The Specificity of Preparing Students at Pedagogical Universities for Educational Activity in the Digital Epoch
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.6000/2292-2598.2020.08.03.24Keywords:
Digitalisation, scale of behaviour regulators, emotional and motivational readiness, pedagogical work with parents.Abstract
Objective: the study is aimed at analysing the problems of forming the skills of educational activities of an individual, leading approaches that outline the range of solutions to education problems, features, and possibilities of these approaches to elucidate the totality of effective methods and techniques for special education pedagogical specialties in students.
Background: education in higher education institutions (HEI) or another educational institution is based on the formation of an individual who has achieved the basic characteristics of his development in the process of professional development and in the framework of cooperation.
Method: the experimental method was used in work during 2014-2019, in which 219 students of experimental groups and 213 students of control groups participated.
Results: The authors determined the possibility of using student training tools as a specialist and a socially responsible person using pedagogical tools implemented in a digital educational environment.
Conclusion: Students can be trained in pedagogical higher education directly using digital technologies. Thus, working with similar technologies will not require additional training in the implementation of practical work in further professional activities
References
Cha S-H. Decentralization in educational governance and its challenges in Korea: focused on policy conflicts between central and local governments in education. Asia Pacific Education Review 2016; 17(3): 479-487. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-016-9448-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-016-9448-3
Kovačević J, Rahimić Z, Šehić D. Policymakers’ rhetoric of educational change: a critical analysis. Journal of Educational Change 2018; 19(3): 375-417. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-018-9322-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-018-9322-7
Saini C, Abraham J. modeling educational usage of social media in pre-service teacher education. Journal of Computing in Higher Education 2019; 31(1): 21-55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-018-9190-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-018-9190-4
Wang R, Scown P, Urquhart C, Hardman J. tapping the educational potential of Facebook: guidelines for use in higher education. Education and Information Technologies 2014; 19(1): 21-39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-012-9206-z DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-012-9206-z
Bischoff K, Volkmann CK, Audretsch DB. Stakeholder collaboration in entrepreneurship education: an analysis of the entrepreneurial ecosystems of European higher educational institutions. The Journal of Technology Transfer 2018; 43(1): 20-46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-017-9581-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-017-9581-0
Seralidou E, Douligeris C. Learning with the AppInventor Programming software through the use of structured educational scenarios in secondary education in Greece. Education and Information Technologies 2019; 24(4): 2243-2281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09866-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09866-7
Jauhar SK, Pant M, Dutt R. Performance measurement of an Indian higher education institute: a sustainable educational supply chain management perspective. International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management 2018; 9(1): 180-193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-016-0505-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-016-0505-4
Ren X. The undefined figure: instructional designers in the open educational resource (OER) movement in higher education. Education and Information Technologies, 2019. Available at: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007% 2Fs10639-019-09940-0
Bormann I, Nikel J. How Education for sustainable development is implemented in Germany: looking through the lens of educational governance theory. International Review of Education 2017; 63(6): 793-809. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-017-9683-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-017-9683-9
Massing N, Schneider SL. Degrees of competency: the relationship between educational qualifications and adult skills across countries. Large-Scale Assessments in Education 2017; 5(1): 1-34. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-017-0041-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-017-0041-y
Daniela L, Lytras MD. Educational Robotics for inclusive education. Technology. Knowledge and Learning, 2019; 24(2): 219-225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9397-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9397-5
Aspelin J. The elementary forms of educational life: understanding the meaning of education from the concept of “Social Responsivity”. Social Psychology of Education 2015; 18(3): 487-501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-015-9298-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-015-9298-6
Sarrab M, Al-Shihi H, Al-Manthari B, Bourdoucen H. Toward educational requirements model for mobile learning development and adoption in higher education. TechTrends 2018; 62(6): 635-646. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-018-0331-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-018-0331-4
Elmberger A, Björck E, Liljedahl M, Nieminen J, Bolander Laksov K. Contradictions in clinical teachers’ engagement in educational development: an activity theory analysis. Advances in Health Sciences Education 2019; 24(1): 125-140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-018-9853-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-018-9853-y
Kyle BN, Corral I, John NJ, Shelton PG. Educational scholarship and technology: resources for a changing undergraduate medical education curriculum. Psychiatric Quarterly 2017; 88(2): 249-261. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11126-016-9474-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11126-016-9474-7
Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities of the united nations general assembly 2006. Available at: https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities.html
Yarskaya V.N., Yarskaya-Smirnova E.R. Inclusive culture of social services. Case Studies 2015; 12: 133–140.
Bakker M., van den Heuvel-Panhuizen M., Robitzsch A. Effects of mathematics computer games on special education students’ multiplicative reasoning ability. British Journal of Educational Technology 2016; 47(4): 633-648. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12249 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12249
Anastasiou D, Kauffmann JM. A Social constructionist approach to disability: implications for special education. Exceptional Children 2011; 77(3): 367-384. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291107700307 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291107700307
Itterstad G. Inclusion – what does this concept mean, and what problems does the Norwegian school face in putting it into practice? Psychological Science and Education 2011; 3: 41–49. Available at: http://psyjournals.ru/files/46350/ psyedu_2011_n3_Itterstad.pdf.
Pennington R. Using robot-assisted instruction to teach students with intellectual disabilities to use personal narrative in text messages. Journal of Special Education Technology 2014; 29(4): 9-58. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264341402900404 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/016264341402900404
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
