Designing the educational process of postgraduate studies: integration of fractal-resonance methodology and pedagogical design
- Authors: Pivneva S.V.1, Grebennikova V.M.2, Nikitina N.I.3, Komarova E.V.4
-
Affiliations:
- Russian State Social University
- Kuban State University
- A.S. Griboyedov Moscow University
- Russian Academy of National Economy and Public Administration
- Issue: Vol 13, No 2 (2024)
- Pages: 208-215
- Section: Pedagogical Sciences
- URL: https://journal-vniispk.ru/2309-4370/article/view/271372
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.55355/snv2024132309
- ID: 271372
Cite item
Full Text
Abstract
The modern education system is characterized by increasing demands for the quality and effectiveness of the educational process (including postgraduate studies), which actualizes the need to use scientifically based methodological approaches to the design and implementation of educational programs. In this context, the integration of fractal-resonance methodology (FRM) and the concept of pedagogical design (PD) is of particular importance. The article considers the mechanisms of synthesis of neobehavioural, cognitivist and constructivist approaches within the theory and practice of pedagogical design, as well as three key approaches to pedagogical design in the concept of pedagogical design: «from the task», «from the type of activity» and «from educational results», their features, advantages and limitations are analyzed. Fractal-resonance methodology (FRM) of designing the educational process is based on the principles borrowed from the theory of fractals and the concept of resonance. The article considers the essence of this methodology, its key aspects, principles, possibilities and didactic mechanisms for implementation in the educational process of postgraduate studies. The content of the article analyzes how the application of the four-component model of instructional design (4C/ID), based on Edward Sweller's theory of cognitive load and Richard Mayer's theory of multimedia learning, can improve the educational process in graduate school and help students effectively cope with the topics studied.
Full Text
##article.viewOnOriginalSite##About the authors
Svetlana Valentinovna Pivneva
Russian State Social University
Email: tlt-swetlana@yandex.ru
Candidate of Pedagogical Sciences, Associate Professor of the Information Technologies, Artificial Intelligence and Public-Social Technologies of Digital Society Department
Russian Federation, MoscowVeronika Mikhailovna Grebennikova
Kuban State University
Author for correspondence.
Email: vmgrebennikova@mail.ru
Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences, Professor, Head of the Pedagogy and Psychology Department
Russian Federation, KrasnodarNatalya Ivanovna Nikitina
A.S. Griboyedov Moscow University
Email: nn0803@mail.ru
Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences, Professor of the General Psychology and Pedagogy Department
Russian Federation, MoscowEkaterina Vladimirovna Komarova
Russian Academy of National Economy and Public Administration
Email: evkomarova@mail.ru
Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences, Associate Professor, Professor of the Computer Science and Mathematics Department
Russian Federation, MoscowReferences
- Абдуллина Л.Б., Маджуга А.Г., Синицина И.А. Фрактальная педагогика: теория, методология и практика: монография. М.: Университетская книга, 2016. 320 с.
- Маджуга А.Г., Синицина И.А., Абдуллина Л.Б. Фрактально-резонансный подход как методология постнеклассического гуманитарного знания // Высшее образование сегодня. 2014. № 11. С. 61–66.
- Ушаков А.А. Фрактальная методология личностно-профессионального саморазвития педагога в интегративной образовательной среде [Электронный ресурс] // Мир науки. Педагогика и психология. 2020. Т. 8, № 2. https://mir-nauki.com/pdf/58pdmn220.pdf.
- Соколов А.В. Применение фрактальной методологии в гуманитарных науках // Время науки. 2016. № 3. С. 12–18.
- Ефимова Е.А., Корешникова Ю.Н., Давлатова М.А. Педагогический дизайн: российская и зарубежная исследовательская повестка / под науч. ред. Е.В. Чернобай. М.: НИУ ВШЭ, 2022. 44 с.
- Mangaroska K., Giannakos M. Learning analytics for learning design: a systematic literature review of analytics-driven design to enhance learning // IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies. 2018. Vol. 12, iss. 4. P. 516–534. doi: 10.1109/tlt.2018.2868673.
- Power R. Everyday Instructional design: a practical resource for educators and instructional designers. Sydney: Power Learning Solutions, 2023. 303 p.
- Mattar J. Constructivism and connectivism in education technology: active, situated, authentic, experiential, and anchored learning // Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia. 2010. Vol. 21, iss. 2. P. 201–217. doi: 10.5944/ried.21.2.20055.
- Асанов С.А., Акименко Г.В. Педагогический дизайн и педагогическое проектирование как эффективные технологии организации образовательного процесса в вузе [Электронный ресурс] // Дневник науки. 2020. № 8 (44). http://www.dnevniknauki.ru/images/publications/2020/8/pedagogics/Asanov_Akimenko.pdf.
- Вольхин С.Н., Васильева Т.В., Гребенникова В.М., Ильгов В.И., Квитковская А.А., Комарова Е.В., Никитина Н.И., Пивнева С.В., Романова Е.Ю., Федосов А.Ю. Совершенствование качества непрерывной профессиональной подготовки специалистов социономического профиля: колл. монография. М.: Перспектива, 2022. 323 с.
- Гришина П.Ю. Применение педагогического дизайна при разработке программ профессионального обучения для руководителей высшего звена управления // Лидерство и менеджмент. 2016. Т. 3, № 1. С. 33–50. doi: 10.18334/lim.3.1.35022.
- Мельников В.А., Синицина И.А., Синицын И.А. Концептуальные основы педагогического дизайна: фрактально-резонансный подход // Наука о человеке: гуманитарные исследования. 2016. № 2 (24). С. 118–124. doi: 10.17238/issn1998-5320.2016.24.118.
- Alammary A., Sheard J., Carbone A. Blended learning in higher education: three different design approaches // Australasian Journal of Educational Technology. 2014. Vol. 30, № 4. Р. 440–454. doi: 10.14742/ajet.693.
- Van Merriënboer J.J.G., Sweller J. Cognitive load theory and complex learning: recent developments and future directions // Educational Psychology Review. 2005. Vol. 17, № 2. P. 147–178. doi: 10.1007/s10648-005-3951-0.
- Sweller J., van Merriënboer J.J.G., Paas F. Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 years later // Educational Psychology Review. 2019. Vol. 31, № 2. P. 261–292. doi: 10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5.
- Martin F., Ritzhaupt A.D. Standards and competencies for instructional design and technology professionals // Design for Learning: Principles, Processes, and Praxis / eds. J.K. McDonald, R.E. West. EdTech Books, 2020. P. 265–273.
- Макаренко А.А. Педагогический дизайн как средство повышения эффективности организации учебного процесса // Вестник Костромского государственного университета. Серия: Педагогика. Психология. Социокинетика. 2017. Т. 23, № 4. С. 13–16.
Supplementary files
