Abstract
The author of the article proceeds from the assumption that students’ sensemaking during English lessons is a powerful tool of development of motivation and personality. In this paper we prove that a driving force of sense-making is an exchange of values between teacher and students. The article represents the essence of mechanisms of impact on students’ sense sphere. The procedure of coding of sense sphere that causes certain model of behavior is shown. The first step is
finding of extra motives. The second step is a choice of verbal and visual image for establishing sense-bearing links. Also the article underlines the importance of English lessons’ integration into major subjects for increasing meaningfulness of both subjects and appearing of new senses. In that case we deal with interconnection
of personal senses and the content of education. Due to the above mentioned fact the content of education is a thing that causes students’ development and academic progress. The article describes methods, which were used for sense-making activization. Among these methods are heuristic conceptual foresight, analytical method, brainstorming. Method of heuristic conceptual foresight allows predict some events by means of analyses of the past and present experience. Analytical
method allows to find out the interconnection between the object and factors influencing this object. Brainstorming allows to get a big amount of productive ideas. The article describes psychological peculiarities of students’ age group that contributes to achieving of the aim of the research. In this paper we prove a significant advantage of the sense-making activity for the development of students’ personality.
References
Абакумова И. В., Ермаков П. Н., Фоменко В. Т. Новодидактика. Книга 2. Обра- зовательные технологии: новые ракурсы. – М.: КРЕДО, 2013. – 122 с.
Абакумова И. В., Ермаков П. Н., Фоменко В. Т. Новодидактика. Книга 3. От классической дидактики – к дидактической инноватике. – М.: КРЕДО, 2013. – 134 с.
Абакумова И. В., Ермаков П. Н., Фоменко В. Т. Новодидактика. Книга 4. Структурная дидактика как направление современной педагогики. – М.: КРЕДО, 2013. – 152 с.
Абакумова И. В. Обучение и смысл: смыслообразование в учебном процессе. – Ростов н/Д: Изд-во Рост. ун-та, 2003. – 480 с.
Асмолов А. Г. По ту сторону сознания: методологические проблемы неклассической психологии. – М.: Смысл, 2002. – 480 с.
Донцов Д., Сенкевич Л. Психологические особенности, социально- психологические закономерности и специфика развития личности в юношеском возрасте // Российский научный журнал. – 2013. – № 1 (32). – С. 198–207.
Ермаков П. Н., Лабунская В. А. Психология личности. – М.: Эксмо, 2007. – 656 с.
Леонтьев А. Н. Деятельность. Сознание. Личность. – М.: Смысл, Академия, 2005. – 352 с.
Леонтьев А. А. Основы психолингвистики. – М.: Смысл, 1997. – 287 с.
Леонтьев Д. А. Психология смысла: природа, строение и динамика смысловой реальности. 2-е, испр. изд. – М.: Смысл, 2003. – 487 с.
Amabile T. M., Barsade S. G., Mueller J. S., Staw B. M. affect and creativity at work // administrative Science Quarterly. – 2005. – vol. 50. – no. 3. – pp. 367–403.
Amabile T. M., Hennessey B. A. creativity // annual review of psychology. – 2010. – no. 61. – pp. 569–598.
Boroditsky L. Does language Shape Thought?: Mandarin and English Speakers’ conceptions of Time // cognitive psychology. – 2001. – no. 43. – pp. 1–22.
Browne M. N., Keely S. M. asking the right questions: a guide to critical thinking. – upper Saddle river, Nj: pearson prentice-hall, 2009. – 212 p.
Cameron J., Banko K. M., Pierce W. D. The pervasive negative effects of rewards on intrinsic motivation: The myth continues // The Behavior analyst. – 2001. – vol. 24. – no. 1. – pp. 1–44.
Cattell R. B. personality structure and the new fifth edition of the 16 pF // Educational and psychological Measurement. – 1995. – vol. 55. – pp. 926–937.
Chomsky N. language and mind. – New york: cambridge university press, 2006. – 209 p.
Collins A. M., Loftus E. F. a spreading-activation theory of semantic processing // psychological review. – 1975. – vol. 82. – no. 6. – pp. 407–428.
Zhang L. Does student-teacher thinking style match/mismatch matter in students’ achievement? // Educational psychology. – 2006. – vol. 26. – no. 3. – pp. 395–409.