The influence of the Nordic and Baltic countries on the development of craft education in Ukraine in the ХІХ-ХХ century

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

The influence of the Nordic and Baltic countries on the development of craft education in Ukraine in the ХІХ-ХХ century

Khodorivska K.V.

The article discusses historically common roots of theoretical bases of formation of national systems of craft education in Ukraine, Nordic and Baltic countries. Development of the theory of manual training in Ukraine was part of formative process in the Russian school of manual training (second half of the 19th century), which formed its main principles on the basis of the leading at that time ideas of Finnish and Swedish educators. The article also describes the particularities of formation of the craft education system in Latvia, which was a part of the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union, as well as Ukraine, and then, finding independence, joined the European educational space.

Key words: manual training, craft education, handicraft, creativity, dexterity, pedagogical system, esthetic.

Ходоривская К.В. Влияние североевропейских и прибалтийских стран на развитие трудового обучения в Украине в ХІХ-ХХ веках

В статье рассматриваются исторически общие корни теоретических основ формирования национальных систем трудового обучения в Украине, североевропейских и прибалтийских странах. Развитие теории трудового обучения в Украине проходило в рамках становления российской школы трудового обучения (2 пол. ХІХ в.), которая сформировала свои основные принципы, исходя из лидирующих в то время взглядов финских и шведских педагогов. В статье также рассмотрены особенности становления системы трудового обучения Латвии, которая так же, как и Украина, была частью Российской империи и Советского Союза, а затем, обретя независимость, вошла в общеевропейское образовательное пространство.

Ключевые слова: ручной труд, трудовое обучениие, ремесло, творчество, ловкость, педагогическая система, эстетика.

Ходорівська К.В. Вплив північноєвропейських та прибалтійських країн на розвиток трудового навчання в Україні у ХІХ-ХХ століттях

У статті розглянуто історично спільні корені теоретичних основ формування національних систем трудового навчання в Україні та країнах Північної Європи та Балтії. У часи зародження теорії навчальної праці, у середині ХІХ століття, Україна була частиною царської Росії. Тому розвиток української педагогічної думки відбувався в межах російського освітнього простору, де українські педагогічні діячі також відігравали помітну роль. Становлення російської педагогічної системи трудового навчання у школі відбувалося за безпосереднім впливом передових педагогічних ідей фінської та шведської шкіл ручної праці. Тому доцільно розглядати вплив країн північної Європи на становлення української системі трудового навчання. З іншого боку, країни Балтії, зокрема розглянута у статті Латвія, були частинами Росії у той же час, що й Україна, тому на них поширювалися такі ж реформувальні процеси у трудовій педагогіці, що відбувалися і в Україні. Крім того, у часи незалежності (1919-1941 та з 1991) Латвія відчувала посилення впливу педагогічної думки північних країн, водночас зберігаючи художні фольклорні традиції латиських ремесел та на цій базі розвиваючи національне декоративне мистецтво. Тому вивчення історичного досвіду балтійських країн може бути корисним у пошуку шляхів подолання труднощів інтеграційного процесу української національної педагогічної системи в європейському освітньому просторі.

Ключові слова: ручна праця, трудове навчання, ремесло, творчість, спритність, педагогічна система, естетика.

The relevance and problem statement. The changing meaning of values in modern society defines the new qualities of successful and competitive personality and global pedagogical task: to bring up an intellectually rich, creative, harmonic and competitive personality with developing of moral and priority of ecological values, on the current stage. The Ukraine has also local task connected with gradual entry into the European space: to investigate and define the ways of more efficient transition to the European educational system with preserving the best achievements of Ukrainian pedagogical school.

The technology teachers' training of all the Nordic countries were evolving into a homogeneous integral structure during 130 years and have passed a complex path to the top of the world rankings [1, p. 198]. Results of testing of school students in the Nordic countries that are held with the help of UNESCO project PISA third time confirmed the high results and world leadership in educational achievements of Finland [1, p. 188]. The fact gives the reason to consider the pedagogical experience of Nordic countries in the first order. However, at the present stage, direct borrowing or using of foreign experience of those or other pedagogical innovation may not always be helpful. Only special comparative research conducted on clear criteria and methods may bring us closer to the scientific rationale for specific recommendations on the organization, content and technology of training of future teachers in the context of world pedagogical space [1, p. 45].

The purpose of the presented paper is to investigate the historical development of Ukrainian system and systems of craft education in Nordic and Baltic countries trying to identify the common historical roots and features with purpose to implement useful experience and successful ideas for efficient cooperation with European school of craft education.

The analysis of recent research and publications. The historical development of national systems of craft education of the European countries are well described and still attracts attention of researchers as a reliable source for understanding and predicting the development of processes in the theory of craft education. J. Kantola, A.Rasinen, T.Kanannoja, E.Garber, V.Nurmi, L.Herrera, A.Lakoteva were writing about U.Sygneaus and Finnish craft educational school. The O.Salomon's system of manual training and its development was investigated by N.Kotriakhov, H.Thorbjornsson, H.Reincke, E.Yokoama, D.Whittaker. The issues about development of handicraft education in Latvia considered M.Urdzina-Deruma, I. Amanis, J.Anspaks. The Ukrainian researchers I.Zhernoklieiev, O.Lokshina, N.Abashkina, L.Ziaziun, L.Liashenko and other considered issues on technology (craft) education in Ukraine and countries of central and northern Europe. craft education ukraine

The main material of the research. Craft education has a long history and was remarkable influenced by political, economic and national traditions. The world leadership in creation of theory of manual training belongs to Nordic countries, namely Finland and Sweden. The attempts to crate the theory of craft education has started in the middle of 19th century. The founder of the Finnish school of craft education, Uno Cygnaeus (1810-1888), has developed idea on introducing manual training to general schools. The work education initiatives which were introduced in different countries in the second part of the 19th century were inspired by development in the Nordic countries, first of all from Finland, and then the movement spread out from Finland to Sweden and other Nordic countries and later to England, the rest of Europe and the USA [2, p. 57]. The problem how educative craft should be implemented in practice was solved by the method of work according to instructions developed by Otto Salomon (1849-1907, Sweden). O.Salomon created what he called Swedish educational sloyd or Naas-slojd. [3, p. 2].

The Danish school (founded by A. Clauson-Kaas, 1826-1906) hasn't had such a great impact on future development of pedagogical theory as the ones mentioned, but its merits have enriched the craft education: strict systematization of tools and items in an increasing order of difficulty, preliminary exercises with different tools, additional tasks for pupils with better abilities [4, p. 62].

In times, when the introduction of craft education into general educational system was discussed, Ukraine was a part of Russia and participated in all stages of development of craft education in Russia. Since Russia has experienced the same problems with professional human resources for developing industry as well as other countries of Europe, the commission on technological and vocational training at the Imperial Russian technological society (1868) has supported the combining general education at national school and elements of practical training according to Cygneaus' ideas. Then development of «The plan for a General Standardized System of Industrial Education in Russia» has started (1884). At the first stages of teaching of crafts in Russian school the system of Salomon was followed exclusively, including buying instructions and collections of models in Sweden. The first teachers of crafts were directed to Salomons' seminars for teachers (Naas). Gradually, during thirty ears the reformed system of education in Russia that included manual training was introduced with first centres of craft education: Teacher's Institutes in St.-Petersburg ( instructor of manual training K.J. Cirulis), Moskow (N.V. Kasatkin), Kharkov (N.P. Stolpyansky). These three instructors are creators of Russian system of craft education.

However, the using Salomon's system experienced difficulties and was not sufficient for Russia. The main criticism concerned «collection of models, methods suppressed the child's personality. These issues were discussed on congresses of the Russian activists of technical and vocational training in Russia (1889-1890, 1895-1896, 1903-1904). During this time big group of teachers and instructors of manual training took part in developing of new Russian system: K.J. Cirulis, N.V. Kasatkin, D.I.Zagrebin, I.L. Shatalov. The first Ukrainian instructors N.P. Stolpyansky and S.M. Soloshenko together with some other instructors have presented their own programs [5, p. 109-117]. The Russian pedagogical system didn't abandon pedagogical principles of Salomon, but developed and supplemented them. In practical part the «collection of models» was changed on more suitable to local Russian folk tradition and work with other materials was added (paper, cardboard, metal). In methodical part the main moral principles were saved, and the attempts to increase the creative activity of children were done.

On the territory of Ukraine the main centre of developing of manual training was in Kharkov Teacher's Institute. Here, instructor N.P. Stolpyansky (1834-1909) was considering the problems of methods of manual training. According to him, methods of teaching a subject play the main role in achieving the intended goal. Drawing analogy to shop lessons, writing and arithmetic, he believed that they should yield the same fast and obvious outcomes. And for this purpose first of all should study the theory of labour process, and then practice in performing concrete techniques or operations [6, p. 78].

Also when regular teacher's courses has started since 1885, the one of the main place for them was Odessa (it was held 15 courses during first 10 years), another famous places were St.-Petersburg (20), Riga (5) and Moscow (4).

The reasons described above shows that reforming ideas of Sygneaus and Salomon through their impact on Russian system of craft education has reached the most advanced minds of Ukrainian educators and were put in basis of future national school of craft education.

To realize the fact of influence of Latvian craft education on Ukrainian system it could be thoughtful to consider the development of craft education in Latvia, as a one of the Baltic countries. The history of Latvia had many common and similar with Ukraine events during last 150 years. Therefore, it could be interesting to consider development of its national pedagogical system of craft education. First of all, when development of pedagogical thought on manual training has begun in Europe, Latvia was a part of Russia (as well as Ukraine was). Secondly, the main founder of Russian system of craft education K. Cirulis was also the founder of Latvian school, and before St.-Petersburg Teachers' Institute he has graduated the Baltic Teachers' Seminar and handicraft courses in Kuldiga directed by Danish work school. By his active presence in Latvian pedagogical society the craft education was developing in the same direction as well as it was in Russia (and Ukraine) and one of the most active in Russia places of popularization and teaching of new theory of pedagogical labor was Riga (see above). Also, among the three the most famous first Russian instructors of manual training one, Cirulis, was from Latvia and second, Stolpiansky, was from Ukraine. Thirdly, both Latvia and Ukraine were parts of tsarist Russia till its end. Therefore both countries has experienced equal initial period of establishing of manual training in general schools. But after October revolution these countries had different time, meeting again in measures of the Soviet Union from time before Second World War and parting «forever» after collapse of the USSR. Fourthly and eventually, considering the fact that Latvia has begun its way to European society more than 20 years earlier than Ukraine, taking in mind the necessity for Ukrainian society to increase the speed of integration processes of the Ukrainian educational system to European in sphere of technology (craft) education, perhaps, it could be interesting to consider the vectors of development, particularities and merits which experienced Latvian system of craft education during this time.

The craft education was introduced into general school of Latvia at 1874, but its main development was in the beginning of the 20th century. As a country that was geographically close to the Nordic countries on the one hand, and has been being a part of Russia on the other hand, it was involved in common process of development the system of manual training based on ideas of Cygneaus and Salomon on pedagogical nature of craft education and it has introduced with some additions by Cirulis and other first Russian instructors of manual training the Russian system of manual training. The special feature of Latvian craft education was emphasizing on textile crafts, since the main productive craft in Latvia at that time was production of textile goods. One of the most active educators was A. Dauge. He told that craft should be acquired as an art: «Exactly artists should try to influence handicraft education in schools, bringing into it more true and creative amateur art, developing exact, proper estimation by sight and feeling of authenticity, educating people with good taste». A.Dauge criticized the acquiring crafts only as a technique and showed what is difference between purely technically made work and work, that is created in «artistic spirit» - observing, acquiring and using art language, expressing oneself creatively, making beautiful things, such, that delight heart and eyes [7, p. 32]. In such way A. Dauge has expressed the Latvian main idea of Latvian national system of craft education: to create esthetically beautiful things, based on Latvian folk tradition, but not just to teach craft techniques or make some useful in daily life items.

Latvian pedagogical thought kept this idea in teaching craft during all times of social and political changes during the 20th century. After independence, in 1919 the School department of the Ministry of Education founded first craft workshops in Riga and later in other cities with purpose to prepare teachers for school subject Handicraft. Latvian craft education included learning the basics of fine arts and was close to teaching applied arts. Traditionally, the items made in school workshops were decorated with Latvian national ornaments. The famous Latvian educators Arvids and Alexandra Dzervitis in their book «Rokdarbu metodika» (1937) pointed out the educational significance of school craft to develop both spiritual and physical level of children with emphasizing the national component in teaching. Also they developed idea of importance drawing and drafting in teaching handicraft, teaching lows of colors and ornament composition: «It is not allowed just to draw some ornaments and patterns during handicraft lessons. This will not have any significance. Ornament should be drown for definite objects and they have to be adjusted to form and material» [7, p. 34]. According with school program in 1935 in the framework of handicraft it was also planned to introduce pupils to national costumes of the most characteristic parts of Latvia. At the time of Independent Latvia, on the one hand handicraft was taught in a national spirit and on the other hand representatives of European work schools and art pedagogic remarkably inspired the development of craft education in Latvia.

In the soviet time in Latvia (1941-1991) the main goal was to teach pupils industrial working skills, but nevertheless, the Latvian national pedagogical traditions had slight impact on content of annual programs for handicraft. Since program of 1962 school year the program for girls includes also national elements (Latvian ethnographic ornaments), basics of composition and color scheme «with purpose to develop a wish to be creative in the field of applied art» [7, p. 37]. At 1973 the theme «Applied art» was introduced to the school program of handcraft for girls. The program, published in 1988, includes a target to develop technical and elementary artistically abilities. Also the theme «The folk costume of Latvian regions» was introduced.

After collapse of the USSR the idea to develop the creative personality was consequently implemented in school programs. In program at 1991 the objectives for the subject «Handicraft and home Economics» are «to promote the development of harmonious, creative, intellectual, moral personality», «to develop positive habits and esthetic taste». The Primary education Standard of «Handicraft and Home Economic» (1992) emphasizes on acquiring of national cultural heritage in various themes of textile and applied art [7, p. 39]. The goals of the subject according to Standard (1998) were to promote developing of moral, intellectually rich, creative, harmonic and competitive personality; awareness of national identity. The Standard for handicraft (2005) is not concretized what exactly from each textile, woodworking or metal working techniques has to be acquired, but emphasizes sequence of the handicraft process: idea, formation, realization of this idea and evaluation [7, p. 40] that is an introduction the method of projects in craft education.

Conclusions

1. The Ukraine as an active part of Russian educational space in the 19th century has common historical roots with Russian craft education system, and was influenced by pedagogical ideas about manual training of the Nordic countries, namely Finland, Sweden and Denmark.

2. The historical way of development craft education in Latvia shows the opportunities to use its experience to put proper tasks and make useful corrections in reforming process of Ukrainian educational system, namely in part of technology school education, with purpose to combine European and national educational traditions in a more efficient way. Also, detected common historical roots of Ukrainian and Latvian school of craft education give the reasons to conduct research of development craft education in other Baltic countries.

Literature

1. Жерноклєєв І. В. Підготовка майбутніх вчителів технологій у країнах Північної Європи: монографія / І. В. Жерноклєєв. - К. : Вид-во НПУ ім. М. П. Драгоманова, 2012. - 275 с.

2. Kantola J., Rasinen A. Development of craft education in Finland during the time of Uno Cygneaus/ J. Kantola, A. Rasinen // Bulletin of Institute of vocational and technological education, No. 3, june 2006. ISSN 1348-4893. - Р. 57-68.

3. Thorbjomsson H. Otto Salomon/ H. Thorbjomsson // UNESCO: International Bureau of Education, vol. XXIV, no. 3A - Paris,1994. - Р. 471-485.

4. Карелль И. К. Педагогический ручной труд по датской сстеме. Указания для начинающих учителей: По сочинению Акселя Микельсона / И. К. Карелль. - СПб, 1890.

5. Kotriakhov N. V. Pedagogicheskiy ruchnoy trud v russkoy obscheobrazovatelnoy shkole kontca XIX - nachala XX v./ N. V. Kotriakhov. - Kirov, 1995.

6. Kotriakhov N. V. The effect of Otto Salomon's system on the dissemination of pedagogical manual training in Russia in 1884-1917/ N. V. Kotriakhov // Bulletin of Institute of vocational and technological education, No.3, june 2006. ISSN 1348-4893. - Р. 69-92.

7. Urdzina-Deruma M. Historical development of handicraft education in general schools in Latvia / M. Urdzina-Deruma // Bulletin of Institute of vocational and technological education, No. 3, june 2006. ISSN 1348-4893. - Р. 31-43.

Размещено на Allbest.ru