A PRODUCTIVE LEARNING MODEL IN DEBATING PROCESS

Maija Ročāne, Alīda Samuseviča

Abstract


Basing on the analysis of pedagogical/psychological theoretical findings, the publication describes the specifics of youth productive learning. The aim of the article is to characterize the specifics of the learning process of 10th-12thgrade students, justifying the regularities of the productive learning process and pedagogical possibilities that ensure a purposeful and active cognitive process, revelation and problem learning, as well as the student's self-realization in the debating process. Interest, motivation, learning goals, action, responsibility, collaboration, and reflection are the components of productive learning, which are described in the publication. The theoretical and empirical research questions have been analysed and updated in the article, highlighting the issues of productive learning.


Keywords


young people; debating; components; model; productive learning

Full Text:

PDF

References


Atkinson, R. L., Atkinson, R. C., Smith, E. E., & Bem, D J. (1993). Introduction to Psychology. 11th edition. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Baltic Institute of Social Sciences. (2014). Pētījums par priekšlaicīgas mācību pamešanas iemesliem un riskiem jauniešiem vecuma grupā no 13 līdz 18 gadiem. Rīga. Retrieved from http://www.izm.gov.lv/images/statistika/petijumi/41.pdf

Benavides, F., Dumont, H., & Istance, D. (2012). The Nature of Learning: Using Research to Inspire Practice. OECD Publications. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/50300814.pdf

Berman, S. (1997). Children’s social consciousness and the development of social responsibility. New York: State University of New York Press.

Biggs, J. (1987). Student Approaches to Learning and Studying. Victoria: Council for Educational Research.

Böhm, I., Borkenhagen, H., Mirow, H., & Schneider, J. (2011). Productive Learning and school development in Germany. In Productive Learning and International School Development (pp. 41-56). Berlin: Institut für Produktives Lernen in Europa. Retrieved form http://www.iple.de/Pdf/Productive-Learning-and-international-school-development.pdf

Brighouse, H. (2009). Moral and Politial Aims of Education. In Siegel, H. (Eds). The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Education (pp. 35-51). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Čehlova, Z., & Grīnpauks, Z. (2003). Skolēnu integratīvo prasmju veidošanās. Rīga: RaKa.

Easterday, M. (2012). Educational Technologies for Teaching Argumentation Skills. In Niels Pinkwart, N., McLaren, B. (Eds). Policy World: A Cognitive Game for Teaching Deliberation (pp. 225-276). Bentham Science Publishers.

Eurydice. (2012). Galveno kompetenču pilnveide Eiropas skolās: rīcībpolitikas uzdevumi un iespējas. Luksemburga: Eiropas Savienības Publikāciju birojs. Retrieved from http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/eurydice/documents/thematic_reports/145LV.pdf

Excolo Latvia. (2013). Jauniešu iespēju attieksmju un vērtību pētījums. Rīga. Retrieved from http://www.izm.gov.lv/images/statistika/petijumi/23.pdf

Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating Significant Learning Experiences: An Integrated Approach to Designing College Courses. San Francisko: John Wiley & Sons Jossey Bass.

Freire, P. (2005). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum. Retrieved from https://libcom.org/files/FreirePedagogyoftheOppressed.pdf

Harackiewicz, J., & Hulleman, C. (2010). The Importance of Interest: The Role of Achievement Goals and Task Values in Promoting the Development of Interest. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, Vol. 4, No. 1, 42-52.

Hidi, S., & Baird, W. (1988). Strategies for increasing text-based interest and students’ recall of expository texts. Reading Research Quarterly, Vol. 4, No. 4, 465-483.

Hidi, S., & Renninger, A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, Vol. 41, Issue 2, 111-127.

Koens, R., Makelroja, Š., Pileta-Hola S., & Džendrina-Gvinebolta, Dž. (2002). Jaunieši Pārmaiņu sabiedrībās. Rīga: UNICEF.

Kursīte, R. (2005). Mācību priekšmeta programmas paraugs – angļu valoda 3.-9. klasei. Rīga: Izglītības satura un eksaminācijas centrs.

Latvijas Republikas Izglītības un zinātnes ministrija. (2013). Izglītības attīstības pamatnostādnes 2014. – 2020. gadam. Rīga.

Latvijas Skolu psihologu asociācija. (2012). Metodiskie ieteikumi darbā ar skolēniem, kuriem ir agresīva uzvedība. Rīga. Retrieved from http://www.izm.gov.lv/images/statistika/petijumi/03.pdf

Marton, F., & Booth, S. (2009). Learning and Awareness. London & New York: Routledge.

Oshana, M. (1997). Ascriptions of responsibility. American Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 34, No. 1, 71-83.

Proulx, G. (2004). Integrating scientific method and critical thinking in classroom debates on en vronmental issues. The American Biology Teacher, Vol. 66, No. 1, 23-33.

Rutter, M., & Rutter, M. (1993). Developing Minds. London: Penguin books.

Savin-Baden, M., & Major, C. H. (2004). Foundations of Problem-Based Learning. Berkshire: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.

Seijts, G., & Latham, G. (2005). Learning versus performance goals: when should each be used? Academy of management executive, Vol. 19, No. 1, 124-131. Retrieved from http://homepages.se.edu/cvonbergen/files/2012/12/Learning-versus-performance-goals_When-should-each-be-used1.pdf

Selvester, M., & Summers, D. (2012). Socially Responsible Literacy: Teaching Adolescents for Purpose and Power. New York and London: Teachers Colledge, Columbia University.

Valsts izglītības satura centrs. (2017). Izglītība mūsdienīgai lietpratībai: mācību satura un pieejas apraksts. Retrieved from https://domaundari.lv/cepure/Jauna_satura_ietvars.pdf

Wlodkowski, J. (2008). Enhancing Adult motivation to learn. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Zull, J. (2004). Teaching for Meaning. The Art of Changing the Brain: Educational Leadership, Vol. 62, No. 1, 68-72.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17770/ercs2017.2755

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.