

Chapter 1. Theoretical Foundations and Problems of Group Cohesion

.1 The problem of group cohesion in the writings of researchers

Cohesion is interpreted by many foreign authors as an attraction. The most concentrated similar understanding was reflected in the review publication of B. Lott, who defined cohesion as “such a group property that is derived from the number and strength of mutual positive attitudes of group members” .

The interpretation of cohesion as a predominantly emotional phenomenon of interpersonal relationships is inherent, however, not only to many foreign researchers. A review of domestic work in this area of group psychology, carried out by A. I. Dontsov, also reveals a number of attempts at an "emotional" approach to the problem. Domestic authors do not use the concept of attraction. Cohesion is described in their research as a sociometric phenomenon, operationally expressed by the ratio of in-group (in favor of one's own group) and out-group (in favor of some external groups) sociometric choices, which is qualified by specialists as one of the manifestations of interpersonal attraction.

Cohesion as a result of group membership motivation. Although the identification of cohesion with interpersonal attraction is quite common in the literature, nevertheless, there are more interesting, in our opinion, attempts to understand the essence of the phenomenon under discussion. One of them belongs to D. Cartwright, who proposed, perhaps, the most detailed model of group cohesion, which is based on the idea of cohesion as some kind of resultant forces or motives that encourage individuals to maintain membership in this particular group.

D. Cartwright emphasizes that certain characteristics of the group will have a motivating force for the subject only if they meet the corresponding needs that are part of his motivational basis of attraction to the group. Unfortunately, just as at the time when D. Cartwright's work was written, even now the question of the relationship between these two types of variables (the characteristics of the group and the needs of its members) can be safely classified as poorly studied.

Cohesion as a value-oriented unity of group members. In describing the two previous models of cohesion, it is not difficult to find something in common, namely, their inherent emphasis on the predominantly emotional nature of the phenomenon. To some extent, the antithesis of both approaches are the ideas developed by A. V. Petrovsky and supporters of the stratometric concept of group activity about the cohesion of a group as a value-oriented unity of its members.

However, it should be noted that the idea of considering the similarity, or unity, of a number of personal characteristics of group members (for example, their opinions, values, attitudes) in the context of the problem of cohesion is not new. The idea that the similarity of individuals in opinions, values, attitudes is one of the conditions for their mutual attraction, and hence the growth of motivation for group membership, and, in turn, cohesion, was expressed in foreign literature in the early 50s. It is associated primarily with the classical studies of L. Festinger and T. Newcomb.

In a different aspect, the question of interest to us is considered within the framework of the stratometric concept of the team of A. V. Petrovsky. But before presenting the corresponding views of the supporters of this direction, we emphasize that they were presented to the domestic reader in the past by a large number of publications.

According to A. V. Petrovsky, “cohesion as a value-oriented unity is a characteristic of the system of intra-group relations, showing the degree of coincidence of assessments, attitudes and positions of the group in relation to objects (persons, tasks, ideas, events) that are most significant for the group as a whole » . Value-oriented unity in the team is, first of all, the convergence of assessments in the moral and business spheres, in the approach to the goals and objectives of joint activities.

Within the framework of the approach under consideration, A.I. Dontsov singled out one of the highest forms of value-oriented unity in a group - subject-value unity, which reflects the coincidence of value orientations of group members regarding the subject of joint group activity, and empirically shows the legitimacy of such an understanding of cohesion.

As can be seen from the materials cited above, the interpretation of cohesion as a value-oriented unity, especially in its most clearly manifested activity-determined samples (for example, in the form of subject-value unity), practically eliminates its emotional component from the analysis of this group phenomenon. It would be more accurate to say that this component is taken into account, but, as the supporters of the discussed approach emphasize, only in relation to the surface layer of intragroup relations, which is the third psychological level of the group structure in the conceptual scheme of A.V. Petrovsky.

There is a cohesion of the instrumental type, it should include the subject-value unity of the group, which is dominant for groups focused mainly on solving problems of a professional (instrumental) nature. At the same time, this does not mean that the emotional sphere of the group's life activity and the cohesion of the emotional type corresponding to it are not worthy of attention "moments" of group life.

When describing the structure of a small group, two of its main features were identified: multi-level and heterogeneous. Diversity is represented by systems of intragroup relations hierarchically located in the "space" of group functioning, uniformity - by separate, or partial, dimensions of the group structure, each of which reflects a vertical connection between positions of group members of different degrees of prestige. The partial components of the group structure (a kind of "separate structures"), in particular, include: formal status, role, sociometric and communicative dimensions, positions of leadership and social power. In addition, the possibilities of static and (especially) dynamic, procedural representation of the group structure by means of appropriate model constructions are shown.

An important factor in the life of the group are the norms that function in it - a kind of regulators of the group process. The features of normative behavior associated with the influence of norms shared by a majority or a minority of group members, with the consequences of deviation from group standards, were discussed. An analysis of various forms of consent of individuals with the opinion of the majority indicates the need for a differentiated approach to this issue. This kind of agreement in some situations can play a positive role, contributing to the preservation of the integrity of the group, the effectiveness of the tasks it solves, while in other situations it provokes stagnation tendencies that hinder the development of the group process. In a number of cases, an effective counteraction to these tendencies is the activity of the group minority, which introduces elements of novelty and creativity into the life of the group and thereby contributes to its dynamization. Taking into account the simultaneous influences of majority and minority groups requires viewing normative behavior not as a unidirectional, but a reciprocal, reciprocal process of social influence.

Literature data point to the complex nature of such an integrative characteristic of a group as its cohesion, due to the conjugation of many determining factors: intergroup, group, personal. In turn, the consequences of cohesion tangibly affect various aspects of the life of the group: from the personal adaptation of its members to the overall productivity of the group.

1.2 Student group as a social community

A social community is a relatively stable set of people who are characterized by more or less similar features of life and consciousness, and, consequently, interests.

Communities of different types are formed on different basis and are extremely diverse. These are communities that are formed in the sphere of social production (classes, professional groups, etc.), growing on an ethnic basis (nationalities, nations), on the basis of demographic differences (sex and age communities), etc.

A group is a set of people clearly limited in size, which is isolated from a wide society as a kind of separate psychologically valuable community, united in the logic of any significant grounds: the specifics of a given and implemented activity, socially assessed belonging to a certain category of people included in a group, structurally compositional unity, etc.

A student group is understood as a social community, which is characterized by the presence of direct personal interactions and contacts. Such interactions play a special role, as they ensure the satisfaction of the most important individual and social needs: education, health, social activities, recreation, entertainment, that is, those that make up the everyday meaning of our life.

A. V. Petrovsky suggests using the structure of a small group consisting of three main layers, or “strata” for this:

the external level of the group structure is determined by direct emotional interpersonal relationships, that is, what has traditionally been measured by sociometry;

the second layer is a deeper formation, denoted by the term "value-oriented unity" (COE), which is characterized by the fact that the relationship here is mediated by joint activities. Relations between members of the group are built in this case not on the basis of attachments or antipathies, but on the basis of the similarity of value orientations (A.V. Petrovsky believes that this is a coincidence of value orientations related to joint activities);

the third layer of the group structure is even deeper and involves an even greater inclusion of the individual in the joint group activity. At this level, group members share the goals of group activity, and it can be assumed that the motives for choosing at this level are also associated with the adoption of common values, but at a more abstract level. The third layer of relations is called the "core" of the group structure.

Three layers of group structures can simultaneously be considered as three levels of group cohesion. At the first level, cohesion is expressed by the development of emotional contacts. At the second level, there is a further rallying of the group, and now this is expressed in the coincidence of the main system of values associated with the process of joint activity. At the third level, the integration of the group is manifested in the fact that all its members begin to share the common goals of group activity.

In the above definition of the concept of "student group", the following features of a student group were recorded:

an organized community of people

) uniting people on the basis of education,

) the existence of relations of cooperation, mutual assistance and mutual responsibility,

) the presence of common interests,

) the presence of common (unifying) value orientations, attitudes and norms of behavior.

Along with the listed signs, you can also find some others: for example, a sign of the stability of a group of people who study together, or a community of people who study together as individuals, as participants in social relations, etc.

There is also a sign of purposeful controllability of the process of functioning and development of this group of jointly trained people. This emphasizes the importance of self-government.

Attention is drawn to some special requirements imposed by the team on authority and leadership. In particular, such as the demand for the organic unity of formal and informal leadership and authority. In addition, attention is drawn to the fact that the collective assumes the voluntariness of its choice by the individual, identification of himself with this group. Competitive relations between its members are called as an important feature of a student team, in contrast, for example, to relations of simple competition.

Collaborative learning allows:

transfer their knowledge and skills to other members of the team;

solve more complex and voluminous tasks than individually;

more fully use the individual abilities of each person;

to condemn the deeds and actions of comrades that do not meet the norms of morality and morality accepted in the team, and even punish the guilty, up to and including dismissal.

There are three elements in the structure of the student group: the leader group, the so-called core and the peripheral part.

The student group leader himself is a member of the group capable of leading it and who is recognized in this role by the majority of the members of this group. Here it is important that two qualities coincide in one person - the so-called formal and real leadership. The leadership group of the labor collective is made up of the leaders of the student group, taken in its main areas.

The core of the student group is a group that usually makes up 30-40% of their total number, which is the bearer of the consciousness, collective norms and traditions that have developed in this team. In addition, we can talk about a student group with a different number of cores, as well as a kind of nuclear-free groups. Most of the latter are characterized by the underdevelopment of their own collectivist qualities in one respect or another, or in all respects in general. Each case of such deviations from a certain norm requires special study and is a particularly significant and, in general, fruitful object of the student group.

In social psychology, special terms are used that indicate the state of the individual in interpersonal relationships - the role, status, well-being of the student in the group:

"Star" - The member of the group (collective) who receives the most elections. As a rule, there are 1-2 "stars" in a group. In the table. 17 example - these are students numbered 5 and 7 in the group list.

"Bazhaniy" - A member of a group (collective) who receives half or a little less of the number of elections devoted to the popular.

"imprinted" - A member of a group (collective) who receives 1-2 choices.

"Isolation" - A member of a group (collective) who did not receive any choice. In the given example, the 2nd student on the list is in this state.

"Discarded" - The one who is called when answering the question "Who would you like to work with, relax with?" (3rd and 5th questions of the questionnaire.

Thus, each member of the group (collective) takes a certain position, which is not always the same in business and personal relationships. For example, one student in business relationships has the status of "pushed aside", in personal relationships - "desired", the second - in personal relationships - "star", and in business relationships - "desired". But there may also be a coincidence of status: “desired” in business and personal relationships.

An important phenomenon in interpersonal relationships is socio-psychological reflection - the ability of an individual to perceive and evaluate their relationships with other members of the group

The most important concepts in the definition of a student group as a social institution are the concepts of "content of learning" and "character of learning". It is very important to find out the features of the application of these concepts to the problems of the student group.

The nature of learning usually means a certain set of the most common and stable features of the learning process, internal and external conditions. In fact, the nature of learning refers to some of the most general form of learning.

Each student group, from the moment of its creation, goes through a number of life stages, begins to live its own life, improve, change, “grow up”, gain strength and fully reveal its potential, i.e. become mature.

A formed student group, like any living organism, goes through several stages in its development: the first corresponds to infancy, adolescence; the second - the period of effective work and adulthood; the third - weakening of the potential, aging and, ultimately, either elimination or renewal. (American researchers identify five or more stages of team maturity: grinding, close combat, experimentation, efficiency, maturity, etc.)

Conclusions on the first chapter

Foreign authors understand attraction as group cohesion. Among the reasons for sympathy, researchers include: the frequency of interaction between individuals, the cooperative nature of their interaction, the style of group leadership, frustration and a threat to the course of the group process, status and behavioral characteristics of group members, various manifestations of similarity between people, success in performing a group task, etc.

Domestic scientists describe cohesion in their studies as a sociometric phenomenon, operationally expressed by the ratio of in-group and out-group sociometric choices. A. V. Petrovsky defines the structure of a group as: 1. direct emotional interpersonal relationships; 2. "value-oriented unity" 3. the inclusion of the individual in a joint group activity.

A student group is understood as a social community, which is characterized by the presence of direct personal interactions and contacts.

We have recorded the following features of a student group: an organized community of people, an association of people on the basis of education, the presence of relations of cooperation, mutual assistance and mutual responsibility, the presence of common interests, the presence of common (unifying) value orientations, attitudes and norms of behavior

In social psychology, special terms are used that indicate the state of the individual in interpersonal relationships - the role, status, and well-being of the student in the group. Each member of the group (collective) takes a certain position, which is not always the same in business and personal relationships.

Chapter 2. The essence and specificity of group cohesion at different stages of education

1 The main methods and means of determining the influence of the nature of activities and interpersonal relations on the group cohesion of students

Based on data on the phenomenon of group cohesion, including: direct emotional interpersonal relationships; "value-oriented unity"; the inclusion of the individual in a joint group activity. We have chosen the following methods:

The sociometric method was developed by the Austrian-American psychologist D.L. Moreno. Sociometry refers to socio-psychological tests and allows you to measure interpersonal relationships, preference relationships that arise in a situation of choosing a partner in a particular activity or situation.

With the help of sociometry, one can identify popularity and leadership, charisma, group conflict, integrators and outsiders of the group. Also, this method allows assessing the socio-psychological climate in the group, measuring competence in communication, and identifying the value orientations of the group.

During sociometry, participants are guaranteed anonymity, their names are encrypted, and the results are presented only in encrypted form.

As a basic technique for identifying direct emotional interpersonal relationships, we chose the questionnaire of interpersonal relations (IMO) by A.A. Rukavishnikov. This questionnaire identifies the following needs:

The need for inclusion. It is the need to create and maintain satisfying relationships with others, on the basis of which interaction and cooperation arise.

The need for control. This need is defined as the need to create and maintain satisfying relationships with people based on control and power.

Interpersonal need for affect. It is defined as the need to create and maintain satisfying relationships with other people based on love and emotional relationships.

Definitions of the value-orientational unity of the group (COE) (). Designed to determine the degree and nature of the COE of the studied team.

Using the methodology for determining the value-oriented unity (COE) of a group allows the experimenter to answer the question of whether this particular functioning group can be considered a cohesive community, and also experimentally determine the severity of this most important group characteristic.

The creators of this methodological procedure proceeded from the fact that the analysis of the phenomenon of group cohesion cannot be reduced to the consideration of such, in their own way, important characteristics of interpersonal relations as the frequency and intensity of contacts between members of the community, the degree of their mutual sympathy, etc. Following their argument, which is hard to disagree with, we have to admit that in a number of cases of intensification of interpersonal contacts of group members, sometimes a sharp intensification of their interaction can be a direct reflection of not centripetal, but, on the contrary, centrifugal forces, naturally leading not to unity, but to the actual disintegration of the community. In this regard, within the framework of the theory of activity mediation of interpersonal relations, a fundamentally different approach was developed to understanding the psychological essence of the phenomenon of group cohesion as a value-oriented unity of the members of the contact group. In fact, we are talking here about the degree of consistency of opinions, positions of members of a particular community in relation to the most significant objects for its life.

. "Formation of Positive Group Motivation" This test is used for collective assessment of factors related to the formation of group activity. Certain preconditions are necessary for effective group work. Along with the importance of the process of joint solution of tasks and problems in the group, one should take into account the climate in the group, the “growing” of the group to a certain degree of maturity, the process of preparing group members for joint work. Thus, the advantage of group work is achieved due to the synergistic effect that is possible when the participants in the interaction enter into a kind of psychological resonance, feel comfortable and confident, and when their activity increases.

To determine the characteristics of group activities, we compiled a questionnaire based on three research questions: “Is there a positive interdependence of group members?”, “Is there personal responsibility for the work done in the group”, “Is there simultaneous interaction of students?”. These questions were compiled on the basis of the following signs of joint activity:

Positive interdependence of participants (the goal is perceived as a single one, requiring the unification of the efforts of all members of the group).

Personal reporting of each on the work done in the group (the organization of activities involves the division of labor, the establishment of a relationship of responsibility for their part of the work).

Simultaneous interaction of students (when preparing a group assignment and group performance in the lesson).

Equal participation of everyone in the work of the group.

Group reporting (control of activities is partially carried out by the students themselves).

Reflective activity in groups (collective analysis and introspection).

2.2 Features of the nature of activities and interpersonal relationships on the group cohesion of students

To confirm the hypothesis, we conducted a study of group cohesion at different stages of education. The study involved 47 students.

The method of sociometry was carried out on the study group of the first year of teachers of psychologists. The group consisted of 18 people. The study involved 15 respondents. Based on the data obtained during the survey, tables were constructed with the primary answers of all respondents (encrypted in letters) (Appendix 1).

Based on the existing number of mutual elections and their potential number, the group cohesion index is calculated using a special formula. It is believed that with the values of this index about 0.6-0.7, the cohesion is quite high, the connections are saturated, there are almost no “isolated” members of the group. In the group under consideration, the index is 0.52. This result means low group cohesion at the moment.

Sociometry methodology was also carried out on the study group of the third year of teachers of psychologists. The group consisted of 15 people. The study involved 15 respondents.

Based on the existing number of mutual elections and their potential number, the group cohesion index was calculated, it is 0.66. This result means high group cohesion at the moment.

Also, the methodology of sociometry was carried out on a training group of fifth-year psychologists. The group consisted of 17 people, 15 respondents participated in the study (Appendix 3).

Based on the existing number of mutual elections and their potential number, the group cohesion index was calculated, it is 0.61. This result means not high group cohesion at the moment.

Figure 1 - Results according to the "sociometry" method

In this regard, we can say that in the first year, group cohesion is at a low level. By the third year, connections in the group become more extensive, integrators appear. In the fifth year, connections remain strong, while there are significantly fewer integrators.

The external level of the group structure is determined by the immediate emotional interpersonal relationships in the group. In order to determine the nature of interpersonal relations in the student group, we used the methodology "Questionnaire of interpersonal relations (IMO)" by A.A. Rukavishnikov, V. Schutz. This technique reveals interpersonal needs. This technique was carried out by three training groups of psychologists.

A group of first-year psychologists showed the following results (Appendix 4).

The need for inclusion. This need, to create and maintain satisfactory relationships with other people, on the basis of which interaction and cooperation arise, is at a high level. Students feel good among their group members and tend to develop interpersonal relationships (80%). There is a need for inclusion in the group, a desire to create and maintain a sense of mutual interest (70%). Behavior corresponding to the need for inclusion is aimed at establishing connections between people.

The need for control. This need is defined as the need to create and maintain satisfying relationships with people based on control and power. First-year students try to take responsibility, combined with a leading role (80%), and in this group there is a need for dependence and hesitation in making decisions (60%).

Interpersonal need for affect. It is defined as the need to create and maintain satisfying relationships with other people based on love and emotional relationships. Group members are more likely to establish close sensual relationships (60%), less willing to avoid establishing close contacts (40%). Also, some students are more careful when choosing people with whom they create deeper emotional relationships (60%), another part requires that the rest indiscriminately establish close emotional relationships with them (40%).

In the third year, the results of this technique showed the following results (Appendix 5).

The need for control. The majority of students in the 3PP group do not take control of themselves (80%). At the same time, one part of the students try to take responsibility (60%), while the other avoids making decisions and taking responsibility (40%).

Interpersonal need for affect. Most members of the third year group (80%) demand that others indiscriminately establish close emotional relationships with them. In the group there are those who are careful when establishing close intimate relationships (50%), and those who tend to establish close sensual relationships (50%).

In the fifth year, the results of this technique showed the following results (Appendix 6).

The need for inclusion. Students feel good among their classmates, tend to expand their connections in the group (70%). Third-year students have a strong need to be accepted in their group (60%), and some third-year students tend to communicate with a small number of people (40%) .

The need for control. The majority of students in the 5PP group do not take control of themselves (80%). At the same time, one part of the students try to take responsibility (60%), while the other avoids making decisions and taking responsibility (40%).

Figure 2 - The results obtained during the implementation of the methodology "Questionnaire of interpersonal relations (IRO)"

Based on the results obtained, it can be said that in the first year there is a high level of need for communication, in the third year the need for communication with group members decreases, in the fifth year this trend continues. In the first year, the propensity to establish close relationships is higher than in the third year; in the fifth year, this need is at a low level. Also, the acceptance of control from the group in the first year is significantly lower than in the third, but in the fifth year the control is reduced.

The next criterion for determining the development of a group is the value-oriented unity of the group. To do this, we used the method of determining the value-oriented unity (COE) of the group. It allowed us to answer the question of whether this particular functioning group can be considered a cohesive community, as well as experimentally determine the degree of expression of this most important group characteristic.

We determined the degree of agreement among the members of the surveyed community about what qualities a leader should have. We introduced each subject to a generalized list and asked him to indicate the five most important characteristics for a leader from those that were included in the summary list.

The technique was carried out on a training group of first-year psychologists (Appendix 7). The members of the group made the following choice, in their opinion, of the five most valuable qualities for a leader.

Based on the existing number of choices of personality traits, the COE index was calculated, it is 28%. such an indicator of the level of group cohesion cannot be regarded otherwise than as very low.

Third-year students made the following choice of the most important characteristics for a leader (Appendix 8).

Based on the existing number of choices of personality traits, the COE index was calculated, it is 64%, such an indicator of the level of cohesion is at an average level

Fifth-year students made the following choice of the most important characteristics for a leader (Appendix 9).

Based on the existing number of choices of personality traits, the COE index was calculated, it is 45%, this result can be called the average level.

The next layer of group structure is the joint activities of the group. To determine it, we used:

. "Determination of the level of joint activity" Lishchuk K. E.

During the study, we obtained the following results: in the first year, the group is not sufficiently motivated for a positive result in their activities. In the third year, the group is sufficiently focused on achieving success in their activities. In the fifth year, the group is not sufficiently motivated for positive results in activities, while the results obtained are lower than those of the first year.

Figure 4 - Results obtained during the methodology "Determining the level of joint activity"

A survey was conducted, the purpose of which was to answer the following research questions: “Is there a positive interdependence of group members?”, “Is there personal responsibility for the work done in the group”, “Is there simultaneous interaction of students?”. The following results were obtained (Appendix).

In the first year it was revealed that 18% of students are dissatisfied with joint activities, in turn 82% are satisfied with joint activities. Also, a small part of 18% would prefer independent work to group work, 36% wish to work only with a few specific members of the group, the remaining 46% preferred independent work to group work.

It turned out that there is no personal responsibility of each for the work done in the group. Students do not distribute questions among all group members when preparing for an exam. Some of the students from a part believe that they are responsible for preparing for the seminar in front of the whole group 36%, the rest do not adhere to this opinion 64%.

It can be said that in the first year there is interaction between students. The group has such duties as: leisure organizer and duty officer. The group has established communication and organization of activities, while 63% are satisfied with the effectiveness of the dissemination of information in the group, 27% are only partly satisfied, 9% are dissatisfied in general.

The results of the third-year survey showed that 80% have a desire to work in a group, and 20% have a desire to be present sometimes, while 80% of the respondents enjoy joint work, 20% are dissatisfied with joint activities.

It turned out that there is no personal responsibility of each for the work done in the group. 90% of third-year students distribute questions among themselves in preparation for the exam. At the same time, 20% of respondents, when preparing for the seminar, believe that they are letting their group down, 40% believe that they are only partly responsible, the remaining 40% are confident that they will not let the group down if they do not prepare for the seminar.

We can say that in the third year there is a high level of interaction between students. The group has such duties as: the one who monitors the schedule changes, the person on duty, the one who informs about events at the institute, the organizer of the group's leisure. The group has established communication and organization of activities 70% are satisfied with the dissemination of information in the group, the remaining 30% are partially satisfied.

In the fifth year, students enjoy working in a group, while 90% would prefer independent work to group work, and 10% would prefer individual work to group work.

Fifth-year students do not distribute questions in preparation for exams among all members of the group, only a part of the students (20%) distribute questions between some members of the group. At the same time, 20% of respondents, when preparing for the seminar, believe that they are letting their group down, 40% believe that they are only partly responsible, the remaining 40% are confident that they will not let the group down if they do not prepare for the seminar.

It turned out that in the fifth year with there is a simultaneous interaction between students. The group has such responsibilities as: the one who monitors the changes in the schedule, the one who informs about events within the walls of the institute, the organizer of leisure. The group has established communication and organization of activities 70% are satisfied with the dissemination of information in the group, the remaining 10% are partially satisfied, 20% are not satisfied at all.

Figure 5 - Results obtained during the survey

On the basis of the data obtained, it can be said that our hypothesis that interpersonal relationships are the factors of group cohesion among junior students, and joint group activity among senior students, was not confirmed.

Conclusions on the second chapter

An important aspect of a group structure is how cohesive it is. In the first year, group cohesion is at a low level. By the third year, connections in the group become more extensive, integrators appear. In the fifth year, connections remain strong, while there are significantly fewer integrators.

In the first year, the desire to look for new connections within the group is greater than in the third and fifth years, but at the same time, the need to find new connections remains quite high in these courses. In addition, there is a tendency to reduce the need to communicate with a large number of people within their group. If in the first year this need is at a sufficiently high level, then by the fifth year it is significantly reduced.

In the first year, most tend to avoid responsibility for making decisions, while by the fifth year this need becomes one of the leading needs in communication. It can also be said that first-year students do not accept the control of the group over themselves, while in the third year there is dependence and hesitation in decision-making, by the fifth year the dependence on the group decreases, but at the same time it is higher than that of the first year.

The need to establish close relationships in the first year is higher than in the third year, in turn, in the fifth year this need is greatly reduced, fifth-year students have almost no tendency to establish close sensual relationships. In the first year there is no strong need to establish close relationships, by the third year this need increases greatly, and in the fifth year the need to create deep emotional relationships ceases to be relevant.

Conclusion

A characteristic of the system of intra-group relations, showing the degree of coincidence of assessments, attitudes and positions of the group in relation to objects, people, ideas, events that are most significant for the group as a whole. Cohesion as a feature expresses the degree of like-mindedness and unity of its members, is a generalized indicator of their spiritual community and unity. In a group formed from strangers, some part of the time will necessarily be spent on achieving the level of cohesion that is necessary for solving group problems. The military calls this process "combat coordination."

Among the main factors of group cohesion are primarily:

the similarity of the main value orientations of the members of the group;

clarity and certainty of group goals;

democratic style of leadership (leadership);

cooperative interdependence of group members in the process of joint activities;

relatively small group size;

the absence of conflicting microgroups; prestige and tradition of the group.

Specific indicators of psychological cohesion are usually:

the level of mutual sympathy in interpersonal relationships (the more members of the group like each other, the higher its cohesion);

the degree of attractiveness (usefulness) of the group for its members: it is the higher, the greater the number of people who are satisfied with their stay in the group - those for whom the subjective value of the benefits acquired through the group exceeds the significance of the efforts expended.

Group cohesion consists of the following levels

Direct emotional interpersonal relationships;

. "value-oriented unity"

The inclusion of the individual in a joint group activity.

A student group is understood as a social community, which is characterized by the presence of direct personal interactions and contacts.

In the course work "" the following questions were considered:

The concept of a student group as a social community, signs of a group, group structure.

Characterization of the features of the characteristics of the student team.

Approaches to the problem of cohesion, the concept of cohesion, forming cohesion, approaches to measuring group cohesion, types of work collectives depending on their cohesion, “personality-cohesion” variables.

If in the first year a group is formed, interpersonal relations develop, relationships become stronger, a value-oriented unity begins to form, a desire arises to unite in the name of educational and leisure activities, in the third year ties continue to strengthen within the group, integrators appear, responsibilities within the group expand , there is a dependence of the members of the group on the group. The group becomes cohesive, the desire to work in the group increases, there is a space for the dissemination of information (a common e-mail, a page on a social network appears in the group), members of the group are interested in achieving a common goal.

In the fifth year in the group there are no common goals, value-oriented unity, interpersonal ties are destroyed.

The group will cease to exist in a few months, so there are such patterns as: a decrease in interpersonal relationships, a decrease in the level of value-oriented unity, the level of joint group activity is insignificant.

This study will help to take into account the peculiarities of the development of interpersonal relations within the group at various stages of the educational process, the dynamics of the formation of the value-oriented unity of the group, the features of interaction in the group in the educational process.

Bibliography

1.Andreeva G.M. Social Psychology. M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 1998. 431p.

2.Anikeeva N.P. Psychological climate in the team M .: Education, 2005. 224 p.

.Antonyuk V.I., Zolotova O.I., Mochenov G.A., Shorokhova E.V. Problems of the socio-psychological climate in Soviet social psychology. / Socio-psychological climate of the team. M., Science. 2000. p. 5-25.

.Belinskaya E.P., Tihomandritskaya O.A. Social Psychology: A Reader. - M.: Aspect Press, 2003. - 475s.

.Bagretsov S.A., Lvov V.M., Naumov V.V., Oganyan K.M. Diagnosis of socio-psychological characteristics of small groups with an external status St. Petersburg: Iz-vo Lan, 1999. - 640 p.

.Vichev V.V. Morality and social psychology. M., 1999.

.Dontsov A.I. Psychology of collectives. M. Publishing House of Moscow State University 2004. 246 p.

.Dontsov A.I. On the concept of "group" in social psychology. West. Moscow university Psychology. 1997. No. 4. with. 17-25

.Dontsov A.I. Problems of group cohesion. M.: MGU, 1979. 128s.

.Zhuravlev A.L. Socio-psychological problems of management.

.Applied problems of social psychology. M. 1999. 184p.

.Neimer Yu.L. Cohesion as a characteristic of the primary Collective and its sociological dimension - Sots. research 1995. #2

.Krichevsky R.L., Dubovskaya E.M. Psychology of a small group: Theoretical and applied aspects. M. Publishing House of Moscow State University, 2001, 152 p.

.Kono T. Strategy and structure of Japanese enterprises. M.: 1987.

.Kolominsky Ya.L. Psychology of relationships in small groups. Minsk, 1976

.Krysko V. Social psychology. SPb.: Peter, 2006, 432.

.Krysko V. Dictionary-reference book on social psychology SPb.: Piter, 2003, 416.

.Kunz G., O. Donnell. Control. System and situational analysis of managerial functions. M.: 1981.

.Levin K. Field theory in social sciences. M.: 2000.

.Obozov N.N. Psychology of small groups. Social Psychology. L. 1979.

.Petrovsky A.V. Personality. Activity. Collective. Moscow: Politizdat. 1982.- 255p.

.. Platonov K.K., Kazakov V.G. Development of the system of concepts of the theory of psychological climate in psychology. /Social and psychological climate of the team./Ed. Shorokhova E.V. and Zotova O.I. M.: 2006. p. 32-44.

.Platonov Yu.P. Psychology of collective activity: Theoretical and methodological aspect. L. publishing house of Leningrad State University. 2000. 181 p.

.Psychology. Textbook. / Ed. Krylova.M.: Avenue 1998. 584p.

.Psychology. Dictionary./Ed. Petrovsky. M. 2000. 586 p.

.Sidorenkov A.V. Informal subgroups in a small group: a socio-psychological analysis. Rostov n/a: RGU, 2004.

.Fetiskin B.E. Socio-psychological development of the individual and small groups

.Shakurov R. Kh. Socio-psychological problems of teaching staff management. M., 1982.

30.Show M.E. group dynamics. New York. 1971.

Annex A

Table A1 - Sociometric matrix 1PP 1234567891011121314151Zhk22329115692Ia32139131693Km2321862624Ka3121119154695Ml33219108696Ma3377237Nm3222985698Po325123389Sa33391156910Sd32319696911Saa00012Tk232291236913Tp222391086914Ta3361324615Che000686175721160775142

Figure A1 - The results obtained during the implementation of the "sociometry" technique in the 1st course. Sociometric status index

Annex B

Table B1 - Sociometric matrix 3PP

1234567891011121314151Ge23117123542Ga3339169693Da333969694Id23139123695Is122319108696Ko31318154627Ks321129123698Km3339108699Le33391156910Oe133291546911Pyu00012Pn313291006913Ra211121191236914Tl33391546915Yam213391626991367512756118471112

Figure B1 - The results obtained during the implementation of the "sociometry" technique in the 3rd year. Sociometric status index

Annex B

Table B1 - Sociometric matrix 5PP1234567891011121314151Br333969692Be121329169693Vo333969694Dyu331119162695Zho3339100696Ko32229138697Kn232792548Me1311129115699Ma33391626910Pe33852311Pp3317545412Pm3339926913Pms3227775414Sa231171545415Hn333910069013131249561281033194

Figure B 1 - The results obtained during the implementation of the methodology "sociometry" in the 5th year. Sociometric status index

Annex D

Figure D1 - The results obtained during the implementation of the methodology "Questionnaire of interpersonal relations (OMO)" in the 1st course

Annex D

Figure D1 - The results obtained during the implementation of the methodology "Questionnaire of interpersonal relations (IMO)" in the 3rd year

Appendix E

Figure E1 - The results obtained during the implementation of the methodology "Questionnaire of interpersonal relations (IRO)" in the 5th year

Annex G

Table G1 - The results obtained during the implementation of the COE method at the 1st trial

SpravedlivostumotvetstvennostobschitelnostskromnostGotovnost come to pomoschDobrotaPriznanie oshibokTrebovatelnostRabotosposobnostNastoychivostOstorozhnostUmenie avoid nakazaniyaFizicheskaya silapokladistostZhk11111Ia11111Km11111Ka11111Ml11111Ma1111Nm11Po11111Sa11111Sd11111SaaTk11111Tp1111Ta11111Che1111summa855834444751403

COE=42%

Figure G1 - Figure. The results obtained during the implementation of the COE method in the 1st course.

Annex H

Table H1 - Results obtained during the implementation of the COE method at 3PP

Fair FairnessProductionProductionProductionProduction Commit to Help ProcessingProtability ErroringProductionProductabilityProductsSustrativeness Avoid Punchanging Present Power Supplies1354GA21345DA354GM21345DA354KM13245Le3214532435pn2134542354In13542354In

COE=64%

Figure Z1 - The results obtained during the "COE" technique in the 3rd year

Appendix I

Table I1 - Results obtained during the implementation of the COE method at 5PP

FairnessMindresponsibilitySociabilityModestyReadiness to helpKindnessRecognition of mistakesDemandingnessEffectivenessPerseveranceCaution Ability to avoid punishmentPhysical strength complaisanceBr11111Be11111Vo11111Du11111Jo11111Ko11111Kn11111Me11111Ma11111Pe11111TsOE1111113541Ppsum21111

Figure I 1 - The results obtained during the implementation of the COE method in the 5th year

Annex K

student cohesion interpersonal attitude

Training program for the formation of cohesion of the student group.

The cohesion of the student group is an important aspect of its activities. However, often the group is cohesive, but not to achieve educational goals, but to meet a variety of non-educational needs. The situation becomes especially tense when the cohesion of the group is directed against one of its members. Therefore, it is necessary to organize and conduct special events to develop group cohesion of the student team with a positive development vector of its direction.

To this end, it is necessary to conduct a socio-psychological training "Development of the cohesion of the student group."

Purpose of the training:

increasing the cohesion of the group, the development of the team as an integral group subject.

Training sessions develop the following skills and abilities:

goodwill, interest and ability to build trusting relationships with each other;

emotionally empathize with a classmate;

cooperate and work together;

coordinate their actions with others and jointly solve tasks;

resolve conflict situations;

All this contributes to the rapprochement and development of a sense of "We" in the student team.

The content of the training program "Development of the cohesion of the student group" is based on the solution of problems that are close and understandable to students: how to build relationships in a team and resist pressure; how to understand another person during a conversation, and how important it is to be able to convey your thoughts and feelings to the interlocutor. Thus, communicative competence is formed, and group cohesion dynamically develops on its basis.

We have developed a training program aimed at forming the cohesion of the student group.

Class. Self respect.

) Acquaintance. Establishing contact.

Participants sign badges. The facilitator introduces himself and says a few words about what will happen.

) Rules for working in a group.

Then the facilitator establishes certain rules for working in a group, which are necessary for all participants to feel comfortable and safe. The rules are written out in advance on a piece of drawing paper, and after the group has accepted them, they are fixed in a conspicuous place. During all subsequent classes, the rules of the group are in the same place and are reminded by the leader at the beginning of the lesson.

List of rules:

Listen carefully to each other.

Respect each other's opinion

I am a statement

Non-judgmental judgments

Activity

stop rule

Confidentiality

Each of the points of the rules is explained by the moderator.

) Warm-up. "Swap Places"

Description of the exercise

Participants sit on chairs in a circle. The driver goes to the middle of the circle and says the phrase: - “Change places” those who ... (knows how to fry fried eggs). At the end, some sign or skill is called. The task of those who possess this skill or sign is to change places. The leader's task is to have time to sit in any vacant seat. The one who did not have time to sit down becomes the new driver.

Warm-up, creating conditions in order to get to know each other better, to understand how much they have in common, to increase the interest of the participants in each other.

) The main exercise. "Good and Bad Deeds"

Description of the exercise

Participants are divided into two teams randomly. Each team is given a piece of drawing paper, felt-tip pens or markers and A4 paper. The task of one team is to write as many actions as possible that allow a person to respect himself more. Accordingly, the task is different - to write as many actions as possible, because of which a person's self-respect is lost. If desired, each team can reinforce the words with drawings of the corresponding actions.

Discussion

Each team presents its own topic. Then there is a general discussion, at the end the leader summarizes everything that has been said. It is very important to pay attention to the fact that everyone has a choice between these and other actions, but each time, choosing this or that behavior, we gain or lose respect for ourselves.

The psychological meaning of the exercise

Children's awareness of the connection between actions and self-esteem. Identification of the very concept of self-esteem and the discovery of its connection with mutual respect. And this is a necessary condition for full-fledged communication, without which the development of cohesion is impossible.

) Final exercise. "Thanks!"

Description of the exercise

The participants stand in a circle, and the facilitator invites everyone to mentally put on their left hand everything that they came with today, their luggage of mood, thoughts, knowledge, experience, and on their right hand - what they received in this new lesson. Then, all at the same time strongly clapped their hands and shouted - YES! or THANK YOU!

The psychological meaning of the exercise

Final ritual. Allows you to think about the content and result of the past lesson, as well as complete it beautifully on a positive emotional note.

Lesson 2. "Beautiful garden"

) Warm-up. Exercise "Hello"

Description of the exercise

The host invites everyone to shake hands, but in a special way. You need to greet with two hands with two participants at the same time, while you can release one hand only when you find someone who is also ready to say hello, i.e. hands should not remain idle for more than a second. The task is to greet all the members of the group in this way. There should be no talking during the game.

The psychological meaning of the exercise

Warm up. Establishing contact between participants. The handshake is a symbolic gesture of openness and goodwill. It is also important that eye contact occurs - this contributes to the emergence of intimacy and a positive internal attitude. The fact that the action takes place without words increases the concentration of the group members and gives the action the charm of novelty.

) The main exercise. "Beautiful garden"

Description of the exercise

The participants sit in a circle. The host offers to sit quietly, you can close your eyes, and imagine yourself as a flower. What would you be? What kind of leaves, stem, and maybe thorns? High or low? Bright or not so bright? And now, after everyone has submitted this - draw your flower. Everyone is given paper, felt-tip pens, crayons.

Next, the participants are invited to cut their own flower. Then everyone sits in a circle. The facilitator spreads a canvas of any fabric inside the circle, preferably plain, distributes a pin to each participant. The fabric is declared a garden clearing to be planted with flowers. All participants take turns coming out and attaching their flower.

Discussion

It is proposed to admire the "beautiful garden", to capture this picture in memory so that it shares its positive energy. It should be noted that although there are many flowers, there was enough space for everyone, everyone occupied only his own, the one he chose. To see, surrounded by different, unlike flowers, yours grows. But there is something in common - someone has a color, someone has the size or shape of the leaves. And without exception, flowers need sun and attention.

The psychological meaning of the exercise

In itself, art therapy is a very powerful tool that is used for psychological correction and serves to explore feelings, to develop interpersonal skills and relationships, to strengthen self-esteem and self-confidence. In this case, the exercise allows you to understand and feel yourself, to be yourself to freely express your thoughts and feelings, as well as to understand the uniqueness of everyone, to see the place that you occupy in the diversity of this world and to feel like a part of this beautiful world.

Final exercise. "Thanks!"

Lesson 3. Development of communication skills. Non-verbal communication

) Warm-up. Exercise "Let's line up"

Description of the exercise

The facilitator offers to play a game where the main condition is that the task is performed silently. It is impossible to talk and correspond at the same time, you can communicate only with the help of facial expressions and gestures. "Let's see if you can understand each other without words?" In the first part of the exercise, the participants are given the task to line up by height, in the second part the task becomes more complicated - you need to line up by date of birth. In the second option, at the end of the construction, the participants alternately voice their birthdays, while checking the correctness of the exercise

The psychological meaning of the exercise

Warm up. Demonstration of the possibility of an adequate exchange of information without the use of words, development of expression and non-verbal communication skills. The unusual conditions that the participants find themselves in include interest, makes them find ways to convey their thoughts more accurately to another person, to contact each other in order to achieve a common goal.

) The main exercise. "Drawing on the back"

Description of the exercise

Participants are randomly divided into three teams and lined up in three columns in parallel. Each participant looks at the back of his friend. The exercise is performed without words. The facilitator draws some simple picture and hides it. Then the same picture is drawn with a finger on the back of each last member of the teams. The task is to feel and convey this drawing as accurately as possible further. At the end, those who stand first in teams draw what they felt on sheets of paper and show it to everyone. The presenter takes out his picture and compares.

Participants are invited to discuss in teams the mistakes and findings that were made during the exercise. Draw conclusions, then, taking into account these conclusions, repeat the exercise. In this case, the first and last members of the teams change places.

Discussion

Discussion in a general circle. What helped to understand and convey feelings? How did the first and last members of the teams feel in the first and second cases? What prevented you from doing the exercise?

The psychological meaning of the exercise

Development of communication skills, responsibility, cohesion within the team. Realize how important it is to tune in to understanding another person, as well as the very desire to understand another. Demonstration of the possibility of an adequate exchange of information without the use of words, development and skills of non-verbal communication.

AND GROUP RULES

group cohesion- an important socio-psychological characteristic that shows the degree of integration of the group, its unification into a single whole. the integration of the student group, in turn, is the process of increasing the meaningful coherence and orientational community of students.

Main properties cohesive group are:

1) the attractiveness of group members to each other, i.e. degree of mutual sympathy;

2) similarity between group members (in values, attitudes, stereotypes of behavior, etc.);

3) features of group goals, their compliance with the needs of group members, clarity of setting, the success of the group in achieving them;

4) the peculiarity of the relationship of the members of the troupe (the consequences of the cooperative and competitive strategies of behavior of the members of the group);

5) satisfaction with group activities (study, work);

6) the nature of leadership and decision-making (leadership style and the actual participation of group members in the development of group decisions);

7) structural properties of the group (models of communication links and status-role aspects of the structure);

8) group atmosphere (features of interpersonal relationships, the prevailing emotional tone of business and personal relationships);

9) size (dimensions) of the group.

In the process of group development, its cohesion may increase, which leads to the preservation of group membership (there is a decrease in the number of departures from the group); to strengthening the influence exerted by the group on its members (the phenomenon of conformal behavior increases); to increase the involvement of individuals in group activities; to the growth of individual adaptation in the group and the experience of a sense of personal security (an increase in self-esteem and a decrease in the anxiety of members of a small group).

A number of studies show that increasing group cohesion does not necessarily increase (or decrease) group productivity. At least two factors can significantly affect the relationship of these variables, firstly, the positive norms adopted in the group and, secondly, the motivation for group activity.

But there is also an understanding of the compatibility of people in a group. Band Compatibility is the ability of people to coordinate their actions and optimize relationships in various areas and types of joint activities. There are several levels of compatibility:

Psychophysiological, that is, the members of the group are temperamentally compatible and coordinated in sensorimotor actions;

Psychological, when there is compatibility of characters, the unity of intellectual, emotional-volitional and need-motivational manifestations within the association of people;

Socio-psychological, which characterizes the consistency of functional-role expectations and social forms of behavior of group members along the business and interpersonal lines of relations;

Sociological, which includes the value-oriented unity (the similarity of values and meanings) of the group members.

the compatibility of people in a group depends not only on their individual characteristics, but also on the norms shared by the members of this group, on their relationship to each other and to the common cause.

Consider the following characteristic of a student group, which affects the functioning of the processes of normative behavior in it (behavior associated with the implementation of group norms).

group(or social) norm, can be considered as a rule, a standard of behavior in a small group that regulates relations in it. It is described most often as one of the elements of a group structure, especially associated with status and role.

You can give a general description of the functioning of the norms in the group:

1) norms are products of social interaction that arise in the process of the life of the group, as well as introduced into it by a larger social community;

2) the group does not establish norms for every possible situation, norms are formed only in relation to actions and situations that have some significance for the group;

3) norms cannot be applied to situations as a whole, regardless of the individual members of the group participating in it and the roles they play, but they can regulate the implementation of a particular role in different situations, i.e. act as purely role-based standards of behavior;

4) the norms differ in the degree of their acceptance by the group: some norms are approved by almost all of its participants, while others are supported only by a small minority, and some do not approve at all;

5) the norms differ in the degree and breadth of the deviance (deviation) they allow and the range of sanctions applied corresponding to it.

The effectiveness of a group may depend on whether it puts pressure on its members to ensure that their actions, thoughts, and values coincide with the actions, thoughts, and values of others (i.e., conform to group norms). In a changing and ambiguous social reality, the simplest solution to this problem for a person is to adhere to group norms that allow each participant to understand, accept and reinforce the world in which he lives, as well as to belong to it. Allocate positive and negative norms. The positive ones include norms that support the goals and objectives of the life of the group, stimulating the moral behavior of its members. Negative norms include those that encourage negative criticism, violations of discipline, antisocial forms of behavior, etc.

Someone who deviates from the norm is seen as a source of social threat, so most members of the group will exert pressure on him pressure so that he returns to the "true path" and again becomes "like everyone else." This pressure can manifest itself in the form of ridicule, social condemnation, even outright rejection of the "deviating person". Depending on the reaction to group pressure, people are usually divided into conformists, nonconformists and collectivists. conformists change their behavior, agreeing with the group. Nonconformists, on the contrary, successfully resist the pressure of the group, act in their own way. Collectivists selectively react to the influence of the group, agreeing with the opinion of the majority, if it corresponds to universal human values.

It should be noted that group cohesion has a level nature: from emotional unity to the similarity of value orientations of group members. Therefore, the cohesion index of a group is most often determined by the frequency of coincidence of opinions, assessments, positions of its members in relation to significant objects (goals of activity, group norms, events, individuals, etc.).

To diagnose the cohesion of a student group, there are the following methods: determination of the Sishore group cohesion index, “What is more important?” , "How many heads, so many minds".

INDEX DEFINITION

GROUP COHESION SISHOR

Target. Determine the level of group cohesion.

Age group: since adolescence.

Material: a form with 5 multiple-choice questions (for each member of the group).

Sample form

"Formation of cohesion of the study group"

Each student entering college enters a completely new world of relationships with the group, course and teaching staff. All the time of college education involves constant interpersonal communication of young people in classrooms - in the classroom, in places of cohabitation, as well as interpersonal contacts in their free time. The success of a student in learning, personal development depends on how much he was able to join the group, adapt to new people for him. After all, the more united and friendly the group, the more effectively it works for the development of each individual, therefore the problem of cohesion of student groups, as well as the question of how satisfied students are with the nature of interactions in their groups, are relevant today.

A real close-knit student group does not arise immediately, but is formed gradually, passing through a series of stages:

The first stage corresponds to the first and partially second courses, the second - partially to the second and third, and the third is typical for the fourth course.

At the first organizational stage, the group of college students is not a team in the full sense of the word, since it is made up of students entering the college with different life experiences; views, different attitudes towards collective life. The first stage is characterized by industrial and socio-psychological adaptation, i.e. active adaptation to the educational process and growing into a new team. Freshmen learn the elementary requirements, norms and traditions of the college, on the basis of which group traditions and norms of behavior will later be created. The organizer of the life and activities of the study group at this stage is the curator, he makes demands on the behavior and mode of activity of students. At this organizational stage, the leader must carefully study each member of the group, his character, personality traits, gradually highlighting those who are more sensitive to the interests of the team, are an asset, the leader of the group.

The second stage is characterized by the prevailing public opinion, a workable asset, systematic work to master the future specialty, and the involvement of all students in organizational work. By the end of the second stage, friendly and demanding relations are established between students, interest in common affairs, readiness for joint actions, versatile awareness of the affairs of the faculty and the university, thanks to which the team can solve its own affairs on its own, without the help of a teacher. The leader at the second stage of the development of the team must objectively study and analyze the interpersonal relationships of the members of the team.

At the third stage, each member of the team becomes the spokesman for social demands. This is the most fruitful period in the scientific, professional and civic education and self-education of the team and the individual. Each student strives to fulfill the collective, and, consequently, personal task - to provide maximum assistance to his comrades in achieving the intended goal.

On the example of my group, I want to talk about this problem. At the beginning of the academic year in the first year in the group there was no unity of the team, there were only separate groupings according to sympathy, common interests, etc., the positive activity of students is limited only by the scope of their microgroup. The group had its own informal leaders, who quite steadily occupy high positions in the group, there were quite a lot of them for a group consisting of 28 people, namely 8 students. Most of the group were "rejected" and "isolated". But gradually, thanks to painstaking work, by the 4th year we came up with the following results: 2 microgroups stood out in the group. The first group consists of “urban” students, and the second group consists of out-of-town students. Observing the behavior of the students in the group, no conflicts or discrimination were noticed. Microgroups interact well with each other. And it is worth noting that the overall and qualitative performance of students has improved significantly.

Throughout this time, to unite the group, I have used the following forms and methods: conversations, trainings, games, joint trips to the cinema, theater and museum, tea parties dedicated to "Mother's Day", thematic class hours "Traditions of my family", etc. d.

We can draw the following conclusion: the sooner the student group is studied for group cohesion, the sooner work on the formation of the team will begin and the team will be created. After all, it is the team that is the most favorable environment for the development and training of students.

Table of contents
Introduction………………………………………………………………….3
Chapter 1
learning from students………………………………………………………..5
1.1. The concept of group cohesion…………………………...5
1.2. The emergence of group cohesion among students ... ... 7
1.3. The basis of group cohesion among students……………10
1.4. Motivation for learning from students……………………….12
Summary……………………………………………………………………….18
Chapter 2. Methodology and methods of researching the problem………….20
2.1. Methodology and principles…………………………………..20
2.2. Research methods and techniques…………………………21
2.3. Justification of the sample……………………………………….22
2.4. Research progress…………………………………………….23
2.5. Data processing methods…………………………………24
Chapter 3. Analysis and interpretation of results
psychodiagnostic research…………………………………25
3.1. Data on the diagnostic method
personal and group values………………………………...25
3.2. Data on the diagnostic method
learning motivation of students…………………………………..28
Summary…………………………………………………………………………33
Conclusion………………………………………………………………...34
Conclusions……………………………………………………………………..35
Literature…………………………………………………………………36

Introduction.
The relevance of the research topic: a person has always been in society and has always been a member of various groups, with the attitudes of which he is in solidarity.
A person in a group feels himself in his place, because cohesion is the result of agreement, similarity of value orientations, views; the search for common directions, ideas, interests with other people is due to the need for social recognition, which will provide the individual with security and emotional comfort. This means that it will allow you to develop and be interested in labor and educational activities, to be motivated to work without getting interfering from outside factors. The cohesion of small permanent groups, such as student groups, is multifaceted, dealing not just with personal and group attitudes, but also with constant close interpersonal interactions. It is on cohesion that the success of the group, the performance of the group and its members depends. Reduced anxiety and interest in things that require high motivation to be successful. The motivation of the stronger learning members of the group will influence the increase in the motivation of the weaker members if the cohesion in the group is high. The motivation of each member of the group, the efforts that he made to be recognized in the group, will affect the motivation of the entire group as a whole.
The study of group cohesion is present in the works of Festinger L., Cartwright D., Levin K., Godefroy J., Rudestam K., Petrovsky A.V., Volkov I.P., Alexandrov A.A. and etc.
Studies of educational motivation and student motivation were carried out by Hekhauzen N., Mormuzheva N.V., A.A. Rean, Markova A.K., Bozhovich L.I. and etc.
The purpose of the study: to identify the relationship between the cohesion of the student group and motivation for learning.
Object of study: the cohesion of the student group, the motivation for learning in a psychological group.
Subject of study: the relationship between the cohesion of the student group and motivation for learning.
Research hypotheses:
1. The cohesion of the student group increases the motivation for learning of all its members.
2. The longer the interpersonal interactions of the student group, the higher will be the motivation for learning in the group.
Research objectives:
1. To study the phenomenon of cohesion of small groups, various approaches to the study of cohesion of small groups in Russian and foreign psychology.
2. To study the level of cohesion in student groups.
3. To study the phenomenon of motivation for learning among students, various approaches to studying the motivation of student groups in Russian and foreign psychology.
4. To study the relationship between the cohesion of the student group and the motivation for learning.
Methods: systemic approach (B.F. Lomov, 1971); the principle of development (S.L. Rubinshtein, 1968); psychodiagnostic method.
Methods:
1) Methods for diagnosing personal and group values (A.V. Kaptsov, L.V. Karpushina),
2) Methods for diagnosing student learning motivation (A.A. Rean and V.A. Yakunin, modified by N.Ts. Badmaeva).

Chapter 1
1.1. The concept of group cohesion
Group cohesion is an indicator of the strength, unity and stability of interpersonal interactions and relationships in a group, characterized by mutual emotional attraction of group members and satisfaction with the group. Group cohesion can act both as the goal of psychological training and as a necessary condition for successful work. In a group formed from strangers, some part of the time will necessarily be spent on achieving the level of cohesion that is necessary for solving group problems.
The concept of "cohesion" is used to refer to such socio-psychological characteristics of a small group as the degree of psychological community, the unity of group members, the tightness and stability of interpersonal relationships and interaction, the degree of emotional attractiveness of the group for its members.
Group cohesion is also the subject of close attention from domestic and foreign experts who have not come to a unified definition of this phenomenon.
The beginning of a systematic study of group cohesion dates back to the end of the 40s, when the first special studies were carried out under the leadership of L. Festinger. L. Festinger, a student of K. Levin, owns the most common definition of group cohesion as "the result of all the forces acting on the members of the group in order to keep them in it." Almost two decades later, D. Cartwright will practically repeat the original definition: "group cohesion is characterized by the extent to which members of the group wish to remain in it." T. Newcomb (1969) had his own approach to the formation of group cohesion, who connected the concept of group cohesion with the concept of “group consent”. The author defined group consent as a similarity, a coincidence of opinions and views that occurs in the process of direct interaction between group members.
Closely related to this approach is the understanding of cohesion as a value-oriented unity of the group, proposed by A.V. Petrovsky and V.V. Shpalinsky, which is understood as similarity, coincidence of values regarding the subject of joint activity, its goals and motives.
A.A. Alexandrov understood group cohesion as an indicator of the strength, unity and stability of interpersonal interactions and relationships in a group, characterized by mutual emotional attraction of group members and satisfaction with the group.
Thus, group cohesion contributes to the satisfaction of a person from being in a group. The cohesive forces of a group have two generators: firstly, the degree of attractiveness of one's own group, and secondly, the force of attraction of other available groups. A group can therefore be defined as a collection of individuals connected in such a way that each regards the benefits of the association as greater than can be obtained from outside.
Socio-psychological compatibility in a group means that the given composition of the group is possible for the group to provide its functions, that the members of the group can interact. This is one of the most important internal factors affecting the psychological climate in the group.
According to N.N. Obozov, cohesion in a group is such an effect of a combination of people that gives the maximum result of activity with minimal psychological "costs" of interacting persons. Cohesion can be considered in connection with two main types of group life: business (instrumental) and emotional (interpersonal). In fact, in the case of instrumental compatibility, we are talking about harmony, which is associated with the success of the activity.
1.2. The emergence of group cohesion among students.
In the scientific psychological literature, one can find many diverse characteristics of the criteria for the level of development of student study groups, ranging from the unity of the worldview orientation and value orientations in them to such features as "coincidence of formal and informal structure", "high academic performance" and even the absence of conflicts in groups. From this set of criteria, the most significant groups can be distinguished:
1. the level of social significance of the objective activity of the student group, the fulfillment of the main student function, the impact on the harmonious development of the personality of a member of the team;
2. the level of cohesion as a value-oriented unity of the group;
3. the level of organizational unity of the group;
4. the level of satisfaction of group members with the state of affairs and relationships in the group;
5. the level of her emotional culture;
6. the level of all types of group social activity;
7. the level of group self-awareness and the need for its development.
Based on the two-factor model of the group, the English psychologists G. Stanford and A. Roark identified the following seven stages in the development of group cohesion.
1. The stage of forming students' ideas about the place of study and each other. The first interpersonal interactions at this time are still very cautious, and lead to the formation of dyads. The teacher is perceived as the only authority.
2. The period of formation of group norms, the beginning of the formation of group self-consciousness.
3. The stage of conflict - there are clashes between individual members of the group due to their overestimation of their capabilities and the desire to solve all problems of self ........

Literature
1. Andreeva G.M. "Social Psychology". M., 2003.
2. Antipova I.G. Attitude to educational activity of high school students and students. / I.G. Antipova // Author. dis. . cand. psychol. Sciences. Rostov-on-Don, 2000.
3. . Aseev, V.G. Motivation of educational activity and personality formation. Text. / V.G. Aseev. M., 2006.
4. Verbitsky, A.A. Development of student motivation in contextual learning / A.A. Verbitsky, N.A. Bakshaeva. M.: Research Center for Quality Problems in Training Specialists, 2000.
5. Verkhova, Yu.L. Formation of personal and professional orientation of students in contextual learning: autoref... cand. psychol. Sciences: 19.00.07 / Yu.L. Verkhov. - M., 2007.
6. Dontsov A.I. "Psychological Unity of the Collective". M., 2002.
7. Dontsov A.I. "Problems of group cohesion". M., 2009.
8. Krichevsky R.L., Dubovskaya E.M. Psychology of a small group. 2001
9. Marisova L.I. "Student team: bases of formation and activity". Kyiv, 2005.
10. Nemov R.S., Shestakov A.G. questions of psychology "Cohesion as a factor of group effectiveness", 2001
11. Platonov Yu.P. "Psychology of collective activity". 2000.
12. Psychology of joint activity of small groups and organizations / otv. ed. Zhuravlev A.L. - M.: Sotsium: Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2001.
13. Psychological and pedagogical support of multilevel higher education / Ed. Kaptsova A.V. - Samara, 2003
14. Maklakov A.G. General psychology: Proc. manual for students of universities and students of courses of psychological disciplines / A.G. Maklakov. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2008
15. Markova A.K. Formation of learning motivation: Book. for the teacher / A.K. Markova, T.A. Matis, A.B. Orlov. - M.: Enlightenment, 2000
16. Sidorenkov A.V. Group cohesion and informal subgroups // Psychological journal. 2006. №1
17. Fetiskin N.P., Kozlov V.V., Manuilov G.M. Socio-psychological diagnostics of personality development and small groups. - M., 2002.

Portal for the student. Self-training

RELATED ARTICLES