Reflexive communication as a condition for the manifestation and development of educational agency of master students


Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The learning process at school and at a university usually allows students to remain a passive “material” of pedagogical influences; it both does not require any student initiative and prevents its manifestation. This paper describes the experience of creating conditions for students to take a more active position regarding the process of their professional training: to realize their interests and requests for the learning process, to reflect on personal results for a semester and academic year, to cooperate with teachers to improve the educational process. The authors describe three communicative formats (goal-setting session, analytical session, comprehensive semester exam) and the results of their use in the organization of the educational process. The main feature of these communication formats is the posing of questions by each of the participants (to themselves or to other participants in the interaction), the exchange of these questions, and their joint discussion highlighting the problems that need to be solved. The described experience shows that such an organization of interaction between students, both among themselves and with teachers, helps students to better understand their own educational needs and the possibilities of the postgraduate program, set realistic goals for the next semester, and think about how to make their professional training as effective as possible. As a result, some master students take part in the educational process improvement together with teachers. This allows suggesting that as a result of the interaction organized in this way, students acquire the educational agency experience.

About the authors

Vadim Evgenyevich Karastelev

Moscow City University, Moscow

Author for correspondence.
Email: karastelevve@mgpu.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6246-4228

PhD (Political Sciences), Associate Professor of the Directorate of Educational Programs

Russian Federation

Vera Leonidovna Danilova

Interactive Questioning Laboratory, Kharkiv

Email: danilova.2007@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-9606-6415

PhD (Psychology), сo-founder of the online community

Ukraine

References

  1. Klemenčič M. From student engagement to student agency: Conceptual considerations of European policies on student-centered learning in higher education. Higher education policy, 2017, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 69–85. doi: 10.1057/s41307-016-0034-4.
  2. Sorokin P.S. “Transformative agency” as an object of sociological analysis: contemporary discussions and the role of education. Vestnik Rossiyskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriya: Cotsiologiya, 2021, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 124–138. doi: 10.22363/2313-2272-2021-21-1-124-138.
  3. Jääskelä P., Poikkeus A.-M., Vasalampi K., Valleala U.M., Rasku-Puttonen H. Assessing agency of university students: validation of the AUS Scale. Studies in Higher Education, 2017, vol. 42, no. 11, pp. 2061–2079. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2015.1130693.
  4. Komarov R.V., Kovaleva T.M. Personalization of the educational process: 3D space of interpretations. Vestnik MGPU. Seriya: Pedagogika i psikhologiya, 2021, no. 1, pp. 8–21. EDN: TNSPKP.
  5. Tuominen T., Martinsuo M. Employees’ Agency in the Formalisation of Knowledge-Intensive Business Service Processes: A Cross-Case Comparison. Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 2019, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 45–70. doi: 10.1108/jstp-10-2017-0184.
  6. Smith K., Ulvik M. Leaving Teaching: Lack of Resilience or Sign of Agency? Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 2017, vol. 23, no. 8, pp. 928–945. doi: 10.1080/13540602.2017.1358706.
  7. Bandura A. Social cognitive theory: an agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 2001, vol. 52, pp. 1–26. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1.
  8. Emirbayer M., Mische A. What is agency? American Journal of Sociology, 1998, vol. 103, no. 4, pp. 962–1023. doi: 10.1086/231294.
  9. Biesta G., Tedder M. Agency and learning in the life-course: towards an ecological perspective. Studies in the Education of Adults, 2007, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 132–149. doi: 10.1080/02660830.2007.11661545.
  10. Case J.M. A social realist perspective on student learning in higher education: the morphogenesis of agency. Higher Education Research & Development, 2015, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 841–852. doi: 10.1080/07294360.2015.1011095.
  11. Sorokin P.S., Frumin I.D. Education as a source for transformative agency: theoretical and practical issues. Voprosy obrazovaniya, 2022, no. 1, pp. 116–137. doi: 10.17323/1814-9545-2022-1-116-137.
  12. Bandura A. Adolescent development from an agentic perspective. Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents. Greenwich, Information Age Publ., 2006, pp. 1–43.
  13. Klemenčič M. What is student agency? An ontological exploration in the context of research on student engagement. Student engagement in Europe: society, higher education and student governance. Strasbourg, Council of Europe Publ., 2015. Vol. 20, pp. 11–29.
  14. Dillon J.T. Questioning and Teaching. A Manual of Practice. Oregon, Wipf and Stock Publ., 2004. 208 p.
  15. van der Meij H., Bӧckmann L. Effects of embedded questions in recorded lectures. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 2021, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 235–254. doi: 10.1007/s12528-020-09263-x.
  16. Rozin V.M. Prolegomena to the theory of questioning. Kultura i iskusstvo, 2019, no. 7, pp. 26–36. doi: 10.7256/2454-0625.2019.7.29906.
  17. Danilova V.L., Karastelev V.E. The art of asking questions – literacy of the XXI century. Idei i idealy, 2018, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 113–127. EDN: XVBQLJ.
  18. Danilova V., Karastelev V., Rozin V. Interaktivnoe voproshanie: kak umenie stavit sobstvennye voprosy pomogaet razvivatsya [Interactive questioning: how does the skill to put own questions help to develop]. Ekaterinburg, Izdatelskie resheniya Publ., 2022. 282 p.
  19. Karastelev V.E. Sketch of the theoretical foundations of establishing an individual educational route using the interactive questioning technology in the system of additional professiopnal education. Biznes. Obrazovanie. Pravo, 2020, no. 4, pp. 418–423. doi: 10.25683/VOLBI.2020.53.403.
  20. Karastelev V.E. What is the Modern Culture of Questioning? How to Teach to Pose One’s Own Questions and not to Borrow Someone else’s? Sovremennoe obrazovanie, 2018, no. 4, pp. 104–118. doi: 10.25136/2409-8736.2018.4.28457.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML

Copyright (c)



This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies