Self-analysis of teacher's pedagogical activity in the context of pedagogical communication styles

The issues of pedagogical communication in the conditions of the modern model of the educational process are beginning to play an increasingly important role. Of course, at all times this problem played a significant role in the effectiveness of education and upbringing, but to date the world, including our state, is moving away from the system of centralized instruction in groups, focusing on individual education. It is in this situation that the style of pedagogical communication goes to the fundamental positions. It should be noted that in the methodological literature four main styles of communication are distinguished - two of them are extreme, respectively, opposite, and two - intermediate. It is worth noting that when the teacher's self-analysis is carried out, the question is seldom considered, which is unacceptable in the work of a high-quality pedagogical worker. Why the educator? Not only, but also primary school teachers. It is at this age that the basics of a future personality are laid, the desire of the child to attend school. In this situation, the self-analysis of the activity of the primary school teacher should be carried out regularly, in order to exclude possible errors and shortcomings in the work.

Authoritarian type of communication

It is worth noting that this option, referring to the first style, unfortunately, is still the most common. At the same time, the teacher's style of communication with pupils, pupils or students is characterized by quick reaction to certain actions or inactivity of children, the formation of specific, appealing commands or instructions, and the limitation of creativity. Conducted self-examination of the teacher's activity, in this situation, is unlikely to display these facts. Most often, this problem is related to the lack of professional education of the teacher, but there are situations when such a manner of conducting classes is formed from the personal qualities of the individual teacher. It's about his not wanting to invest in the learning process completely. The latter 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 pedagogical activity of the educator carried out 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, although not explicitly, are not open, but agree that such ways of organizing communication can be acceptable, at least in a separate, short stage of the general educational or educational process, at least for the formation of a responsible attitude In children to what is happening.

Stimulating style of communication and self-analysis of teacher's pedagogical activity, his professing

The opposite of the authoritarian style of communication in literature is the so-called stimulating style. This option, of course, is the most advanced and progressive. Its essence is not to suppress the independent decisions of the child at any stage of the pedagogical process, but to stimulate cooperation, when the teacher conducts various types of indirect methods of influence, for example, leading questions, etc., in the management of the activity of the pupil or pupil. It is clear that the self-analysis of pedagogical activity of the educator in this situation will be based not on the achievement of the educational or educational goals set, but on the degree of mutual understanding and cooperation, both with a single pupil and with the collective as a whole. Thus, self-analysis of the activity of the teacher of any, but primarily self-analysis of the activity of the primary school teacher, should be directed not only, and not so much, to assessing the work done, but, first and foremost, the prospects for further cooperation with their wards.