Abstract
Introduction. The use of psychological techniques and technologies for the implementation of students’ value-meaning choice in the educational process creates conditions for creative activity and self-disclosure of personal experience, thereby providing a personal-meaning orientation of the learning process. However, there is also a disadvantage of choice, namely, ‘sacrificing’ one alternative in favor of another in such situations. Therefore, the classification of meaning-building techniques for the implementation of a value-meaning choice also contains support technologies. This study reports the first development of a classification of meaning-building techniques capable of initiating students’ value-meaning choice, as well as their testing in the educational process to increase students’ motivation and develop their value-meaning sphere. Methods. The study used the following psychological assessment tools: (a) the Meaning-in-Life Orientations test (MLO) by D. A. Leont’ev, (b) the inventory for Diagnosing the Orientation of Educational Motivation by T. D. Dubovitskaya, and (c) the Multidimensional Questionnaire of Personality Self-Realization (MQPSR) by S. I. Kudinov. The study involved students of the South-Russian State Polytechnic University (Novocherkassk) and the Don State Technical University (Rostov-on-Don). A total of 437 respondents participated in the study. Results. The results of the formative experiment in the experimental groups showed that according to the MLO test, the overall score of meaningfulness in life increased by 6.5 %; according to the ‘life performance’ subtest, the overall score of meaningfulness in life increased by 2.06 %. According to the MQPSR, the ‘optimism’ indicator increased by 3.6 %, and the ‘pessimism’ indicator, on the contrary, decreased by 2.3 %. Experimental results at the initial and final stages showed the effectiveness of the use of meaning-building techniques in the educational process and speak in favor of the performance and meaningfulness of their life paths. Discussion. The proposed classification of meaning-building techniques is focused not only on students’ self-expression, creation of conditions for creativity, and actualization of subjective experience, but is also represented by technologies of psychological and pedagogical support, which are of particular importance in the act of choice.
References
Abakumova, I. V., Mironenkova, N. N., & Pen'kov, D. V. (2019). Meaning techniques oriented towards students’ subjective experience as the basis for their value-meaning choices: A case of studies in mathematics. Russian Psychological Journal, 16(2), 63–80. https://doi.org/10.21702/rpj.2019.2.4 (in Russ.).
Abakumova, I. V., Pronenko, E. A., & Golubova, V. M. (2019). The possibilities of using the meaning technician for the regulation of meaning dynamics in team interaction. Natsional'noe zdorov'e (National Health), 2, 37–44. (in Russ.).
Abakumova, I. V., & Zorina, E. S. (2017). Sense-making techniques in educational process and their impact on the personal characteristics of students. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education, 5(2), 41–46. https://doi.org/10.5937/ijcrsee1702041A
Aleksin, A. Yu., Pomel'nikova, E. A., & Sukhova, L. V. (2014). Development of subjectivity in the process of foreign language teaching in the conditions of language paraenvironment. Izvestiya Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta (Ivzestia of the Volgograd State Pedagogical University), 4, 19–23. (in Russ.).
Bandler, R., & Grinder, J. (1982). Refraiming: Neuro linguistic programming and the transformation of meaning. Utah: Moab.
Barnhardt, B., & Ginns, P. (2014). An alienation-based framework for student experience in higher education: New interpretations of past observations in student learning theory. Higher Education, 68(6), 789–805. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-0149744-y
Brizhak, Z., Kolesina, K., & Mironenkova, N. (2020). Positive psychology in students’ axiological choice situations. In Innovative Technologies in Science and Education (ITSE-2020), 210. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202021020003
Dilts, R. (2012). Sleight of mouth: The magic of conversational belief change. St. Petersburg: Piter. (in Russ.).
Dubovitskaya, T. D. (2002). Methodology for diagnosing the direction of educational motivation. Psikhologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie (Psychological Science and Education), 2, 42–45. (in Russ.).
Elagina, M. Yu., Pen'kov, D. V., Solov'eva, L. V., & Marchenko, M. O. (2019). Smyslotechniki as a factor in the initiation of self-realization. Molodoi issledovatel' Dona (Young Researcher of the Don), 4, 130–134. (in Russ.).
Jones, C. S. (2017). Barriers to student engagement in HE: Revisiting concepts of alienation. Retrieved from http://www.celt.mmu.ac.uk/ltia/Vol12Iss2/2_Jones_barriers_to_student_engagement_in_HE_revisiting_concepts_of_alienation.pdf
Kudinov, S. I. (2012). Psychodiagnostics of personality. Tolyatti: TSU. (in Russ.).
Kumar, A., & Supriya, P. (2020). Impact of neuro linguistic programming on social communities through visual kinesthetic dissociation. International Journal of Computer Applications, 176(13), 40–44. https://doi.org/10.5120/ijca2020920101
Leont'ev, D. A. (2000). The Meaning-in-Life Orientations test (MLO). Moscow: Smysl. (in Russ.).
Lake, J. (2013). Positive L2 self: Linking positive psychology with L2 motivation. In Language learning motivation in Japan. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783090518-015
Li, S.-P., Lin, Y.-H., Lu, Ch.-Y., Chung, R.-G., Chen, D.-F., Chen, J.-S., & Chou, W.-C. (2017). The influence of positive traits of university students on individual creativity. In B. Zhang (Ed.), Advances in education sciences. 3-rd International conference on creative education (Vol. 13, pp. 41–46). Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Mironenkova, N. N. (2015). The multilevel structure of the learner’s experience in the context of comprehension. Vestnik Adygeiskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya 3: Pedagogika i psikhologiya (Bulletin of the Adyghe State University. Series 3: Pedagogy and Psychology), 2, 43–51. (in Russ.).
Mironenkova, N. N., & Abakumova, I. V. (2021). Reframing as a didactic technology of initiating a meaning choice. Science for Education Today, 11(3), 82–106. https://doi.org/10.15293/2658-6762.2103.05 (in Russ.).
Mironenkova, N. N., & Susimenko, E. V. (2021). Personalization as a condition of actualization of subjective position when learning a foreign language. Azimut nauchnykh issledovanii: pedagogika i psikhologiya (Azimuth of Scientific Research: Pedagogy and Psychology), 2, 208–211. https://doi.org/10.26140/anip-2021-1002-0050 (in Russ.).
Odintsova, I. V. (2012). Frame, framing, and reframing in linguodidactics. Mir russkogo slova (The World of Russian Word), 1, 73–80. (in Russ.).
Osin, E. N. (2015). Alienation from study as a predictor of burnout in university students: The role of the educational environment characteristics. Psikhologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie (Psychological Science and Education), 20(4), 57–74. https://doi.org/10.17759/pse.2015200406 (in Russ.).
Palanac, A. (2019). Positive psychology and mastery of the L2 academic self. Journal of Language and Education, 5(2), 86–94. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2019.8569
Slabinskii, V. Yu. (2014). A positive approach in psychotherapy: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Meditsinskaya psikhologiya v Rossii: elektronnyy nauchnyy zhurnal (Medical Psychology in Russia: Electronic Scientific Journal), 6. (in Russ.).
Stakanova, E. (2018). Breaking down barriers to effective EFL communication: A look at sense-making techniques. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education, 6(3), 29–34. https://doi.org/10.5937/ijcrsee1803029S
Tamochkina, O. A. (2019). Project, framing, reframing, priming as a psycho-pedagogical tool in the model of the development of creative potential of university students. Vestnik Universiteta Rossiiskoi akademii obrazovaniya (Herald of the University of the Russian Academy of Education), 2, 33–41. (in Russ.).
Tan, C.-S., Tan, S.-A., Hashim, I. H. M., Lee, M.-N., Ong, A. W.-H., & Yaacob, S. B. (2019). Problem-solving ability and stress mediate the relationship between creativity and happiness. Creativity Research Journal, 31(1), 15–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2019.1568155
Tan, C.-Y., Chuah, C.-Q., Lee, S.-T., & Tan, C.-S. (2021). Being creative makes you happier: The positive effect of creativity on subjective well-being. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(14), 7244. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18147244
Tomaszek, K. (2020). Why it is important to engage students in school activities? Examining the mediation effect of student school engagement on the relationships between student alienation and school burnout. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 51(2), 89–97. https://doi.org/10.24425/ppb.2020.133767
Vulpe, A., & Dafinoiu, I. (2011). Positive emotions’ influence on attitude toward change, creative thinking and their relationship with irrational thinking in Romanian adolescents. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 30, 1935–1941. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.10.376
Wong, S. S. (2012). Negative thinking versus positive thinking in a Singaporean student sample: Relationships with psychological well-being and psychological maladjustment. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(1), 76–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.11.013
Zorina, E. S., & Zelenov, A. A. (2016). Psychological bases of sense techniques as modern educational methods. Russian Psychological Journal, 13(1), 76–84. https://doi.org/10.21702/rpj.2016.1.6 (in Russ.).
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2022 Mironenkova N. N., Pakhomova V. G.