Social technology in questions and answersVladimir Tarasov, 2020

Raising children is the most important task of a modern family. The development of the child’s personality as a whole will depend on what style of family education prevails in the family.

The style of family education is the way parents relate to the child, their use of certain techniques and methods of influence on the child, expressed in a peculiar manner of verbal address and interaction with the child. Any disharmony in the family leads to adverse consequences in the development of the child’s personality and problems in his behavior.

Authoritarian style of family education

With an authoritarian parenting style, parents suppress the child’s initiative, strictly guide and control his actions and actions. When raising children, they use physical punishment for the slightest offenses, coercion, shouting, prohibitions. Children are deprived of parental love, affection, care, and sympathy. Such parents only care that the child grows up obedient and efficient. But children grow up either insecure, timid, neurotic, unable to stand up for themselves, or, conversely, aggressive, authoritarian, and conflict-ridden. Such children have difficulty adapting to society and the world around them.

Parents strictly monitor the completion of homework by younger schoolchildren, to the point of standing nearby and putting pressure on the child in an attempt to get him to act independently. For the purpose of self-defense, children use a variety of tricks, such as crying, to show their helplessness. As a result of such measures, children lose the desire to learn, they have difficulty concentrating during teacher explanations or when preparing lessons.

With their parents, such children may seem calm and dutiful, but as soon as the threat of punishment disappears, the child’s behavior becomes uncontrollable.

The influence of an authoritarian parenting style on the behavior of adolescents

As the child grows older, he becomes increasingly intolerant of the demands of authoritarian parents. In adolescence, frequent conflicts can lead to disastrous outcomes. It is with an authoritarian style of family education that adolescents will generate conflicts, treating others with hostility. Parents always make decisions for the child themselves, thereby suppressing the child’s initiative, depriving him of the opportunity to learn to take responsibility for his actions.

Active and strong teenagers will begin to rebel, resist, become more aggressive, and may run away from home. Timid and insecure teenagers with low self-esteem, on the contrary, will get used to obeying their parents in everything, making no attempt to solve their own problems on their own, and will always rely on their parents in everything.

What is characteristic of the style of democracy

This method of company management is based on the following characteristic features:

• informing employees about all the company’s affairs, tasks and planned prospects;
• delegation of individual powers and responsibilities to each member of the company, thereby providing the opportunity to demonstrate independence and creativity in the work process;
• psychology of incentive motivation: bonuses, certificates, verbal praise in full view of the entire team, punishments and fines are the exception;
• orientation towards achieving goals;
• in case of low results, they do not look for the culprits, but consider the reasons that need to be eliminated.

Important! The work is organized in such a way that each employee feels like a “gear”, without which the well-oiled mechanism will stop. He sees and understands the entire work process and the share of responsibility that is assigned to him

However, such a management structure may not work everywhere. Examples where DSR can be used include companies involved in:

• office work;
• using the labor of highly qualified specialists;
• innovative developments.

By the way. In organizations where an employee is required to perform certain work, and his initiative cannot influence the activities of the enterprise as a whole, it is not advisable to use a democratic style.

Teachers at school also cannot use this method of leadership. For example, a physical education teacher cannot be guided by the student’s opinion when accepting a physical training test from him.

Liberal-permissive style of family education (hypocustody)

With a liberal-permissive style, communication with a child is based on the principle of permissiveness and low discipline. To assert himself, the child uses whims, demands “Give me!”, “Me!”, “I want!”, and is demonstratively offended. The child does not understand the words “Must!”, “Impossible”, and does not follow the instructions and demands of adults. Parents with a liberal-permissive style of communication with a child are characterized by an inability or unwillingness to lead and guide the child.

Liberal parents are caring, attentive, and have close relationships with their children. They give the child the opportunity to express himself, show his abilities, discover his creativity and individuality. Parents sincerely believe that in this way they will be taught to distinguish between what is right and wrong. It is difficult for liberal parents to set the boundaries of permitted, acceptable behavior for their children. They often encourage their child's overly relaxed and inappropriate behavior.

How will a child grow up with a permissive style of family education?

As a result, the child grows up to be a selfish, conflicted person who is constantly dissatisfied with the people around him, which does not give him the opportunity to enter into normal social relationships and emotional strong connections with people. At school, such a child may experience frequent conflicts due to the fact that he is not accustomed to giving in, obeying elders, or following laws and rules.

A child raised in an environment of permissiveness is more susceptible to psychological problems, phobias, and depression. Such a child has not learned to control himself and his behavior will have little chance of developing self-esteem. In the future, a child raised by liberal parents will be unable to face life's challenges and will have difficulty interacting socially. Which in turn will lead to the lack of adequate self-esteem and self-esteem. He will conflict with everyone who does not indulge his desires.

Consequences of an incorrectly chosen style

All people make mistakes, without this it is impossible to move forward. However, when it comes to choosing a leadership style, such failure can be costly to the company in every sense.

The chosen leadership style depends on:

• Psychological climate in the team. Here, everything is usually fine with the leaders of the democrats, but the subordinates of the dictators, driven by fear, feel undervalued, lose interest, and work “from the fence to the dinner.”
• Staff turnover. The first point leads to the second. The best employees, dissatisfied with the management style, leave, leaving mediocre opportunists, as well as retirees who are accustomed to the fact that the boss can be anyone since their youth.
• Sabotage of tasks. This problem can occur with any leadership style, but it manifests itself in different ways. Subordinates of tough leaders are characterized by the ability to “roll what’s square and carry what’s round,” so to speak. They could come up with a much more efficient way, but they're just doing what they're told. With democratic leaders, some subordinates feel permissive and begin to answer any questions with endless “I’m already doing it” and “I’ll finish it tomorrow.”
• The presence of new ideas that are necessary for the development of the company, like air. If they are generated by only one person (the director), they gradually lose their novelty. All this leads to the fact that the organization stands still. In conditions where competitors are running forward, this is actually equivalent to walking backwards.
• The ability to pull together and act as one in difficult times. This usually arises with difficulties if the leadership style is too democratic. The right of the last word should always remain with the leader.

Overprotective style of family education

With an overprotective parenting style, parents deprive the child of independence in physical, mental, and social development. They are constantly next to him, solve his problems for him, live in his place. They overly care and patronize him, fearing and worrying about his health. Even when the child becomes an adult, parents continue to take excessive care of him, constantly worrying about him, about his health and well-being.

Overprotection suppresses the initiative, will and freedom of the child, his energy and cognitive activity, deprives him of independence, fosters obedience, lack of will, and helplessness. With an overprotective parenting style, parents unconsciously inhibit the development of various skills and abilities in the child, the development of perseverance in achieving goals, and hard work.

How will a child grow up with an overprotective style of family education?

The child grows up helpless, infantile, unsure of himself, neurotic, anxious, and tearful. Subsequently, he has difficulties in socialization.

Children grow up obedient, but at the same time unsure of themselves, their strengths and capabilities, they will always be afraid of doing something wrong, making a mistake.

Some children in adolescence will strive to escape from the excessive control and guardianship of their parents, showing aggression, becoming disobedient and willful.

Overprotection, control, restrictions and prohibitions will develop the child’s ability to be cunning, deceive and secretive. Teenagers will use lies as a means of self-defense against parents who constantly try to control their personal life, which will ultimately lead to alienation from them.

The consequences of an overprotective style of family education are the formation of dependence on others, as well as negative influence from other people. It is overprotection that is to blame for the fact that children grow up to be “mama’s boys.”

Qualities of a leader and subordinates

In such companies, the manager is distinguished by high professionalism and leadership. The group respects him and sees him as a role model. The qualities of a democratic boss include:

• openness and accessibility during appeals and personal meetings with staff;
• trust in employees;
• the ability to delegate rights and tolerate the denial of personal benefits associated with the position.

The manager is obliged to adhere to mandatory non-interference in collegial work.

Employees, for their part, must follow the corporate style, showing the following qualities:

• professionalism;
• responsibility;
• self-control;
• desire for personal growth and desire to participate in the life of the company.

Typically, employees involved in common work are interested in achieving corporate goals, value the opinions of their colleagues about themselves and are clearly aware of their control rights.

We are one team

Alienated family parenting style

With an alienated style of family upbringing, relationships imply a deep indifference of parents to the child’s personality. Parents “don’t notice” the child and are not interested in his development and spiritual inner world. By actively avoiding communication with him, they keep him at a distance from themselves. Children are left to their own devices.

An alienated parenting style is observed more often in dysfunctional families where one or both parents abuse alcohol or drugs.

How will a child grow up with an alienated style of family education?

Such an indifferent attitude of parents makes the child lonely and deeply unhappy, unsure of himself. He loses the desire to communicate, and may develop aggressiveness towards people. Teenagers often get into trouble with the law.

Types of DSR, their comparison

Democratic style has two types:

• advisory;
• participative.

Each of them is characterized by its own set of conditions for organizing work.

Advisory

The boss, trusting his employees, consults with his subordinates before making decisions or setting tasks. In the process of such communication, the manager selects the best and most valuable proposals. Based on them, tasks are formed. With this approach, employees receive satisfaction from the fact that they can support their boss and point him in the right direction. As a result, no one is bothered by the fact that instructions come from above. Good offers are usually followed by encouragement.

Advisory type of DSR

Participative

This democratic type of leadership is built on the fact that the boss does not consult, but completely delegates the consideration of assigned tasks to the group, ensuring the involvement of all interested employees for constructive proposals. They are also entrusted with control over the fulfillment of the formed goal.

Participative type of DSR

Chaotic family parenting style

Some psychologists identify a chaotic style of family education, characterized by the absence of a single consistent approach to raising a child: there are no specific, definite, clear requirements for the child.

A chaotic style arises due to disagreements between parents in the choice of means and methods of education. Conflicts in the family are becoming more and more frequent, parents constantly sort things out among themselves and often in the presence of the child, which leads to neurotic reactions in the child.

Unpredictable actions and reactions of parents deprive the child of a sense of stability, provoke increased uncertainty, impulsiveness, anxiety, aggressiveness, uncontrollability, and social maladjustment.

How will a child grow up with a chaotic parenting style?

The child needs stability and the presence of clear, specific guidelines in assessments and behavior. Parents who use different parenting and communication styles deprive the child of such stability and form an anxious, insecure, impulsive, and in some cases aggressive, uncontrollable personality.

With a chaotic parenting style, the child will not develop self-control and a sense of responsibility for himself and other people. The child will be characterized by immaturity of judgment.

What is a leader's leadership style

Management style is a leader’s habitual model of interaction with subordinates. On its basis, decisions are made, tasks are delegated and responsible persons are identified.

Even if the manager is not aware of what kind of management style is characteristic of him, he still has an established model of behavior. Her choice is made due to natural characteristics of character, the current situation in the company and other factors.

It is important to understand that there is no ideal team management style. Each model has its own advantages and disadvantages

A key skill of an effective leader will be the ability to adapt their management styles depending on the current situation and the personality type of a particular employee.

End-to-end analytics

from 990 rubles per month

• Automatically collect data from advertising platforms, services and CRM into convenient reports
• Analyze your sales funnel from impressions to ROI
• Set up integrations with CRM and other services: more than 50 ready-made solutions
• Optimize your marketing with detailed reports: dashboards, graphs, charts
• Customize tables, add your own metrics. Build reports instantly for any period

Find out more

Democratic style of family education

With a democratic style of education, parents encourage any initiative of the child, independence, help him, take into account his needs and requirements. They express their love and goodwill to the child, and play with him on topics that interest him. Parents allow children to take part in discussions of family problems and take their opinions into account when making decisions. And also, in turn, they demand meaningful behavior from children, they show firmness and consistency in maintaining discipline.

The child is in an active position, which gives him the experience of self-government and increases confidence in himself and his abilities. Children in such families listen to the advice of their parents, know the word “should”, know how to discipline themselves and build relationships with classmates.

Also, the democratic style of education is characterized by the presence of mutual understanding between parents and children, the manifestation of warm feelings between them, frequent communication and moderate discipline. Parents are attentive to their child, emotionally support him, and create an atmosphere of love and care in the family.

Parents encourage children's independence and personal responsibility in an age-appropriate manner. Parents set rules and standards, boundaries of acceptable behavior and require their child to comply with them.

Mutual understanding between parents and children is achieved through persuasion, discussion, compromise, and arguments. Parents always listen to their child and give the child the opportunity to take responsibility for their actions and actions.

How will a child grow up with a democratic style of family education?

Children grow up as active, inquisitive, independent, full-fledged individuals with a developed sense of self-esteem and responsibility for themselves and those close to them. Children do well in school, are less susceptible to negative peer influence, and are able to get along well and build relationships with people.

The child grows up responsible, independent, competent, self-confident with adequate self-esteem, able to control his desires and, as a rule, achieves great success in life. Children know that their parents will always be able to listen and help.

Correct, responsible social behavior is formed in a child when parents show justice, care, firmness and discipline.

The democratic style of parenting, according to many psychologists, is the most effective style of family education. Whichever of the above styles you choose, when raising, take into account the type of temperament of the child.

Material for teachers “Styles of pedagogical communication”

Styles of pedagogical communication.

The nature of communication between a teacher and students largely depends on the style of pedagogical leadership. Leadership style is understood as a specific system of ways of influence on schoolchildren by the teacher-educator. The style reflects the teacher’s characteristic manner of addressing students, the peculiarities of presenting their demands to them, and the teacher’s attitude towards students. 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. Leadership style is characterized by various parameters:

• Tone of speech (friendly, official, indifferent);
• Form of appeal (order, demand, advice, request);
• The leadership style is also manifested in the manner in which the teacher uses rewards and punishments and establishes a certain distance of communication with them.

The generally accepted classification of pedagogical communication styles is their division into authoritarian, democratic and conniving (A.V. Petrovsky, Ya.L. Kolominsky, V.V. Shpalinsky, M.Yu. Kondratiev, etc.).

Under authoritarian

communication style, the teacher alone resolves all issues relating to the life of both the class team and each student. He determines the position and goals of interaction based on his own attitudes and subjectively evaluates the results of the children’s 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.

Research has shown that teachers who adhere to this style of communication do not allow students to exercise independence and initiative. They are distinguished by their lack of understanding of children and the inadequacy of assessments based only on performance indicators. An authoritarian teacher focuses on the negative actions of the student, but does not take into account his motives. 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.

The authoritarian style of communication, according to N. F. Maslova, 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 qualities as “the ability to get away with anything”, “the ability to use others to do what one should do”, “the ability to force others obey unquestioningly”, “external attractiveness and physical strength”. (V.V. Shpalinsky).

Conniving

(anarchic, ignoring) style of communication is 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 both the school and students. The consequence of such tactics is the lack of control over the activities of schoolchildren and the dynamics of their personality development. Academic performance and discipline in the classes of such teachers are, as a rule, unsatisfactory

The common features of permissive and authoritarian communication styles, despite the apparent opposite, are relationships based on distance, there is obvious alienation, isolation, and a demonstrative emphasis on one’s 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 peculiarity of this style is mutual friendly attitude and orientation toward each other. As a result of an open and free discussion of emerging problems, students together with the teacher come to a solution to the problem. 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.

The characteristics of the above styles of pedagogical communication are given in a “pure” form, however, in real pedagogical 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.

Along with the styles of pedagogical communication discussed above, there are other approaches to their description. L.B. Itelson based the classification of communication styles on those educational forces on which the teacher relies in his activities. He identified a number of intermediate styles between the authoritarian and democratic styles:

emotional style based on mutual love and sympathy;

business style, based on the usefulness of the activity and the achievement of the tasks that students face;

directing style, which involves discreet management of behavior and activities;

demanding style, when tasks are placed directly in front of students;

motivating style, based on attraction, special creation of situations;

coercive style based on pressure.

If with regard to authoritarian and democratic communication styles their assessment is unambiguous, then with regard to intermediate ones 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.

Markova A.K. divided styles into three main ones: liberal-permissive, authoritarian, democratic (A.A. Lobanov and I.A. Zimnyaya adhere to this division of styles in their works). Here the styles are described in more detail; depending on the choice of style, the degree of impact on students, voice timbre, etc. are described. Various features of a teacher's leadership style have a different impact on the nature of students' emotional experiences and on their behavior in the classroom and at school.

Under authoritarian

style is characterized by a tendency toward tight management and comprehensive control. The teacher uses a commanding tone and makes harsh remarks. What is striking is the abundance of tactless attacks against some members of the group and unreasoned praise of others. An authoritarian teacher not only determines the general goals of the work, but also indicates how to complete the task, strictly determines who will work with whom, etc. Tasks and methods for completing them are given by the teacher step by step. It is typical that this approach reduces active motivation, since the student does not know what the purpose of the work he is doing as a whole is, what is the function of this stage and what lies ahead. The step-by-step regulation of students' activities and its strict control indicate the teacher's lack of faith in the positive capabilities of students. In the eyes of the teacher, students are characterized by a low level of responsibility. Moreover, any initiative is considered by an authoritarian teacher as a manifestation of unwanted self-will. Research has shown that this behavior of a leader is explained, in many cases, by his fears of losing authority by revealing his lack of competence. In addition, an authoritarian leader, as a rule, subjectively evaluates the success of his charges, making comments not so much about the work itself, but about the personality of the performer. With this leadership style, the teacher exercises sole control over the leadership of the team, without relying on students, or organizes their purely formal participation. Students are not allowed to express their views, criticize, take initiative, much less claim to resolve issues that concern them. For strict compliance with the teacher’s requirements, the student deserves encouragement, and for disobedience, punishment. One of the indicators of the skill of such a teacher is his ability to quickly apply the necessary methods of rewards and punishments. The decision is always made by the teacher in accordance with his own guidelines, suppressing his students with categorical judgments that do not tolerate objections, and unceremoniousness in giving orders, instructions, and teachings. The student is viewed as an object of pedagogical influence, and not an equal partner. As a result, students lose activity or carry it out only when the teacher plays a leading role, and exhibit low self-esteem and aggressiveness. With an authoritarian style, students’ strengths are aimed at psychological self-defense, rather than at mastering knowledge and their own development. Teachers are characterized by low satisfaction with their profession and professional instability.

It should be noted that the authoritarian system is condemned and rejected by all official structures: the Ministry of Education, the Russian Academy of Education, local education authorities, school administrations and the parent community.

The main feature of
the liberal style
(liberal-permissive leadership style) is essentially the self-removal of the leader from the educational and production process, the removal of responsibility for what is happening, the desire to avoid conflict situations, from clashes with people around him. The permissive style turns out to be the least preferred among the others. The results of its testing are the smallest amount of work performed and its worst quality. It is important to note that students are often dissatisfied with working in such a group, although they do not have any responsibility, and the work is more like an irresponsible game. With a permissive leadership style, the teacher strives to interfere as little as possible in the life activities of students, practically eliminates himself from guiding them, limiting himself to the formal fulfillment of duties and instructions from the administration. Instead of demands, teachers prefer persuasion, and sometimes they themselves carry out some of the assignments for the students. This style corresponds to the ideas of free education, representatives of which were J. J. Rousseau, I. G. Pestallozzi and other teachers at different times. The ideas of free upbringing do not allow the use of punishment, reprimand, moral teaching and anything that puts pressure on the child and limits his freedom. The pedagogy of free education calls for respect for the growing person in the child. With this style of communication, the teacher’s mission is to create conditions for each student. The teacher must study the needs and interests of the child, get to know his inner world in order to provide him with help and support at any time.

Along with this, permissiveness, the absence of reasonable requirements and restrictions significantly complicate the child’s entry into the world of adults, making it difficult for him to accept the norms, rules, and moral standards of behavior that have developed in society. In addition, the inability of liberal teachers to set clear requirements for schoolchildren and to get undisciplined students to behave respectfully in the classroom towards the teacher and classmates significantly complicates interaction with modern students in many schools. The system of free education is hardly suitable for a modern school, since today there are many restrictions in it: state standards, curriculum, internal regulations, etc.

Regarding democratic

style, here the facts are assessed first, not the personality. The main feature of the democratic style is that students take an active part in discussing the entire course of the upcoming work and its organization; the teacher takes into account not only the academic performance, but also the personal qualities of the student. Methods of influence are encouragement to action, advice, request. As a result, students develop self-confidence, high self-esteem, students experience a state of calm satisfaction, and self-government is stimulated. In parallel with the increase in initiative, sociability and trust in personal relationships increase. If in an authoritarian style there was enmity between group members, especially noticeable against the backdrop of obedience to the leader and even ingratiation to him, then in democratic management students not only show interest in work, revealing positive internal motivation, but become closer to each other on a personal level. A democratic leadership style is characterized by a desire to rely on the opinions of their students, to take into account their interests, desires and characteristics, to tactfully and correctly resolve with them all emerging issues and contradictions, and students’ independence is stimulated. In organizing the activities of the team, the teacher tries to take the position of “first among equals.” The teacher shows a certain tolerance to students’ critical comments and delves into their personal affairs and problems. Students discuss the problems of collective life and make choices, but the final decision is formulated by the teacher. This ability to enter into dialogue allows the teacher to make more informed decisions and rely in their implementation on students as their allies, on people interested in the success of the common cause. Along with this, a teacher of this style has the ability to make demands on his students and achieve the fulfillment of these requirements. Teachers who choose this style of communication are characterized by a state of satisfaction with their profession.

A democratic education system is perhaps most suitable for a modern school, since it presupposes compliance not only with the requirements of society, laws and standards, but also with the interests of each individual. It provides for cooperation and focuses on the formation of respectful relationships at school. The democratic style is a style that leads to dialogue. The criterion here is the favorable well-being of both the student and the teacher, the student’s positive attitude towards learning, towards teachers, towards school.

The boundaries between different styles are quite arbitrary and fluid. However, it is important for the teacher to maintain, first of all, general guidelines, a common focus on a democratic style of communication. Then it will be possible to speak the same language with your partners and achieve mutual understanding with the students, and with their parents, and with their colleagues.

Styles do not exist in their pure form. The listed options do not exhaust the wealth of communication styles spontaneously developed in long-term practice. In its spectrum, a wide variety of nuances are possible, giving unexpected effects that establish or destroy the interaction of partners. At the same time, the found and acceptable communication style of one teacher turns out to be completely unsuitable for another. The power of communication clearly reveals the individuality of the teacher’s personality and his communicative culture. Each of these styles, identifying the relationship to the interaction partner, determines its character: from subordination - to partnership - to the absence of directed action. It is important that each of these styles presupposes the dominance of either a monologue or a dialogic form of communication.

Its own characteristics of the main communication styles are also presented in the works of V.A. Kan-Kalik. By communication style he understood the individual typological features of the socio-psychological interaction between the teacher and the children studying with him (communication based on passion for joint creative activity, communication based on friendly disposition, communication-intimidation, communication-flirting, communication-distance).

The style of communication is expressed by:

1. features of the teacher’s communication capabilities;
2. the existing nature of the relationship between the teacher and students;
3. creative individuality of the teacher;

4. characteristics of the student body.

Communication based on passion for joint activities.

This type is the most fruitful. This style is based on the unity of the teacher’s high professionalism and his ethical principles. Passion for creative search together with students is the result of the teacher’s attitude to pedagogical activity as a whole (for example, this style of communication is characteristic of the activities of V.A. Sukhomlinsky, V.F. Shatalov, I.P. Volkov). The most productive communication is based on passion for joint creative activity. This style is based on the unity of the teacher’s high professionalism and his attitude to teaching activity in general.

Communication based on friendship.

This is also a productive style of pedagogical communication. It prepares the previous communication style. Based on a friendly disposition, this style of communication can be considered as a prerequisite for successful joint educational activities. Passion for a common cause is a source of friendliness, and at the same time, friendliness, multiplied by interest in work, gives rise to a joint creative search. The teacher must be a senior comrade and mentor, as well as an accomplice in joint activities. Emphasizing the fruitfulness of this style of relationship between teacher and students and its stimulating nature, which brings to life the highest form of pedagogical communication - based on passion for joint creative activity, it should be noted that friendliness, like any emotional mood and pedagogical attitude in the communication process, must have a measure. Often, young teachers turn friendliness into familiarity, familiar relations with students, and this negatively affects the entire course of the teaching and educational process (often a novice teacher is pushed to this path by the fear of conflict with children, complicating relationships). Friendliness should be pedagogically appropriate and not contradict the general system of relationships between the teacher and children. 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 used to the fullest by both experienced teachers and beginners.

Communication-distance.

Its essence lies in the fact that in the system of relationships between the teacher and students, distance acts as a limiter. But here, too, moderation must be observed. Distance must exist in the system of relationships between teachers and children; it is necessary. But it should follow from the general logic of the relationship between the student and the teacher, and not be dictated by the teacher as the basis of the relationship. Distance acts as an indicator of the leading role of the teacher and is built on his 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 establishment of an authoritarian principle in the system of relationships between the teacher and children, which ultimately negatively affects the results of activities. Why is this communication style popular? The fact is that novice teachers often believe that distance communication helps them immediately establish themselves as a teacher, and therefore they use this style to a certain extent as a means of self-affirmation in the student and even in the teaching environment. But in most cases, using this style of communication in its pure form leads to pedagogical failures.

Authority should be gained not through a mechanical establishment of distance, but through mutual understanding, in the process of creative activity. And here it is extremely important to find both a general style of communication and a situational approach to a person.

Communication - distance is to a certain extent a transitional stage to such a negative form of communication as communication - intimidation.

Communication-intimidation.

The most negative form of communication is most often used by novice teachers, which is explained by their inability to organize productive joint activities. For the personal development strategy of pedagogical interaction, communication-intimidation is unpromising. This communication orients children not on what should be done, but on what cannot be done, and deprives pedagogical communication of the friendliness on which mutual understanding, so necessary for joint creative activity, should be built.

Communication-flirting -

also plays a negative role in working with children. Flirting is typical mainly for young teachers and is associated with the inability to organize productive pedagogical communication. Essentially, this type of communication corresponds to the desire to gain false, cheap authority among children, which contradicts the requirements of pedagogical ethics. The emergence of this communication style is caused, on the one hand, by the young teacher’s desire to quickly establish contact with children, the desire to please the class, and on the other hand, by the lack of the necessary general pedagogical and communicative culture, pedagogical communication skills and experience, and experience in professional communicative activities.

Communication - flirting, as observations show, arises as a result of:

a) the teacher’s lack of understanding of the responsible pedagogical tasks facing him;

b) lack of communication skills;

c) fear of communicating with the class and at the same time the desire to establish contact with students.

Conclusion. 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. The correct style of communication creates an atmosphere of emotional well-being, which largely determines the effectiveness of educational work.

The correctly found style of pedagogical communication corresponds to the unique personality of the teacher and helps to solve many problems. In this case, the pedagogical influence becomes adequate to the personality of the teacher, the process of communication with the audience is simplified, and the procedure for establishing relationships is facilitated.

Family education styles and their characteristics according to the type of “maternal” attitude towards the child:

Mother's attitude towards her teenage son as a “replacement” husband

The mother demands constant attention and care from the teenager. The mother constantly interferes in her son’s personal life, limits contacts with peers and peers, and strives to be aware of his personal and intimate life. You can often hear dissatisfaction from a mother about the fact that her son seeks to distance himself from her and avoids communication. In a less crude form, the teenager is assigned the role of “head of the family.”

Hyperprotection and symbiosis

The mother has a strong desire to hold on, to tie the child to herself, to limit his independence out of fear of a possible misfortune with the child in the future. In psychology, such an attitude is called the “smart Elsa” complex. The mother downplays the child's real capabilities and abilities, which leads to restrictions and maximum control, the desire to do everything for the child in order to protect him from imaginary misfortunes in the future.

Educational control through deprivation of love

This style of parenting is characterized by demonstrating to a child or teenager the attitude “That he is not needed like this, his mother does not love him like this” in the event of any undesirable behavior, disobedience, or insufficient, in the parents’ opinion, school performance, skills and achievements.

Parents, as a rule, do not directly express their dissatisfaction, do not speak it out, or try to explain to the child why he did something wrong. Parents simply stop talking to the child, ignore him, and talk about him in the third person.

In hyperthymic adolescents, such an attitude of parents towards him gives rise to a powerless feeling of anger and rage, outbursts of aggression. A teenager with such behavior wants to prove his existence, to infiltrate the family “We”. The parent, out of fear of aggression, goes to peace, or through retaliatory aggression (slapping, beating) tries to overcome the wall of alienation he has created.

Hyperthymia is a persistent high mood, cheerfulness, accompanied by personal and professional activity, increased socialization.

In sensitive children or adolescents, such an attitude from parents creates a deep feeling of loneliness and uselessness. In order to regain the love of his parents, the child is forced to limit his own individuality, sacrifice his self-esteem, depriving himself of his own “I”. In this way, parents achieve obedience by devaluing the child’s personality.

Educational control by inducing feelings of guilt

A child who violates a ban is labeled by his parents as “ungrateful”, “causing his beloved mother so much grief”, “betraying parental love”, etc. In the future, the teenager, under the constant fear of being guilty of the problems of his parents, is forced to fetter his own independence and initiative.

Styles of family education - books 1. Azarov Yu.P. The art of education. M., 1985. 2. Dobrynina O. A. The problem of creating a favorable socio-psychological climate for the family (on the example of metallurgical workers): Diss. ...cand. psychol. Sci. Novokuznetsk, 1992. 3. Druzhinin V. N. Family psychology. – M., 1996. – 158 p. 4. Kulikova T. A. Family pedagogy and home education: A textbook for students. medium and higher ped. textbook establishments. - M: Publishing House, 2007 5. Shneider L. B. Family psychology: a textbook for universities / L. B. Shneider. — Ed. 3rd. M.: Academic Prospekt; Ekaterinburg: Business book, 2007.

Concept of style

The main task of a manager of any rank is to encourage his subordinates to take actions that contribute to the accomplishment of the assigned task within the framework of the overall goals of the company. The climate in the team and methods of solving problems depend on the characteristics of the leadership style.

Management styles

Doctor of Sociology, Rensis Likert, proposed a theory that divides management styles into four categories. They look like this:

• exploitative-authoritarian;
• paternalistic-authoritarian;
• advisory;
• democratic.

The democratic way of working with a team is based on the principle of collegiality. Preference is given to involving employees in resolving issues related to the organization of the work process and company management tactics.

Important! Signs of this style are the boss’s firm conviction in the professionalism of his subordinates and the belief of any employee that the overall well-being of the organization depends on his work

Democratic style

Liberal model: characteristics

• Freedom. Adults adhere to the slogan: “Freedom is everything.” Therefore, they take absolutely no part in raising their child. He has no restrictions. He does what he wants. The main thing is to be happy. Only such absolute freedom is more reminiscent of permissiveness, which leads to anarchy.
• Equality. There is no pressure or manifestation of power, each family member is in the same conditions. Everyone is equal to each other.
• Lack of control. The baby gets the experience he needs. Therefore, if he wants to learn something, he must come to this decision himself and figure out how he can gain knowledge and skills. That is, there is no control over his actions. He climbed somewhere, which means he needs to satisfy his curiosity and no one will interfere with this process. Therefore, this style of parenting is also called permissive.
• Lack of support. Are there any difficulties or problems? Decide for yourself, gain experience. No one will fuss and correct other people's mistakes.
• Adoption. Adults do not place any hopes on their child. They accept him as he is. Do you want to be a cleaner, and not like dad, a business manager? Well, please, it’s your right, since you see your calling in this profession.
• Confidence. You can discuss any topic without fear of being scolded or denied information on any issue. Again, thanks to acceptance, he may seem imperfect, with a lot of shortcomings, but at the same time he will still remain a beloved son or daughter. Without experiencing rejection or devaluation, which inspires a lot of trust.

Non-interference

The complete opposite of the previous parenting style is the laissez-faire or liberal type of parenting.
Here parents do not limit the freedom of their children, but even vice versa. Children are completely left to their own devices; children have to resolve issues that arise on their own; they have little discipline. The actions of children and the results of their activities are monitored periodically. Thus, the parent relieves himself of responsibility for raising the child. Children raised in this way usually do not know how to behave in public places and do not know the rules of behavior. Nothing but anxiety, nervousness and lack of self-discipline should be expected from children who are raised in this style. Such disastrous consequences can be avoided if you devote a sufficient amount of time to your child to explain to him how and why he should perform this or that action. And, of course, the child must know words such as “should” and “shouldn’t.”

Overprotection

The last style - overprotection, is characteristic of people who, for some reason, are overly worried and constantly afraid for their child.
Most likely, the child was once in real danger, after which the mother considered it necessary to protect her baby from everything that, in her opinion, could threaten him. Such children grow up to be despots, they get used to always being in first place, to constant care from the people around them. They are not independent and ambitious enough. Here you need to think about whether those people who will meet on your child’s life path will also consider it necessary to take such care of your child and whether they should do this. In this case, your child will not be ready for life outside the parental nest, and you will either have to watch the deplorable life situation with regret, or provide your child with constant care.

To avoid such a mistake and not to do a disservice to your child, try to give the child the opportunity to make his own decision to play in the sandbox with other children. Let him get dirty. This will not make your child's life any worse.

Upbringing takes priority over education. Education creates a person. Antoine de Saint-Exupery