Errors in hypothesis as a methodological reflection subject of a teacher-researcher

Introduction. The present article outlines the results of a theoretical and practical study of the mechanisms of hypothesis in scientific research on the problems of education.

The current research is aimed to study the methodological resources for improving the quality of scientific research on the problems of education through understanding the errors in hypothesising as a methodological reflection subject of a teacher-researcher.

Methodology and research methods are based on an activity-personal approach to the cognition of the education process and on research activities to investigate this process. In addition, the following areas of modern pedagogical science are used as the methodological framework of the study: the study of the axiological and conceptual foundations of scientific activity with an appeal to the cultural and historical concept; a hermeneutic phenomenological approach aimed at updating the interpretive potential of scientific texts; classical methods of theoretical analysis and synthesis, deduction and induction, comparison, modelling and extrapolation as tools for studying the research activities of a teacher, as well as methods of expert assessment and included observation. The methodology is based on the criticism of the methodological concept of inductivism and involves the addition of a hypothetical-deductive method with the idea of prolonged end-to-end hypothesising, based on reflexive reassessment and prevention of meaning-making errors by the researcher.

Results. As a result of the study, the mechanisms of trans-level conceptualisation of pedagogical knowledge in the process of working out the methodological apparatus of scientific research were revealed. In addition to the existing ones, unconventional - special - requirements for scientific hypotheses are justified, aimed at updating their prognostic and diagnostic functions. The systematisation of hypothesis errors was carried out, which makes it possible to regulate reflexive scientific and pedagogical search, to carry out feedback in the process of methodological preparation and self-education, and to stimulate the development of scientifically justified heuristic pedagogical solutions. Methodological resources and positive results of using knowledge about the productive possibilities of preventive error management activities in the practice of training teachers-researchers are shown: pedagogical goals and installations of research activities, principles, specific didactic means of formation of methodological competence and error management.

Scientific novelty. The phenomenon of hypothesis error was first described in the context of the conceptualisation and interconnection of elements of the methodological apparatus of scientific research, taking into account the prolongation, cumulativeness and trans-level of the hypothesis nomination process as a regulator of scientific search.

Practical significance. The research results are recommended to be applied in the preparation of curricula for the course “Methodology of Scientific and Pedagogical Research” and as didactic material for academic studies in the process of teacher-researcher training in the framework of master’s, postgraduate, doctoral and postgraduate self-education. The proposed typology of hypothesis errors is used in the development of methodological requirements for the scientific level of dissertation studies on the problems of education.

1. Zagvyazinsky V. I. The role of pedagogical science in social strategy harmonization, educational policy and practice of Russian education reformation. Vestnik Moskovskogo gosu-darstvennogo universiteta. Serija 20. Pedagogicheskoe obrazovanie = Moscow State University Bulletin. Series 20. Pedagogical Education. 2010; (4): 3-10. (In Russ.)

2. Zagvyazinsky V. I., Zakirova A. F. Normative regulation and the formation of methodological culture of pedagogical researchers. Obrazovanie i nauka = The Education and Science Journal. 2013; 5 (104): 3-16. (In Russ.)

3. Steier F. Research and reflexivity. London, England: Sage; 1995. 163 p.

4. Andreyev I. D. Metodologicheskie osnovy poznaniya social’nyh yavlenij = Methodological foundations of social phenomena cognition. Moscow: Higher School; 1977. 328 p. (In Russ.)

5. Vilkeev D. V. Metody nauchnogo poznaniya v shkol’nom obuchenii = Methods of scientific knowledge in school teaching. Kazan: Tatar Book Publishing House; 1975. 160 p. (In Russ.)

6. Gerasimov I. G. Struktura nauchnogo issledovaniya (filosofskij analiz poznavatel’noj deyatel’nosti v nauke) = The structure of scientific research (philosophical analysis of cognitive activity in science). Moscow: Publishing House Mysl’; 1985. 218 p. (In Russ.).

7. Navil E. Logika gipotezy = The logic of the hypothesis. Moscow: Publishing House Librokom; 2011. 368 p. (In Russ.)

8. Ruzavin G. I. Metodologiya nauchnogo issledovaniya = Research methodology. Moscow: Publishing House Juniti-Dana; 1999. 317 p. (In Russ.)

9. Synchenko G. Ch. Logika dissertacii = Thesis logic. Moscow: Publishing House Forum; 2019. 312 p. (In Russ.)

10. Khilkevich A. P. Gnoseologicheskaya priroda gipotezy = Epistemological nature of the hypothesis. Minsk: Belarusian State University named after V. I. Lenin; 1974. 160 p. (In Russ.)

11. Shtoff V. A. Problemy metodologii nauchnogo poznaniya = Problems of the methodology of scientific knowledge. Moscow: Higher School; 1978. 269 p. (In Russ.)

12. Zagvyazinsky V. I. Issledovatel’skaya deyatel’nost’ pedagoga = Research activity of a teacher. Moscow: Publishing House Akademija; 2010. 176 p. (In Russ.)

13. Kraevsky V. V., Berezhnova E. V. Metodologiya pedagogiki: novyj etap = Methodology of pedagogy: A new stage. Moscow: Publishing House Akademija; 2006. 400 p. (In Russ.)

14. Novikov A. M. Metodologiya obrazovaniya = Education methodology. Moscow: Publishing House Jegves; 2006. 488 p. (In Russ.)

15. Orlov A. Methodological characteristics of the dissertation research as the basis of its quality. Pedagog-soiskatel’ = Applicant-Teacher. 2008; 3: 35-40. (In Russ.)

16. Serikov V. V. Pedagogicheskaya real’nost’ i pedagogicheskoe znanie. Opyt metod-ologicheskoj refleksii = Pedagogical reality and pedagogical knowledge. The experience of methodological reflection. Moscow: Editorial and Publishing House of Russian New University; 2018. 92 p. (In Russ.)

17. Bains W. Hypotheses, limits, models and life. Life (Basel) [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2020 Dec 21]; 5 (1): 1-3. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6875436/

18. Marks K., Engels F. Sochineniya = Essays. 2nd ed. Vol. 20. Moscow: State Publishing House of Political Literature; 1961. p. 251. (In Russ.)

19. Bibler V. S. Ot naukoucheniya - k logike kul’tury: Dva filos. vvedeniya v dvadcat’ pervyj vek = From science teaching to the logic of culture: Two philosophical introductions to the 21st century. Moscow: Publishing House Politizdat; 1990. 413 p. (In Russ.)

20. Vygotsky L. S. Sobranie sochinenij v 6 t. T. 1. = Collected works in six volumes. V.1 Moscow: Publishing House Pedagogika; 1982. 487 p.; V. 3. Moscow: Publishing House Peda-gogika; 1983. 366 p. (In Russ.)

21. Davidov V. V. The category of activity and mental reflection in the theory of A. N. Leontyev. Vestnik MGU. Ser 14. Psihologiya = Moscow State University Bulletin. Series 14. Psychology. 1979; 4: 25-41. (In Russ.)

22. Leontyev A. N. Deyatel’nost’. Soznanie. Lichnost’ = Activity. Consciousness. Personality. Moscow: Publishing House Politizdat; 1975. 304 p. (In Russ.)

23. Rubinshtein S. L. Osnovy obshchej psihologii: V 2 t. t.1. = Fundamentals of general psychology. In 2 volumes. Vol. 1. Moscow: Publishing House Pedagogika; 1989. 498 p. (In Russ.)

24. Zakirova A. F. The heuristic nature of scientific and pedagogical hypothesis. Obrazo-vanie i nauka = The Education and Science Journal. 2010; 10 (78): 12-30. (In Russ.)

25. Titova E. V. Methodological errors in pedagogical research. Pis’ma vEmissiya. Offla-jn = The Emissia. Offline Letters. 2011; 9: 1648 p. (In Russ.)

26. Zagvyazinsky V. I. The nature of typical mistakes in pedagogical research. Innova-cionnye proekty i programmy v obrazovanii = Innovative Projects and Programs in Education. 2011; 3: 28 - 31. (In Russ.)

27. Meretukova Z. K. Methodological errors in psychological and pedagogical researches and publications. Vestnik Adygejskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta = Bulletin of Adyghe State University. 2006; 2: 147-151. (In Russ.)

28. Yuzefavichus T. A. Professional’no-pedagogicheskie oshibki uchitelej: sushchnost’ i minimizaciya = Professional and pedagogical mistakes of teachers: Essence and minimisation. Moscow: GOU; 2009. 329 p. (In Russ.)

29. Yuzefavichus T. A. Classification of professional and pedagogical mistakes: Theoretical and applied aspects. Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo oblastnogo universiteta. Seriya: Pedagogika. = Bulletin of Moscow State Regional University. Series: Pedagogy. 2009; 3: 95-99. (In Russ.)

30. Safin A. M. The phenomenon of error in the structure of human activity. Uchyonye zapiski Kazanskogo universiteta = Scientific Notes of Kazan University. 2013; 155 (1): 157-162. (In Russ.)

31. Zakirova A. F. Methods of pedagogical hermeneutics as a means of humanizing pedagogical knowledge. Obrazovanie i nauka = The Education and Science Journal. 2009; 1 (58): 3-13. (In Russ.)

32. Zachos P., Pruzek R., Hick T. Approaching error in scientific knowledge and science education. In: 7th International History, Philosophy of Science and Science Teaching Conference Proceedings; 2003; Winnipeg. Winnipeg; 2003. p. 947-957.

33. Tulis M. Error management behavior in classrooms: Teachers’ responses to student mistakes. Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies. 2013; Jul: 56-68.

34. Steuer G., Rosentritt-Brunn G., Dresel M. Dealing with errors in mathematics classrooms: Structure and relevance of perceived error climate. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 2013; 38 (3): 196-210.

35. Heimbeck D., Frese M., Sonnentag S., Keith N. Integrating errors into the training process: The function of error management instructions and the role of goal orientation. Personnel Psychology. 2003; 56 (2): 333-361. DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2003.tb00153.x

36. Keith N., Frese M. Effectiveness of error management training: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2008; 93 (1): 59-69. DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.59

37. DeBrincat D. Yes, no, wait, what?: The benefits of student mistakes in the classroom. The History Teacher [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2020 Dec 21]; 49 (1): 9-34. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/24810498

38. Fisher K., Lipson J. Twenty questions about student error. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 1986; 23 (9): 783-203.

39. Dewey J. How we think. Reprint. Nobel Press; 2011. 230 p.

40. Capellmann L., Gloystein D. Reflexion. In: J. Frohn (eds.). FDQI-HU-Glossar. Berlin: Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin; 2017.

41. Fichten W., Meyer H. Skizze einer Theorie forschenden Lernens in der Lehrer_in-nenbildung. In: Feyerer E., Hirschenhauser K., Soukup-Altrichter K. (eds.). Last oder Lust? Forschung und Lehrer_innenbildung Munster: Waxman; 2014. p. 11-42. (In German)

42. Korthagen F. A. J. Eine Reflexion uber Reflexion. In: Korthagen F. A. J., Meyer W. (eds.). Schulwirklichkeit und Lehrerbildung. Reflexion der Lehrertatigkeit. Hamburg: EB-Verlag; 2002. p. 55-73. (In German)

43. Popper K. Logika nauchnogo issledovaniya = The logic of scientific research. Moscow: Publishing Houses AST, Astrel; 2010. 576 p. (In Russ.)

44. Bermus A. G. Vvedenie v gumanitarnuyu metodologiyu = Introduction to humanitarian methodology. Moscow: Publishing House “Kanon+” ROOI “Reabilitacija”; 2007. 336 p. (In Russ.)

45. Mortari L. Reflectivity in research practice: An overview of different perspectives. International Journal of Qualitative Methods. 2015; 14 (5): 1-9. DOI: 10.1177/1609406915618045

46. Schon D. A. The reflective practitioner. How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books; 1984. 384 p.

47. Schulz K. Being wrong: Adventures in the margin of error. New York: Ecco; 2011. 405 p.