CURRENT APPROACHES AND NEW RESEARCH IN
MODERN SCIENCES
International scientific-online conference
46
ANALYSIS OF PEDAGOGICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MECHANISMS
OF DEVELOPING COLLABORATIVE SKILLS OF STUDENTS BASED
ON A MULTI-VECTOR APPROACH
Turemuratova Aziza Begibaevna
Assistant, Department of Pedagogy and Psychology,
Karakalpak State University named after Berdakh,
Republic of Karakalpakstan, Uzbekistan
Tursunboyeva Guljahon Kurolboy kizi
Yusupova Kumushkhon Ismoil kizi
Sultanova Zebokhon Safarbay kizi
Students of Karakalpak State University named after Berdakh
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13943486
Abstract.
This work is devoted to the definition of the concept of
"collaboration" in the system of pedagogical sciences, as well as the study of
collaboration as a form of pedagogical interaction. The relevance of the study is
due, on the one hand, to the increasing frequency of references by pedagogical
researchers to the concept of "collaboration", and on the other hand, to the high
degree of inconsistency of scientists in defining this phenomenon in the system
of educational sciences.
Kеywоrds:
pedagogical
collaboration,
pedagogical
interaction,
collaborative learning, collaboration, pedagogy of cooperation, educational
interaction, collective learning.
INTRОDUСTIОN
In modern pedagogical research, the concept of "collaboration"
(collaborative learning) is increasingly encountered. At the same time, a review
of scientific literature has made it possible to identify the problem of the lack of
unanimity of opinion among researchers regarding the concept of collaboration
in the field of education. A number of researchers use the term "collaboration" to
combine the concepts of "joint activity", "activity performed jointly", "group
form of interaction organization", "educational cooperation" [1].
MАTЕRIАLS АND MЕTHОDS
There are also references to collaborative learning as a general term for a
group of educational technologies based on the process of collective educational
interaction: for example, project technology, case technology, learning in
cooperation, etc. According to G.P. Sinitsyna, collaboration is one of the
components of the educational strategy of learning in partnership [2]. N.V.
Pavelyeva believes that collaborative learning should be understood more
broadly: as a pedagogical approach based on close interaction between
CURRENT APPROACHES AND NEW RESEARCH IN
MODERN SCIENCES
International scientific-online conference
47
participants in the educational process [3]. A.V. Kulikov defines collaboration in
the educational environment even more broadly, noting that collaboration is a
philosophy of education, the original concept of joint activities, training and
professional-academic interaction [4].
RЕSULTS АND DISСUSSIОN
The use of the discourse analysis method to study the terminological
development of the concept of "interaction" up to the time of its first mention in
descriptions of the phenomenon of collaboration was aimed primarily at
determining the moment of transition of the observed phenomenon into the
area of social relations. This step was necessary to identify the signs of mutual
activity of subjects, which, as a superstructure over the key meaning-forming
element, contributed to the emergence of the concept of "collaboration" as an
independent unit of scientific discourse. In other words, the task was to
determine whether the concepts of "collaboration" and "interaction" are
synonymous in the system of social sciences.
The core of materialistic dialectics was the transfer of the philosophical
understanding of interaction to the area of social relations. According to F.
Engels, social development is basically reduced to interaction in the form of
struggle between different social classes. This form is based on the interaction of
opposites. The understanding of society as a product of human interaction,
which is one of the main provisions of dialectical materialism, was further
developed in the philosophical works of V.I. Lenin, who considered social
relations as a process of changing the properties and qualities of external reality
as a result of human activity. An appeal to the nature of interaction can be traced
in V.I. Lenin's definition of human activity as a change in various properties and
qualities of external reality based on the goal-setting activity of man. As V.V.
Davydov noted, Lenin introduced into materialistic dialectics the concept of
transformative human activity as the interaction of goals, means and actions of
the subject in relation to objective reality, thus highlighting the basic
components of interaction in the area of social relations: goal-setting, selection
and use of external tools, verification of the coincidence of the subjective and
objective.
M. Weber in his work "Basic Sociological Concepts" defined the formula of
social interaction as the sum of purposefulness and orientation towards others.
The scientist identified four types of social interaction: traditional (following
certain patterns of behavior), rational (correlation of goals and means), affective
(emotional) and value-rational. Somewhat later, the American sociologist T.
CURRENT APPROACHES AND NEW RESEARCH IN
MODERN SCIENCES
International scientific-online conference
48
Parsons, continuing his attempts to establish the relationship between social
interaction at the level of individual groups and the type of a specific society,
began to consider social interaction more broadly than a single act, adding to
Weber's formula also the situational environment of the subject of activity. The
general structure of social interaction is presented by Parsons in the form of five
pairs of opposite poles: affectivity - neutrality, orientation towards oneself -
orientation towards the collective, universalism - particularism, quality -
effectiveness, specificity - diffusion.
The idea of the determinacy of a single social interaction by symbols and
signals of the environment surrounding the subject was developed in the
sociological paradigm of symbolic interactionism by J. Mead, the origins of which
were, on the one hand, the direction of pragmatism in philosophy, and on the
other hand, the theory of behaviorism in psychology (E. Thorndike, I.P. Pavlov, B.
Skinner, etc.). J. Mead represented the structure of social interaction in four
phases of action: impulse, perception, manipulation, reaction. The process of
orientation in each of these phases is carried out by interpreting and producing
symbols, the most important of which are the symbols of language. J. Mead
considered the mechanism of role acceptance, i.e. the acceptance by individuals
of the role of another in order to generate a response symbol adequate to a
specific community, to be the means of such manipulation of symbols to
maintain social interaction. J. Mead's ideas were subsequently reflected not only
in the general typology of interactions, but also at a more specific level in
identifying the mechanisms of social interaction.
Thus, collaboration in the specified period was defined as the joint work of
several physical or economic entities with common goals and interests; as a
collective form of organization of interacting entities, implying the unification of
efforts, resources and results of intellectual labor to create a common product;
or as joint creative activity of a project nature, etc. [3].
However, greater rigor in the description of the phenomenon of
collaboration was brought about by the attempts of researchers to approach the
issue of typologization of social interactions in the late 1970s. It was the desire
to systematize various forms of mutual activity of entities that allowed
researchers to identify distinctive characteristics of interaction that were
sufficient to distinguish elements within a specific typology.
It should be noted that social interaction by the end of the 20th century is
increasingly defined as a system of interdependent and interdependent social
actions, in which the actions of one entity are simultaneously the cause and
CURRENT APPROACHES AND NEW RESEARCH IN
MODERN SCIENCES
International scientific-online conference
49
effect of the actions of another entity, thus forming a cyclical social dependence.
In this regard, studies of the mechanisms of social action from different research
positions have led to the emergence of various typologies of social interaction.
First of all, as A.V. Kandaurova notes, existing typologies are conditioned by the
different initial grounds of researchers for the typologization process itself [4].
СОNСLUSIОN
The results of content and discourse analysis presented in the study allow
us to classify collaboration as a form of social cooperation. It was possible to
establish that this form of social interaction has a number of distinctive
characteristics that allow us to distinguish between the concept of collaboration
and cooperation. The conducted analysis of scientific and pedagogical literature
allowed us to identify the presence of a relationship between the typology of
social and pedagogical interaction when choosing the nature of acts of subject-
subject interaction as the basis for classification.
References:
1. Neznanov A.A. et al. Collaborative technologies in education: how to build
effective support for hybrid learning? / A.A. Neznanov // University
management: practice and analysis. - 2019. - Vol. 23. - No. 1-2. - P. 101-110.
2. Sinitsyna G.P. Strategy of learning in partnership: collaborative learning /
G.P. Sinitsyna // Science of man: humanitarian studies. - 2019. -No. 2 (36). - P.
78-82.
3. Pavelieva N.V. Collaborative learning as a model of effective implementation
of the educational process / N.V. Pavelieva // Education. Career. Society.- 2010.
- No. 3 (29). - P. 30-37.
4. Kulikov A.V. Distance collaborative learning systems and some aspects of
their development technology / A.V. Kulikov // Conference proceedings of the
Research Center Sociosfera. — Vedecko vydavatelske centrum Sociosfera-CZ
sro, 2012. — No. 8. — P. 105–107.
5. Laal M., Ghodsі S.M. Benefіts of collaboratіve learnіng / M. Laal, S.M. Ghodsі
// Procedіa-socіal and behavіoral scіences. — 2012. — Vol. 31. — p. 486–490.
