Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin, 2018, No.3, pp.7-22
UDC: 
378+147+34

The use of the innovative synectic method in the educational process of higher educational institutions

Nagovitsyn R. S. 1 (Glazov, Russian Federation), Zamolotskikh E. G. 2 (Moscow, Russian Federation), Rassolova E. A. 3 (Moscow, Russian Federation), Farnieva M. G. 2 (Moscow, Russian Federation), Oborotova S. A. 4 (Moscow, Russian Federation)
1 Glazov State Pedagogical Institute
2 Moscow Social Pedagogical Institute
3 Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation
4 Russian Academy of Education,
Abstract: 

Introduction. The study is devoted to the significant problem of applying innovations to university-based initial teacher education. The purpose of the article is to evaluate the effectiveness of the synectic teaching method aimed at developing the complex of competences within the framework of initial teacher education.
Materials and Methods. The methodology of the research is based on the competence approach. The solution of research problems was conducted by a set of complementary theoretical methods (analysis of domestic and foreign theory of education, practice and experience in the field of innovation); general scientific methods such as classification, modeling, comparison, and generalization; experimental methods involving diagnostic tools, mathematical-statistical processing and expert assessments. For the experimental part of the work, a special diagnostic toolkit has been created to identify the advanced, basic, threshold and insufficient levels of the formation of a complex of competencies for the activity and reflective indicators
Results. The ideas of using innovations in initial teacher education are summarized. The synectic method is revealed as an innovative approach to learning, which focuses on group project-research activities for the search for educational innovative ideas on the basis of an active critical discussion. The effectiveness of the synectic method for the ability to work in a team, tolerance to social, cultural and personal differences and readiness for active interaction with participants in the educational process is experimentally proved.
Conclusions. The results indicate the need to introduce innovative teaching technologies for effective initial teacher education in methodological, content and organizational aspects.

Keywords: 

Synectic method; Innovation idea; Formation of competences; Teams work; Project activity; prospective teachers; Critical discussion

References: 

1. Zagvyazinsky V. I. About the leading reference points of preparation of a pedagogical personnel at university. Pedagogy, 2016, no. 9, pp. 77–83. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=28100033

2. Zagvyazinsky V. I., Strokova T. A. Pedagogical innovation: problems, strategies and tactics. Monograph. Tyumen, Tyumen State University Publ., 2011, 176 p. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=21097197

3. Klarin M. V. Tool of innovative education: transformative learning. Pedagogy, 2017, no. 3, pp. 19–27. (In Russian) URL: http://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=28916192

4. Kuz’mina N. V., Shmeleva E. A.  Educational environment of a university in the development of the acme-innovative potential of future teachers. Akmeology, 2013, no. 1, pp. 16–21. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=19005037

5. Nagovitsyn R. S., Miroshnichenko A. A., Senator S. Yu. Implementation of Mobile Pedagogy During Continuous Education of Physical Culture Teachers. Integration of Education, 2018, vol. 22 (1), pp. 107–119. (In Russian) DOI: http://doi.org/10.15507/1991-9468.090.022.201801.107-119   

6. Nagovitsyn R. S., Tutolmin A. V., Maksimov Y. G., Volkov P. B.  Continuous college-to-university physical education technology: case study Physical Education and English Language disciplines. Theory and Practice of Physical Culture, 2018, no. 2, pp. 21–23. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=32330536

7. Podymova L. S. Psihologo-pedagogical innovatika: personal aspect. Monograph. Moscow, Prometey Publ., 2012, 207 p. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=32661841

8. Senator S. Yu. Informational and educational environment as a factor of elevating students' training quality. Journal of Secondary Vocational Education, 2012, no. 5, pp. 60–63. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=17764939

9. Senator S. Ju., Sokolnikova E. I.  Formation of Constructive Skills of Students Majoring In Education While Studying Pedagogy at University. Bulletin of Sholokhov Moscow State University for the Humanities: Pedagogy and Psychology Series, 2014, no. 3, pp. 59–64. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=2213294213  

10. Slastenin V. A., Zhog V. I., Borisova N. Yu., Pleshakov V. A., Podymova L. S. Мodels of system integration of innovative international educational practice into system of russian national education. Pedagogical Education and Science, 2010, no. 1, pp. 4–11. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=17056075

11. Slastenin V. A., Podymova L. S. Readiness of the teacher for innovative activity. Siberian Pedagogical Journal, 2007, no. 1, pp. 42–49. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=11687141

12. Khutorskoy A. V. Competence approach and methodology of didactics. To the 90th anniversary of the birth of V.V. Krayevsky. Bulletin of the Institute of Human Education, 2016, no. 1, pp. 11–11 (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=28101971  

13. Greany T. Innovation is possible, it’s just not easy. Improvement, innovation and legitimacy in England’s autonomous and accountable school system. Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 2018, vol. 46 (1), pp. 65–85. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/1741143216659297

14. Gulbrandsen M., Aanstad S. Is innovation a useful concept for arts and humanities research? Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 2015, vol. 14 (1), pp. 9–24. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/1474022214533890

15. Jacobs C. The Evaluation of Educational Innovation. Evaluation, 2000, vol. 6 (3), pp. 261–280. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/13563890022209280

16. Kaufman N. J., Scott C. Innovation in Higher Education: Lessons Learned from Creating a Faculty Fellowship Program. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics, 2016, vol. 44 (1_suppl), pp. 97–106. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/1073110516644239

17. Klimova I. I., Sharabarina N. E., Tikhova E. A., Dubinka S. A. Communicative competence enhancement. XLinguae, 2018, vol. 11 (1XL), рp. 67–74. DOI: http://doi.org/10.18355/XL.2018.11.01XL.07

18. Kwan L. Y.-Y., Leung A. K.-y., Liou S. Culture, Creativity, and Innovation. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 2018, vol. 49 (2), pp. 165–170. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/0022022117753306

19. Lee I., Mak P., Burns A. EFL teachers’ attempts at feedback innovation in the writing classroom. Language Teaching Research, 2016, vol. 20 (2), pp. 248–269. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1362168815581007

20. Nagovitsyn R. S., Chigovskaya-Nazarova Ya. A., Miroshnichenko A. A., Senator S. Y. The realization of the system programme “Health saving education” in the pedagogical university. European Journal of Contemporary Education, 2018, no. 7 (1), pp. 137–149. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.13187/ejced.2018.1.137  

21. Nagovitsyn R. S., Senator S. Y., Maximova E. B., Neverova N. V., Sokolnikova E. I. Continuous professional education of teachers of physical education with the additional qualification in the field of foreign languages on the basis of competency-based approach. Journal of Physical Education and Sport, 2017, 17 supplement issue 4, pp. 2170–2178. DOI: http://doi.org/10.7752/jpes.2017.s4224

22. Notten T. Teaching, researching and innovation. Teaching Public Administration, 2016, vol. 34 (1), pp. 70–82. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/0144739415598366

23. Peurach D. J. Innovating at the Nexus of Impact and Improvement. Educational Researcher, 2016, vol. 45 (7), pp. 421–429. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.3102/0013189X16670898

24. Richmond G., Tatto M. T. Innovation in Educational Research. Journal of Teacher Education, 2016, vol. 67 (5), pp. 360–362. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022487116670866

25. Savelsbergh E. R., Prins G. T., Rietbergen C., Fechner S., Vaessen B. E., Draijer J. M., Bakker A. Effects of innovative science and mathematics teaching on student attitudes and achievement: A meta-analytic study. Educational Research Review, 2016, vol. 19, pp. 158–172. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2016.07.003

26. Shavinina L. Experience-Sampling Research Methods and Their Potential for Education Research. Gifted Education International, 2013, vol. 29 (1), pp. 54–68. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/0261429412440651

27. Zirkel S., Garcia J. A., Murphy M. C. Experience-Sampling Research Methods and Their Potential for Education Research. Educational Researcher, 2015, vol. 44 (1), pp. 7–16. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0013189X14566879

Date of the publication 30.06.2018