Теоретико-методологічний аналіз суб’єкт-суб’єктної взаємодії у вищому навчальному закладі

Hotsuliak N. Y Theoretical and methodological analysis of subject-subject interaction in a higher educational institution / N. Y Hotsuliak, N. S. Slavina // Problems of Modern Psychology : Collection of research papers of Kamianets-Podilskyi Ivan Ohienko National University, G. S. Kostiuk Institute of Psychology at the National Academy of Pedagogical Science of Ukraine / scientific editing by S. D. Maksymenko, L. A. Onufriieva. - Issue 38. - Kamianets-Podilskyi : Aksioma, 2017. - Р 111-122.

N. Y. Hotsuliak, N. S. Slavina. Theoretical and methodological analy-sis of subject-subject interaction in a higher educational institution. The research is devoted to the study of the subject-subject interaction at the higher educational institutions.The concept essence of subject-subject interaction has been clarified and its structure has been stipulated in the article. The authors have defined the components of the subject-subject interaction. They are the following: motivational, communicative and activity ones. The psycho-pedagogical conditions of the subject-subject interaction at the higher educational institutions have been justified. The

N. Y. Hotsuliak - the scientific contribution of the co-author is 50%,

N. S. Slavina - the scientific contribution of the co-author is 50%.

criteria and indicators to estimate the subject-subject interaction level have been defined.

The features of subject-subject interaction at the higher educational institutions have been empirically determined, namely:

1) favourable communicative atmosphere being provided by equal po-sitions of teachers and students; the communicative positions formation, searching common ground for effective joint activities in the process of subject-subject interaction;

2) the content of educational material and selection of forms and means of educational-cognitive activity;

3) mutual activity of interaction subjects. The results obtained while having implemented the substantiated programme gave the possibility to stipulate the practical recommendations to the teachers of higher edu-cational institutions in order to raise the interaction level in classes and develop military professionals' competence.The evidence testified the hy-potheses.

The analysis of scientific sources shows that the study of interaction in psychology is carried out in such basic directions: the clarification of the categories of the status of the concept of «interaction», the isolation of the components of its structure and content, the definition of its place in the development of mental processes of the individual, as well as in system processes of higher order.

Key words: subject-subject interaction, programme, psychological and pedagogical conditions, higher educational institution, student.

Н. Є. Гоцуляк, Н. С. Славша. Теоретико-методологічний аналіз су- б'єкт-суб'єктної взаємодії у вищому навчальному закладі. Проведений аналіз обраної проблеми свідчить, що вивчення взаємодії в психології здійснюється за такими основними напрямками: уточнення катего-рій статусу самого поняття «взаємодія»; виокремлення компонентів її структури та змісту; визначення його місця в розвитку психічних про-цесів індивіда, а також у системних процесах більш високого порядку.

Зазначено, що поняття «взаємодія» є предметом вивчення різних наук, таких як філософія, психологія, педагогіка, соціологія, соціальна психологія, антропологія, культурологія тощо. У межах нашого дослі-дження взаємодія розглядається як процес впливу суб'єктів один на од-ного, що характеризується виникненням зв'язків, взаємозумовленістю та опосередкованістю їхньої спільної діяльності або спілкування.

Результати аналізу наукових джерел дають змогу виокремити де-кілька аспектів вивчення проблеми педагогічного спілкування, а саме як:

1) один із найважливіших складників професійної діяльності ви-кладачів;

2) складову частину професійної діяльності педагога;

3) проблему взаєморозуміння між педагогом та студентом; певну культурну спільноту, що потребує вивчення тих норм, котрі реалізу-ються у педагогічному спілкуванні.

Установлено, що з поняттям «взаємодія» пов'язана також потреба людини в спілкуванні, навчанні, освіті, особистісному розвитку. В про-цесі свого розвитку людина постійно перебуває з іншими людьми. При цьому інші люди - це не просто об'єкти, про які людина щось дізнаєть-ся, але й активні суб'єкти, з якими вона співпрацює, а також джерела уявлень, що відображають різні точки зору.

Ключові слова: суб'єкт-суб'єктна взаємодія, виш, педагогічна вза-ємодія, педагогічне спілкування, студент.

Formulation of the problem.The analysis of the researches of a number of scientists (M. Boryshevsky, L. Grimak, V. Kan-Kalik, S. Kondratieva, N. Kuzmina, A. Kulchytska, V. Morgun, etc.) shows that the problem of the real situation of the subject of learn-ing, the problem of his activity and self-activity in the educational process belong to the most important, especially when it comes to significant restructuring of the pedagogical process and bringing it in line with the practical demands of today.

Analysis of recent researches and publications. An analysis of scientific sources suggests that a number of domestic and foreign researchers studied the problem of interaction between subjects of learning in the broadest sense of the concept. The researches of psy-chologists A. Adler, B. Ananiev, A. Bandura, E. Bern, J. Bruner, L. Vygotsky, C. Kuley, K. Levin, O. Leontiev played a significant role in the study of the problem of interaction.

The aim of the study is to carry out an analysis of the theoreti-cal and methodological analysis of subject-subject interaction in higher educational institution. суб'єкт психологія взаємодія

Presentation of main material. The concept of «interaction» is the subject of studying various sciences such as philosophy, psy-chology, pedagogy, sociology, social psychology, anthropology, cul-turology, etc. In the modern dictionary the term «interaction» is interpreted as a philosophical category, which expresses the process of influencing various objects on each other, their interconnection, interconversion, the generation of one object of another. From the point of view of the philosophy of «interaction» - it is an objective and universal form of movement, development that determines the existence and structural organization of any material system. Interaction as a material process is accompanied by the transfer of matter, motion and information, it is relative, carried out at a cer-tain speed and in a certain space - time. It is through interaction that a person knows the natural and social phenomena, patterns, processes, oriented in the reality that surrounds him, defines the ways of thinking and behavior.

O. Leontiev in his studies considers interaction as a concerted activity, which involves the achievement of common goals and re-sults in solving the important problem for them [1]. The researcher states that in the interaction conditions there is always activity of both parties, although the extent of its detection is different. Ac-tivity, according to I. Zimnaya, is the main characteristic of the interacting parties in the process of any interaction of living mat-ter. In a person with a higher form of development of living matter, activity is manifested at all levels of its organization [2].

The study of the category «interaction» in psychology is consid-ered from the point of view of three main areas: interaction as a pro-cess of activity (M. Kagan, O. Leontiev, S. Rubinstein, etc.); interac-tion as a process of communication (V. Kan-Kalik, Y. Kolominsky, B. Lomov) and interaction as interpersonal relations (N. Kuzmina, N. Obozov, K. Platonov, V. Rubtsov, G. Schedrovitsky, etc.).

In general, in psychology, interaction is interpreted as:direct or indirect influence of subjects on each other, characterized by the emergence of connections and their interconnectedness;the process of mutual simultaneous influence of various objects on each other, their mutual predestination, manifested in the asymmetry of the contradictory dialectical relationship of such global, all-embracing elements of reality, as man and the world.

In social psychology, interaction is seen as a form of organiza-tion of people's activities. In the structure of interaction there are distinguished two sides: internal, or content (the totality of rela-tions between the individual and the social environment) and exter-nal or formal (the manifestation of these relations).

According to the research of Leontiev, interaction is charac-terized as social, group activity, human-to-human impact [3]. In-teraction is seen as a multi-level phenomenon, which distinguishes collaboration as a higher level of interaction. T. Komar states that «people are not only socially, but emotionally and psychologically closely connected with each other.

Today pedagogical science operates with the concept of «peda- gogical interaction», which is considered as one of the main catego-ries of pedagogy. In pedagogy, the concept of «interaction» occurs in studies of the features of the educational process, pedagogical communication, pedagogical activities, etc.

Pedagogical communication as an object was studied by many psychologists and educators (G. Ball, I. Beh, F. Honobolin, N. Kuzmina, V. Kan-Kalik, O. Leontiev, N. Pobirchenko, etc.).The results of the analysis of scientific sources give an opportunity to highlight several aspects of the study of the problem on pedagogi-cal communication, namely: one of the most important components of the professional activity of teachers, which presupposes the pre-sence of special communication skills of the teacher (M. Bohdanova, M. Boryshevskyi, F. Honobolin, N. Kuzmin, etc.); an integral part of the professional activity of the teacher (the teacher's mastery of a number of technical techniques, through which he implements vari-ous methods of interaction, develops communication (S. Batrakova,

G. Gavrilova, V. Kan-Kalik, V. Siniavskyi, etc.), the problem of mutual understanding between the teacher and the disciple, that is mastering the ability to establish a constructive contact, when full understanding of each other (O. Kirichuk, O. Kulchytska, V. Pa- nok, etc.) is achieved.

In general, there are three approaches to understanding the correlation between the concepts of «interaction» and «communi-cation» in psychological and pedagogical literature. The first ap-proach is based on the identity of these concepts. In the most con-centrated form, this approach is set out in the works of O. Leontiev, who considered communication as interaction with other people, as the internal mechanism of the life of the study group [5]. Accord-ing to the second approach the interaction is considered as a wider complex phenomenon, the side or form of which is communication. This point of view is given in the works of A. Goncharov, B. Lomov, V. Krysko, A. Moschenko, M. Obozov, M. Rybakova, J. Khanin and others. The interaction with a person can be accomplished through various contacts. M. Obozov considers contact as a form of interac-tion, which is characterized by spontaneity, space-temporal proxi-mity of people. According to Y. Khanin, communication is firstly the communicative behavior of members of a group separately and the group as a whole [8]. A. Moschenko considers communication as a communicative interaction [9].

The third approach is presented in the work of the researcher

H. Andrieieva, who studies the interaction as a component of hu-man communication, along with social perception and communica-tion. She reasonably points out that, despite the link between com-munication and interaction that objectively exists, it is difficult to divide these concepts between them. The approach to understanding interaction as an interactive component of communication allows, in terms of H. Andrieiev, on the one hand, to exclude the separa-tion of interaction from communication, and on the other - to avoid their identification.

The fundamental study of the relationship between the catego-ries of «communication» and «interaction» in psychology is carried out in the writings of O. Bodaliov, who substantiates the genetic proximity of these concepts and simultaneously shows their non-derivation to each other. So, O. Bodaliov argues that communica-tion «...is always the interaction of people» [10, p. 74-81]. Thus,

O. Bodaliov delimits the concept of activity and interaction, justify-ing the specifics of each of them in the context of contact between people with each other.

As for the relationship between the categories «interaction» and «activities» in psychology, there are two approaches: activi-ties are seen as a form of interaction, and interaction is treated as a side of the joint activities. Representatives of the first approach (A. Honcharov, H. Davydov, B. Lomov) considers the interaction to be the main form of the existence and functioning of social systems. It can be implemented as an interaction between actors or as a type of object-object interaction. The first is realized as communication, the second - as an activity.

Thus, based on the results of the analysis of psychological and pedagogical literature, one can conclude that in modern psychology there is no consensus on the place of interaction among other psy-chic phenomena and processes, which greatly complicate character-istics. It is considered both as an independent category, and as an in-teractive side of communication, and as an option of the individual, and as a form of human activities in general.

The results of the analysis of scientific sources indicate that the essence of the category of «communication» is the subject of active research of various sciences from the second half of the XX century (philosophy, sociology, psychology, linguistics, pedagogy). Com-munication is an extremely complex and ambiguous phenomenon, so there are different approaches to understanding this phenome-non: philosophical, social, activities-based, systemic, manipulative, personality-based, etc.

A number of researchers, investigating the psychological prob-lems of the interaction of subjects in the pedagogical process, de-termined the characteristic differences between different parties of communication, emphasizing, in particular, the role of their spe-cific psychological characteristics, especially characteristics such as psychological and pedagogical observation, depth of empathy, accuracy of social perception [11].

T. Scherban in the study reveals the content of this kind of com-munication, which implements the ability of the teacher and stu-dent to the relationship, as learning communication, interpreting it as a special form of relationship between people, as a process of collaboration between a teacher and a student in which this form of interaction is based on an active feedback that organizes, regulates and enriches each of the participants in this process [12].

Communication and interaction in communication were studied by representatives of psychoanalysis, behavioral, cognitive and hu-manistic psychology.

A number of scholars who studied the psychological peculiari-ties of the interaction of subjects of communication emphasized the specific differences between the various sides of communication, which are components of this process, which can be used to clarify the peculiarities of interaction among different people.

According to O. Tsokur, the structure of pedagogical commu-nication is formed at least by the interaction of three main compo-nents: verbal (it provides functioning of the mechanism of trans-mission-reception of educational information), perceptual and in-teractive [13].

B. Lomov in his research examined the methodological, theo-retical, experimental and applied aspects of communication. The researcher revealed the category of communication as an essential aspect of human existence - interaction at the level of subject-sub-jective communication [14].

Especially bright, practical sounding of the problem of subject- subjective communication is found in the works of V. Sukhomlyn- skyi. The entire pedagogical system of V. Sukhomlynskyi is based on the idea of replacing the traditional subject-object contact of the teacher with the pupils by qualitatively different subject-subject system.

L. Haponenko considers the subject-subjective nature of peda-gogical communication as the principle of its effective organiza-tion, consisting in the equality of psychological positions, the mu-tual humanistic setting, the activity of the teacher and students, their interpenetration into the world of feelings and experiences, readiness to accept the interlocutor, interact with him [16].

The scientist V. Miasyshchev believes that the system of human relations with the world is the most specific characteristic of the individual [17]. The researcher defines education as the process of interaction between educator and pupil as a two-way process. Howe-ver, the existence of a close relationship between the process of in-teraction between people and their interactions does not lead to the identity of these concepts, their interchange. Therefore, mutual re-lations are understood by the author as an internal personal basis of interaction, and the latter - as an implementation or the conse-quence of the first manifestation.

Scientists argue that the category of relationship can be consi-dered both as a readiness for a certain interaction, and as a real active link in the «subject-object», «subject-subject» relations. Relations within the «subject-object» and «subject-subject» are not identical. For example, the activity (or severity) of relations, modality (posi-tive, negative, neutral), latitude, stability, etc., is common to one and another communication. At the same time, the essential diffe-rence of relations within the subject-object and subject-subject com-munication is unidirectional and interrelated.

In scientific sources, subject-subject relations are characteri-zed as a constant reciprocity, and variability, which is conditioned by the activity of both sides in the subject-object relations.

In the scientific literature, there are two approaches to the es-sence of the subject-object and subject-subject interaction, namely: the intellectualistic approach presented in the concept of J. Piaget; interactive found in the works of W. James and J. Moreno, and the cultural-historical theory, developed by L. Vyhotskyi, and develo-ped by O. Leontiev, D. Elkonin and other psychologists. A charac-teristic feature of the concept of J. Piaget is that the source of personal development is the interaction in the system of «subject- object» relations. The main features of the personality, based on the position of J. Piaget, are consciousness, criticality, responsibility. These features are formed firstly in the system of relations between the subject and the object and secondly in the «subject-subject» sys-tem [18].

The interactive approach to the problem of personality develop-ment is characterized by the fact that the interaction is understood as a direct communication of «symbols exchange». The development of a personality takes place in the process of interaction with other people in society, which is interpreted as a system of direct commu-nication in isolation from the activities and outside of their socio- historical precondition. The emotional aspects of human interaction are also ignored. Representatives of this direction consider the in-teraction in the system of «subject-subject» as the main source of development.

Conclusions. Communication of the subject-object type, mono-tony of its forms, when only the teacher who initiates a joint activi-ties, has the ability to manifest activity, his thoughts and attitudes, often forming the position of the observer, a person from the side.

Long-term communication of this type often forms a kind of spiri-tual consumerism, which manifests itself in the inertia of thinking and laziness. Another approach in the relationship between the teacher and the students is characterized as subject-subject com-munication. In this case, the teacher comes from the fact that the student appears or is supposed to appear as a «living person», the subject who communicates .

We are agree with the scholars that the organization of such communication is the merit of a teacher whose personality mani-fests itself in this rather multifaceted manner. Communicating with a person means not just talking with him, but entering into his inner situation, understanding him, revealing a benevolent at-titude, optimism.

Thus, the transfer of positive knowledge is within the subject- subject pedagogical communication, since communication takes place on the interpersonal level.

The prospect of further research of the problem. Among the perspective directions of further scientific research there is the study of the influence of individual characteristics of subjects of learning on the course of psychic cognitive processes taking into ac-count the gender aspect.

Список використаних джерел