Report “Styles of Pedagogical Communication”
Pedagogical communication.
Pedagogical communication is professional communication between a teacher and students in an integral pedagogical process, developing in two directions: organizing relationships with students and managing communication in a children’s team. Pedagogical communication is a multifaceted process of organizing, establishing and developing communication, mutual understanding and interaction between teachers and students, generated by the goals and content of their joint activities. Communication is one of the most important factors in a child’s mental and social development. Only in contact with adults is it possible for children to assimilate the social and historical experience of humanity and realize their innate ability to become representatives of the human race.
One of the factors influencing the development of a child’s personality is the communication style inherent in the teacher. The style of pedagogical leadership can be defined as methods of educational influence, manifested in a typical set of requirements and expectations for the appropriate behavior of students. It is embodied in characteristic forms of organizing the activities and communication of students and has appropriate ways of implementing the teacher’s attitude towards the student’s personality, associated with the achieved level of professional and pedagogical activity.
Styles of pedagogical communication.
The style of pedagogical communication is a certain system of interaction between a teacher and students. It determines his entire pedagogical activity, his culture as a teacher. This is a very important definition in the work of a teacher; the effectiveness of his work depends on the teacher’s communication style. The style of pedagogical communication includes the teacher’s communication technique (manner of communication), his creative characteristics, his attitude towards students, as well as the attitude of students towards the teacher. Thus, a teacher's communication style is a very broad concept. They vary from teacher to teacher.
Democratic style of communication.
The democratic style of interaction is considered the most effective and optimal. It is characterized by broad contact with students, manifestation of trust and respect for them, the teacher strives to establish emotional contact with the student, does not suppress with severity and punishment; Positive assessments predominate in communication with students. A democratic teacher feels the need for feedback from students on how they perceive certain forms of joint activity; knows how to admit mistakes made. In his work, such a teacher stimulates mental activity and motivation to achieve cognitive activity. In groups whose communication is characterized by democratic tendencies, optimal conditions are created for the formation of student relationships and a positive emotional climate of the group. The democratic style ensures friendly mutual understanding between teacher and student, evokes positive emotions and self-confidence in students, and gives an understanding of the value of cooperation in joint activities. Authoritarian communication style.
Teachers with an authoritarian communication style, on the contrary, display pronounced attitudes and selectivity towards students, they are much more likely to use prohibitions and restrictions in relation to students, and abuse negative assessments; severity and punishment are the main pedagogical means. An authoritarian teacher expects only obedience; it is distinguished by a large number of educational influences with their uniformity. A teacher’s communication with authoritarian tendencies leads to conflict and hostility in student relationships, thereby creating unfavorable conditions for the education of students. The teacher’s authoritarianism is often a consequence of an insufficient level of psychological culture, on the one hand, and a desire to accelerate the pace of student development, despite their individual characteristics, on the other. Moreover, teachers resort to authoritarian methods with the best intentions: they are convinced that by breaking students and achieving maximum results from them here and now, they can more quickly achieve their desired goals. A pronounced authoritarian style puts the teacher in a position of alienation from students; every student experiences a state of insecurity and anxiety, tension and self-doubt. This happens because such teachers, underestimating the development of students’ qualities such as initiative and independence, exaggerate their qualities such as indiscipline, laziness and irresponsibility. Liberal communication style
.
A liberal teacher is characterized by lack of initiative, irresponsibility, inconsistency in decisions and actions, and indecisiveness in difficult situations. Such a teacher “forgets” about his previous requirements and, after a certain time, is able to present completely opposite requirements to the requirements he himself had previously given. I am inclined to let things take their course and to overestimate the capabilities of students. Does not check whether its requirements are met. The assessment of students by a liberal teacher depends on their mood: in a good mood, positive assessments predominate, in a bad mood, negative assessments prevail. All this can lead to a decline in the authority of the teacher in the eyes of students. However, such a teacher strives not to spoil relations with anyone; his behavior is affectionate and friendly with everyone. Perceives his students as proactive, independent, sociable, and truthful. The style of pedagogical communication as one of the characteristics of a person is not an innate (biologically predetermined) quality, but is formed and cultivated in the process of practice on the basis of the teacher’s deep awareness of the basic laws of development and formation of a system of human relations. However, certain personal characteristics predispose to the formation of a particular communication style. For example, people who are self-confident, proud, unbalanced and aggressive tend to have an authoritarian style. The democratic style is predisposed by such personality traits as adequate self-esteem, balance, goodwill, sensitivity and attentiveness to people. Research has shown that after the departure of an “autocrat” teacher, it is not recommended to appoint a “liberal” to the group, but after a “liberal”, an “autocrat” is possible. A “Democrat” can be appointed after any predecessor. In life, each of the named styles of pedagogical communication in its “pure” form is rarely encountered. In practice, it is often found that an individual teacher exhibits a so-called “mixed style” of interaction with students. A mixed style is characterized by the predominance of two styles: authoritarian and democratic or democratic style with inconsistent (liberal). The features of authoritarian and liberal styles are rarely combined with each other. Authoritarian style
Teacher communication is characterized by the fact that the teacher makes all decisions himself, and the students’ opinions are not taken into account. The teacher is at the center of the entire process of teaching and upbringing; he determines all the conditions for interaction in the team. In essence, this is a dictatorial style of pedagogical communication. This style was present in domestic pedagogy, but it is not acceptable in student-oriented pedagogy. Any initiative of the student is cut off at the root, the student does not have the right to express his own opinion, he is like a subordinate. If it does happen that a student expresses his opinion, then a conflict situation is generated, which is extremely undesirable. This teacher’s communication style makes it possible to achieve good discipline in the classroom, academic performance is also excellent, but the social and psychological climate in the class leaves much to be desired. Children remain misunderstood. The teacher focuses only on the negative aspects of the student. This style of pedagogical communication also leads to the formation of instability in the child’s nervous system. The student cannot make decisions on his own, and relationships with peers are difficult. The authoritarian style gives rise to the formation of an incorrect stereotype, when authority and power dominate over other qualities of a person, which is unacceptable in current conditions.
The other extreme is the permissive style
– as a variety of basic styles of pedagogical communication. With it, the teacher takes a position where nothing interests him, he lets everything take its course. Decisions are made only by students, the teacher does not interfere in their lives. Thus, the role of the teacher in such a pedagogical process is minimal. Such teachers only formally perform the role of a teacher, but in fact they do not participate in the socio-psychological life of the educational community. This style of communication by the teacher forms an incorrect life position in the student, which he will carry with him for the rest of his life if appropriate measures are not taken in time. Students learn an attitude of non-interference, indifference to the environment, indifference. With this approach, academic performance, discipline, and attitude to life suffer. In general, the style is characterized very negatively. Both authoritarian and permissive communication styles of teachers have one common characteristic - they form distant relationships between the teacher and students, although in other respects they are diametrically opposed. Communication styles are characterized by the teacher’s desire to be minimally involved in the activity, which is explained by the removal of responsibility for its results. Such teachers formally perform their functional duties, limiting themselves only to teaching. The permissive style of communication implements tactics of non-interference, the basis of which is indifference and disinterest in the problems of students. The consequence of such tactics is the lack of control over the activities of students and the dynamics of their personality development. Academic performance and discipline in groups of such teachers are, as a rule, unsatisfactory. The common features of permissive and authoritarian communication styles, despite the apparent opposite, are distant relationships between the teacher and students, lack of trust between them, obvious isolation, alienation of the teacher, and demonstrative emphasizing of his dominant position. An alternative to these communication styles is the style of cooperation between participants in pedagogical interaction, more often called democratic. With this style of communication, the teacher is focused on increasing the student’s subjective role in interaction, on involving everyone in solving common problems. The main feature of this style is mutual acceptance and mutual orientation. As a result of an open and free discussion of emerging problems, students together with the teacher come to one solution or another. The democratic style of communication between the teacher and students is the only real way to organize their cooperation. Teachers who adhere to this style are characterized by an active and positive attitude towards students, an adequate assessment of their capabilities, successes and failures. They are characterized by a deep understanding of the student, the goals and motives of his behavior, and the ability to predict the development of his personality. In terms of external indicators of their activities, teachers with a democratic communication style are inferior to their authoritarian colleagues, but the socio-psychological climate in their classes is always more favorable. Interpersonal relationships in them are characterized by trust and high demands on themselves and others. With a democratic style of communication, the teacher stimulates students to creativity, initiative, and organizes conditions for self-realization.
This is democratic style
pedagogical communication. In general, today all life comes down to a democratic approach, the ability to find compromises in life, and the ability to negotiate in any situation. With this style of communication, reverse reflection is formed, i.e. The teacher listens to the students’ opinions, and they listen to his opinions; a process of constant interaction occurs. During this style of communication, the student’s role increases, he becomes independent, learns to make decisions himself, and be responsible for his actions. Students begin to work on one common task, worrying about a good result. Students learn to work in a team. At the modern level, this is the only correct style of communication for a teacher, which teaches mutual acceptance and mutual orientation. Students can safely discuss any difficulties with the teacher, and they know for sure that they will find support in the person of the teacher, that he will help them find the right way out of the current situation. The basis of interaction in a democratic style of communication is open dialogue. These are the pros and cons of existing styles of pedagogical communication. Styles of pedagogical communication and their technological characteristics As already noted, one of the most important requirements that the teaching profession places on the teacher’s personality is the clarity of his social and professional position. The position of a teacher is a system of intellectual and emotional-evaluative attitudes towards the world, pedagogical reality and pedagogical activity. The social and professional position of a teacher cannot but affect the style of his pedagogical communication, which refers to the individual typological features of the teacher’s interaction with students. That is why the style of pedagogical communication is considered in close connection with the general style of pedagogical activity. The style of pedagogical communication expresses the characteristics of the teacher’s communicative capabilities; the existing nature of the relationship between the teacher and students; creative individuality of the teacher; characteristics of students. Being a socially and morally charged category, communication style inevitably reflects the general and pedagogical culture of the teacher and his professionalism. A generally accepted classification of pedagogical communication styles is their division into authoritarian, democratic and permissive. With an authoritarian style of communication, the teacher alone decides all issues relating to the life of both the class team and each student. Based on his own attitudes, he determines the goals of interaction and subjectively evaluates the results of activities. In its most pronounced form, this style is manifested in an autocratic approach to education, when students do not participate in the discussion of problems that are directly related to them, and their initiative is assessed negatively and rejected. The authoritarian style of communication is implemented using the tactics of dictatorship and guardianship. Schoolchildren’s resistance to teacher pressure most often leads to the emergence of persistent conflict situations. Teachers who adhere to this style of communication do not allow students to show independence and initiative. Their assessments of students are inadequate, based only on performance indicators. An authoritarian teacher focuses on the student’s negative actions, but does not take into account the motives for these actions. External indicators of the success of authoritarian teachers (academic performance, discipline in the classroom, etc.) are most often positive, but the socio-psychological atmosphere in such classes is usually unfavorable. The student’s personality and individuality are outside the interaction strategy. An authoritarian style of communication gives rise to inadequate self-esteem in students, instills a cult of power, creates neurotics, and causes an inadequate level of aspirations in communicating with other people. Moreover, the dominance of authoritarian methods in communicating with students leads to a distorted understanding of values, to a high assessment of such personality traits as irresponsibility and authority; cultivation to the detriment of the internal advantages of external attractiveness and physical strength. The characteristics of the above pedagogical communication styles are given in a “pure” form. In real teaching practice, “mixed” communication styles most often occur. The teacher cannot completely exclude from his arsenal some private techniques of the authoritarian style of communication. As research has shown, they sometimes turn out to be quite effective, especially when working with classes and individual students with a relatively low level of socio-psychological and personal development. But even in this case, the teacher should be generally focused on a democratic style of communication, dialogue and cooperation with students, since this style of communication allows for the maximum implementation of the personal development strategy of pedagogical interaction. In addition to the main ones, there are intermediate styles of pedagogical interaction, in relation to which one should proceed from the fact that educational forces are always generated by personal relationships, i.e. entirely depend on the personality of the teacher. The style of pedagogical communication based on friendly disposition is also quite effective, which can be considered as a prerequisite for the above-mentioned style. Friendly disposition acts as a stimulus for the development of relationships between the teacher and students. Friendliness and passion for working together unite these styles with each other. However, friendliness must be pedagogically appropriate, since a certain measure of distance preserves the status positions and sovereignty of each of the subjects of the interaction process. That is why one of the fairly common communication styles is distance communication, which is fully used by both experienced teachers and beginners. Research shows that a fairly exaggerated (excessive) distance leads to the formalization of interaction between teacher and student. The distance must correspond to the general logic of their relationship and is an indicator of the leading role of the teacher, but must be based on authority. The transformation of the “distance indicator” into the dominant feature of pedagogical communication sharply reduces the overall creative level of collaboration between the teacher and students. This leads to the strengthening of the authoritarian style of their relationship. Communication-distance in its extreme manifestations transforms into a more severe form - communication-intimidation. It is most popular among novice teachers who do not know how to organize productive communication based on passion for joint activities. For the personal development strategy of pedagogical interaction, communication-intimidation is unpromising. An equally negative role in acts of interaction between teachers and students is played by flirting communication, which is also mainly used by young teachers. Trying to quickly establish contact with children, to please them, but not having the necessary communicative culture for this, they begin to flirt with them, i.e. flirt, talk about personal topics in class, abuse rewards without proper grounds. Communication styles such as intimidation, flirtation and extreme forms of communication-distance, in the absence of the teacher’s communication skills necessary to create a creative atmosphere of cooperation, when used frequently, become cliches, reproducing ineffective methods of pedagogical communication. However, a reflective teacher, when comprehending and analyzing his activities, must pay especially close attention to which methods of communication are more typical and more often used for him, i.e. must have the skills of professional self-diagnosis, without which a communication style cannot be formed that is organic to him, adequate to his psychophysiological parameters, and consistent with solving the problem of personal growth of the teacher and students. Observations show that the style of pedagogical communication directly affects the psychological atmosphere and emotional well-being in the team, which largely determine the effectiveness of teaching activities. Communication styles such as intimidation, flirtation, and extreme forms of communication-distance often give rise to conflictual relationships between teachers and students. Responsibility for them always lies with the teacher.
Bibliography.
1. Ershova A.P., Bukatov V.M. Directing a lesson, communication and teacher behavior. — 4th ed., rev. and additional - M., 2010. 2. Berezovin N. A. Problems of pedagogical communication. - Minsk, 1989. 3. Dobrovin A. B. To the educator about the psychohygiene of communication. - M., 1987. 4. Ilyin E. N. The Art of Communication. - M., 1988. 5. Kan-Kalik V. A. To the teacher about pedagogical communication. - M., 1987.
Morphological features
Morphological features of colloquial speech allow common mistakes in colloquial speech to be integrated into a conversation without special emphasis. Surzhik and dialects are a vivid example of this.
Business conversation, as a special type of oral speech, must comply with all the rules of the language, but the syntax of colloquial speech does not always correspond to the rules of the Russian language. Pronunciation may differ from spelling, but over time, spoken language began to be written down in the text in the same way as it is heard. For example:
I'll go outside today - I'll go outside today.
From a spelling point of view, this is not correct, but the framework of the conversational style allows for such spelling and word formation. The characteristics of everyday style are originality, individuality, and a special color of speech.
Syntactic features
In a private conversation, you can express emotions and color the verbalized elements in them. Conversational structures:
- Next stop = we get off.
- Show me the blue T-shirt.
- She has an arctic fox fur coat.
Sometimes the syntax of a conversational style may allow for the omission of parts of a sentence that are intuitively perceived by the interlocutor.
For example: “I look at the wall - dust.” It means that there is dust on the wall, but this is not stated verbatim. Conversational style language means that some parts of a sentence can be shown with gestures.
The functions and syntactic features of the conversational style are not limited to just establishing rules and norms.
In colloquial speech, incomplete sentences (elliptical) are very common, i.e. sentences in which one or another member of the sentence is omitted. Particularly characteristic are situationally incomplete sentences (i.e., understood by the interlocutor only in a specific situation):
- When you arrive, call.
- Stop at the next one.
- Boil/turn off.
- Two to Fryazino.
- Take only the coupe.
