Questions of pedagogical communication in conditionsmodern models of the educational process are beginning to play an increasing value. Of course, at all times this problem has played a significant role in the effectiveness of training and education, but today the world, including our state, is moving away from the system of centralized training in groups, focusing on individual training. It is in this situation that the style of pedagogical communication comes to fundamental positions. It is worth noting that in the methodological literature there are four main styles of communication - two of them are extreme, respectively, opposite, and two are intermediate. It is worth noting that when self-analysis of the pedagogical activity of the educator is performed, this question is rarely considered, which is unacceptable in the work of a high-class pedagogical worker. Why precisely educator? Not only, also primary school teachers. It is at this age that the basics of the future personality are laid, the child’s desire to attend school. In this situation, the self-analysis of the activities of the primary school teacher should be conducted regularly, in order to eliminate possible mistakes and shortcomings in the work.
Authoritarian type of communication
It is worth noting that a similar option relatingto the first style, unfortunately, is still the most common. At the same time, the teacher’s style of communication with students, pupils or students is characterized by a quick reaction to certain actions or inactions of children, the formation of specific teams or instructions that do not tolerate appeals, and the limitation of creative potential. The ongoing self-analysis of the activities of the teacher in this situation is unlikely to display these facts. Most often, this problem is associated with an inadequate professional education of a teacher, but situations arise when a similar manner of conducting classes is formed from the personal qualities of an individual teacher. It is about his not wanting to invest in the learning process completely. The last option is the most dangerous from the point of view of the development of pedagogical traditions in the future, since the self-analysis of the teacher’s pedagogical activity conducted by such an employee, for example, on paper or verbally, will look absolutely convincing and, most importantly, reasoned. As they say in the people, you will not undermine. On the other hand, many well-known teachers, even if not explicitly, are not openly, but agree that such methods of organizing communication can be acceptable, at least in a separate, short stage of the general educational or educational process, if only to form a responsible attitude. in children to what is happening.
Stimulating communication style and self-analysis of the teacher’s pedagogical activity, practicing it
The opposite of the authoritarian style of communication inliterature is called the so-called stimulating style. This option is certainly the most advanced and progressive. Its essence lies not in suppressing independent decisions by a child at a particular stage of the pedagogical process, but rather encouraging cooperation when the teacher exercises the management of a student’s or pupil’s activities by various kinds of indirect methods of influence, for example, leading questions, etc. It is clear that self-analysis of the pedagogical activity of the educator in such a situation will be based not on the achievement of educational or educational goals, but on the degree of mutual understanding and cooperation, both with a single pupil and with the team as a whole. Thus, self-analysis of the activity of a teacher of any, but first of all, self-analysis of the activity of a primary school teacher, should be directed not only, and not so much, to assess the work done, but, first of all, to prospects for further cooperation with their students.
