SUBJECT-CENTRED CONTENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION AS A FACTOR IN THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PROFESSIONAL TRAINING OF A SPECIALIST

Introduction. Nowadays, extensive processes of globalization, informatization and virtualization have captured all spheres of modern life. These processes require the transition from the traditional knowledge-reproductive training of specialists to the activity focused model in higher school. To implement such a transition, it is necessary to reconsider the organization and methods for student knowledge acquisition of the content of educational programs. The transition has to be centred on the subject of development and knowledge.

The aim of the paper is to discuss methodological aspects related to the construction of subject-centred content of higher education and to show its pedagogical capabilities.

Methodology and research methods. The methodological framework of the study is performed with the involvement of the regulators of human cognitivetransformational activity, based on the post-non-classical paradigm of cognition; the key principles of the competency-based, activity and personal-centred approaches to training. Theoretical, discursive types of the analysis, content analysis, modelling of pedagogical systems and processes were used to design a conceptual plan of the research and develop its empirical base. Methods of the comparative analysis, synthesis and generalization of practical experience were applied at the stage of an experiment; the hypertext training program was applied during approbation of the developed model for training content.

Results and scientific novelty. The essence of the subject-centred approach to designing the content of the higher education was summarized. It is noted that a cognitive component of vocational training is transformed to semantic reality by means of the subject-centred approach. The key concepts of “subject”, “subjectivity” and “subject experience” were clarified from the didactic point of view. The research demonstrates the fundamental difference of the content of a new type from its traditional model where it is considered as an object of acquisition, and from the understanding of the content in the activity concept which provides a way (principle) of activity as its elementary unit. A basic unit of the subjectcentred content of the vocational training is the information resource to be transformed by the subject of the education (a student) to personal knowledge through the following this occupation. The student is a self-conscious member of the information and communication process. Based on the subject and author's representations and estimations which provide constructive interaction with the dynamically changing environment, a future expert generates information relying on wellknown knowledge and learns to apply it in a concrete context, getting social, cultural and professional experience. In this regard, a teacher is not an educational content carrier, but a network of hypermedia texts with architectonic-structural points (information hubs) of axiological knowledge. The role of the teacher consists not in formal transfer of the factual material, but assistance with student independent designing and realization of productive capabilities of students. The two-tiered structure of information resource was described. This structure is caused by the unity of the principles of fundamental nature and professional orientation. The script model of the student experience is schematically shown; the logic of training has to comply with the model outlined. The model of subject-centred content of education demonstrating its procedural character and activity form is presented.

Practical significance. The author has proposed a new system organization of the content of higher education using the possibilities of hypertext systems. The proposed system can become the basis for the self-development of future professionals, their mobility in the labour market and the maximum self-realization in the chosen sphere of employment. 

1. Davydov V. V. Vidy obobshhenija v obuchenii = Types of generalization in teaching. 2-nd ed. Moscow: Pedagogical Society of Russia; 2000. 480 р. (In Russ.)

2. Ignatieva G. The activity content of education: Contemporary discussion. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. 2003; 5: 64–74. (In Russ.)

3. Gromyko Yu. V. Mysledejatel'nostnaja pedagogika (teoretiko-prakticheskoe rukovodstvo po osvoeniju vysshih obrazcov pedagogicheskogo iskusstva) = Thought-minded pedagogy (theoretical and practical guidance on the development of higher samples of pedagogical art). Minsk: Techno-print; 2000. 376 p. (In Russ.)

4. Khutorskoy A. V. Didakticheskaja jevristika. Teorija i tehnologija kreativnogo obuchenija = Didactic heuristics. Theory and technology of creative learning. Moscow: Moscow State University; 2003. 416 p. (In Russ.)

5. Spiro R. J., Feltovich P. J., Jacobson M. J. & Coulson R. L. Cognitive flexibility, constructivism, and hypertext: Random access instruction for advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. T. M. Duffy & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.). Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawerence Erlbaum Associates; 1992. p. 57–76.

6. Kintsch W. The Construction-Integration model of text comprehension and its implications for instruction. In: R. Ruddell & N. Unrau (Eds.) Theroretiocal Models and Processes of Reading. 5th Edition, International Reading Association; 2004.

7. Keats D. W., Shuttleworth M. Towards a view of knowledge as the common heritage of humanity: mapping an OC strategy. First Monday. 2003 [cited 2017 Jan 04]; 8, 2. Available from: http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue8_2/keats/index.html

8. Lehmann Fr. OC developers as a social formation. First Monday. 2004 [cited 2017 Jun 14]; 9, 11. Available from: http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue9_11/lehmann/index.html

9. Meskov V. S., Kulikova I. V., Mamchenko A. A. Open content as a phenomenon and model of building societies based on knowledge. Otkrytoe obrazovanie = Open Education. 2006; 5: 71–83. (In Russ.)

10. Abakumova I. V. The meaning as a scientific category and the impact of its conceptual interpretations on the theory of education and training. Nauchnaja mysl’ Kavkaza = Scientific Thought of the Caucasus. 2002; 13 (39): 146–151. (In Russ.)

11. Arshinov V. I. Observer of complexity in the context of the paradigm of post-classical rationality. Filosofskij ezhegodnik. Vyp. 18: Filosofija nauki v mire slozhnosti. Philosophical Yearbook. Iss. 18: Philosophy of Science in the World of Complexity. Moscow: Institute of Philosophy RAS; 2013; 18: 42–61. (In Russ.)

12. Knyazeva E. N. Jenaktivizm: novaja forma konstruktivizma v jepistemologii = Enactivism: A new form of constructivism in epistemology. Moscow; St.-Petersburg: Center for Humanitarian Initiatives; University book; 2014. 352 р. (In Russ.)

13. Dzhiga N. D., Dzhiga O. V. The acmeological concept of teaching creative and self-creative activity of the future specialist. Aktual’nye problemy pravovyh jekonomicheskih i gumanitarnyh nauk: materialy Mezhdunarodnoj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferencii = Actual Problems of Legal Economics and Humanities: Materials of the International Scientific and Practical Conference. Minsk: Belarusian Institute of Law; 2011. p. 226–229. (In Russ.)

14. Lazarev V. S. The concepts of mental action and its formation in the theories of P. Ya. Galperin and V. V. Davydov. Voprosy psihologii = Questions of Psychology. 2010; 4: 119–128. (In Russ.)

15. Rubtsov V. V. Social'no-geneticheskaja psihologija razvivajushhego obrazovanija: dejatel'nostnyj podhod = Socio-genetic psychology of developmental education: Activity approach. Moscow: Moscow State Pedagogical University; 2008. 416 p. (In Russ.)

16. Gabay T. V. The activity theory of learning: Knowledge and skills. Vestnik Mezhdunarodnogo instituta menedzhmenta LINK = Bulletin of the International Institute of Management LINK. 2008; 22: 169–173. (In Russ.)

17. Sadovnikov N. V. Fundamentalization of modern education. Izvestija Penzenskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta im. V. G. Belinskogo = Proceedings of V. G. Belinsky Penza State Pedagogical University. 2011; 24: 782– 786. (In Russ.)

18. Nikitin V. A. Problemy ob’ektivacii, sub’ektivacii i ontologizacii v istoricheskom podhode (K postanovke voprosa o vydelenii koncepcii istorii u G. P. Shhedrovickogo i v MMK na fone sravnitel'nogo analiza s koncepcijami Shkoly annalov i drugih avtorov) = The problem of objectification, subjectification and ontologization in a historical approach (to the issue of the allocation of the history of the concept in Shchedrovitsky and MMK on the background of a comparative analysis of the concepts of the Annales School and others). 2005 [cited 2018 Apr 03]. Available from: http://www.fondgp.ru/lib/grant/grant2005/works (In Russ.)

19. Nixon E., Scullion R. and Hearn R. Her majesty the student: marketised higher education and the narcissistic (dis)satisfactions of the student-consumer. Studies in Higher Education. 2018; 43 (6): 927–943. DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2016.1196353

20. Muller J. The future of knowledge and skills in science and technology higher education. Higher Education. 2015; 70 (3): 409–416. DOI: 10.12973/ejmste/80787