High school students’ perceptions of the modern teacher image

Introduction. In modern Russian society, the requirements for the general level of the school educational process have resulted not only from the demands related to the content of educational programmes, but also from sufficiently high requirements for a teacher personality. A modern teacher has to build up a holistic and harmonious image, ranging from stylish and modern appearance to a high level of professionalism. The image of a teacher directly or indirectly influences the effectiveness of the mutual action of the members of education. Therefore, the reflection of various aspects, which form the image of the teacher in order to correct it in accordance with the existing school realities, is a relevant direction of psychological research.

The aim of the present research is to identify the most significant and preferred characteristics of the image of a modern teacher in the perceptions of high school students.

Methodology and research methods. The methodological framework of the research is based on psychosemiotic approaches in social psychology: the concept of modern psychosemiotics of communication by E. A. Petrova and theoretical positions of objective and subjective psychosemantics by E. Yu. Artemyeva, V. F. Petrenko and A. G. Shmelev. The selection of psychodiagnostic methods was based on three-factor models of imageological space organisation. The perceptions of high school students about such characteristics of the image as the appearance of the “ideal” and “bad” teacher were studied using a projective technique. The method of free semantic survey, supplemented by the method of “Factor Space of the Teacher Image” by E. A. Petrova, was used to study personal, professional and communicative features. Such method allowed the authors to structure the students’ ideas about the image of the teacher by categories related to personal characteristics: attitude to own profession, attitude to students and educational activities. The images of teachers of different types were created through the psychosemantic technique developed by D. Peabody in A. G. Shmelev’s adaptation. The non-parametric criterion of differences – Mann-Whitney U-test was employed to identify the differences in high school students’ ideas about the image of the modern “ideal” teacher depending on gender.

Results and scientific novelty. It was established that the attitude of high school students to the teacher mostly depends on teacher’s professional and personal qualities. School students especially highlighted the following aspects: the high level of mastery over the subject taught; teachers’ ability to interest students in educational material; cooperation with students and objective assessment of their knowledge. Significant positive personality characteristics included the ability to interact constructively and kindly with each student, as well as the high level of activity and positive energy of the teacher. The students think that a teacher’s appearance does not play a determining role. However, the respondents noted that it is important for them that the teacher prefers the business style of clothing and looks modern and neat.

Practical significance. The research results can be applied in the practice of school psychological service and in coaching activities in order to inform the teaching staff and interested teachers about the role of image when building effective interactions in the system “teacher-student”.

1. Petrova E. A. Image and destiny of man [Internet]. In: Konferencija “Smysl zhizni i acme” = Conference “Meaning of life and Acme”; 2005. 2005 [cited 2019 Apr 4]. Available from: http://www/academim.org/art/petrovasudba/html (In Russ.)

2. Petrova E. A. Image and its study in modern science. Jekonomika i predprinimatel’stvo = Economics and Entrepreneurship. 2007; Oct-Dec: 31-47. (In Russ.)

3. Panasyuk A. Yu. Formirovanie imidzha: strategija, psihotehniki, psihotehnologii = Image Formation: strategy, psychotechnics, psychotechnologies. Moscow: Publishing House Omega-L; 2007. 266 p. (In Russ.)

4. Perelygina E. B. Psihologija imidzha = Psychology of image. Moscow: Publishing House Aspekt Press; 2002. 223 p. (In Russ.)

5. Belobragin I., Belobragin V. V. Nekotorye voprosy formirovanija imidzhelogii kak nauki = Some issues of formation of image as a science [Internet]. 2009 [cited 2019 May 16]. Available from: http://www/academim (In Russ.)

6. Gorchakova V. G. Imidzhelogija: teorija i praktika = Imagology: Theory and practice. Moscow: Publishing House YUNITI-DANA; 2011. 335 p. (In Russ.)

7. Pocheptsov G. G. Imidzhelogija = Imagology. Moscow; Kiev: Publishing Houses Refl-book; Vakler; 2001. 698 p. (In Russ.)

8. Nefedova I., Vlasova E. Ja i moj imidzh = Me and my image. Moscow: Publishing Houses Yauza; EKSMO-Press; 1997. 168 p. (In Russ.)

9. Shepel V. M. Imidzhelogija. Kak nravit’sja ljudjam = Imagology. How to make people like you. Moscow: Publishing House Narodnoe obrazovanie; 2002. 576 p. (In Russ.)

10. Simonova I. F. Pedagogicheskie uslovija formirovanija imidzha budushhego specialista social’no-kul’turnoj dejatel’nosti kak professional’noj cennosti = Pedagogical conditions of formation of image of the future specialist of social and cultural activity as professional value [Internet]. 2012 [cited 2019 Apr 4]. Available from: htpp://extinguish.ru.pdf (In Russ.)

11. Volodarskaya E. A. Imidzh nauki kak social’no-psihologicheskij fenomen = Image of science as a socio-psychological phenomenon. Moscow: S. I. Vavilov Institute for the History of Science and Technology of the Russian Academy of Sciences; 2006. 147 p. (In Russ.)

12. Gorbatov S. V., Khapova S. N., Lysova E. I. Personal branding: Interdisciplinary systematic review and research agenda. Frontiers in Psychology. 2018; 9: 1-17.

13. Philbrick D. L., Cleveland A. D. Personal branding: creating your path to professional success. Medicinskie spravochnye sluzhby = Medical Reference Services. 2015; 34 (2): 181-189. (In Russ.)

14. Bendish F., Larsen G., Truman M. Fame and fortune: A conceptual model of executive brands. Evropejskij zhurnal marketinga = European Journal of Marketing. 2013; V. 47, 3/4: 596-614. (In Russ.)

15. Zabojnik R. Personal branding and marketing strategies. European Journal of Science and Theology. 2018; V. 14, 6: 159-169.

16. Edmiston D. Creating a personal competitive advantage by developing a professional online presence. Marketing Education Review. 2014; 24: 21-24.

17. Kalyuzhny A. A. Psihologija formirovanija imidzha uchitelja = Psychology of formation of image of the teacher. Moscow: Publishing House VLADOS; 2004. 222 p. (In Russ.)

18. Roberts L. M. Changing faces: Professional image construction in diverse organizational settings. Academy of Management. 2005. V. 30; 4: 685-711.

19. Petrova E. A., Shkurko N. M. Imidzh uchitelja v sovremennoj Rossii = The image of the teacher in modern Russia. Moscow: Publishing House RIC AIM; 2006. 101 p. (In Russ.)

20. Tarakanova A. A. Image as a dynamic characteristic of personal and professional qualities of a teacher. Pedagogicheskoe obrazovanie v Rossii = Pedagogical Education in Russia. 2012; 3: 70-75. (In Russ.)

21. Fadeeva E. I. Competence approach to the formation of the image of a modern teacher. Nauka i shkola = Science and School. 2008; 1: 28-35. (In Russ.)

22. Mironova O. I., Pluzhnikova N. I., Akimova N. N., Nekrasova M. V., Shagaeva E. A., Zhukova V. I. Social and psychological factors of the compelled choice of profession. Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics. 2014; V. 5, 2: 147-156.

23. Chertykova I. P. Representations of students about the image of the University teacher. PR v obrazovanii = PR in Education. 2003; 3: 105-109. (In Russ.)

24. lepuhina G. V., Petushkova O. G. Study of the image of the subjects of the educational process in the aspect of moral education of high school students. Sovremennye problemy nauki i obrazovanija = Modern Problems of Science and Education. 2015; 6: 504. (In Russ.)

25. Chirikova N. V. Perception peculiarities of senior schoolchildren and college students of teacher’s personality. Pedagogicheskoe obrazovanie v Rossii = Pedagogical Education in Russia. 2011; 3: 232-236. (In Russ.)

26. Thomson M. M. Metaphorical images of schooling: Beliefs about teaching and learning among prospective teachers from the United States displaying different motivational profiles. Educational Psychology. 2016; 36 (3): 502-525.

27. Salakhova V. B., Buldakov A. V., Sokolovskaya I. E., Mikhaylovsky M. N. Substantive (content-related) characteristics of deviant behavior as a social and psychological phenomenon. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education. 2016; 17: 10609-10622.

28. Menşure A. Küçükaydın An action research on the scientist image of 4 th grade students. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching. 2018; V. 19, 1: 124-144.

29. Shmelev A. G. Psihodiagnostika lichnostnyh chert = Psychodiagnostics of personality traits. St. Petersburg: Publishing House Rech’; 2002. 480 p. (In Russ.)