pp. 151-164 | Article Number: mathedu.2016.019
Published Online: April 10, 2016
Article Views: 553 | Article Download: 892
The urgency of the problem under investigation is due to the fact that under the circumstances of educational priorities change the humanistic values become fundamental. That’s why forming students` abilities in their self-productive activity is becoming actual. The problem is also important in choosing pedagogical technologies of teaching foreign languages, because there is a high priority of using humanistic technologies over the using of authoritarian ones. The aim of the article is to reveal and characterize the efficient humanistic educational technologies of teaching foreign languages. The main methods of the research are systematization, classification, comparative analysis, which allowed to determine the main objectives and results of using humanistic educational technologies in teaching foreign languages in Russia and abroad and to substantiate the efficiency of its using. The article deals with the characteristics of foreign language teaching process humanization. The authors give the characteristics of educational technology and its classification in the Russian researches. The article reveals the principles and approaches to humanization of teaching foreign languages, as well as some humanistic educational technologies of teaching foreign languages (immersion in the language and gaming). Special attention is paid to peculiarities of using humanization approach in the immersion method. The article reviews the immersion method; formulates its principles; structures the stages of its; grounds the advantage of using the method of immersion and defines the characteristics of using of this method in the Republic of South Korea, Daegu, in the “Daegu Keongbuk English Village”. The results of the research will be useful for the foreign language teachers to ensure the humanization of educational process in the educational institutions.
Keywords: foreign language, humanization, education, educational technology, teaching, learning, immersion in the language, gaming
Acitelli., L. K. (2002). Things to do before class begins. Michigan: Center for Research on Teaching and Learning.
Amonashvili, S.A. (1996). Thoughts About Humane Pedagogy. Moscow: Amonashvili.
Andrade, S. (1988). Urban FLES models: Progress and promise. Cincinnati.
Andreev, V. I. (2005). Pedagogy of High School: innovative and predictive course. Kazan: Center of innovative technologies.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
Berlitz, 120 Years of Excellence: 1878–1998 (1998). Berlitz International, Inc.
Bespalko, V. P. (1989). Components of Pedagogical Technology. Moscow: Pedagogy.
Bloom, B. S. (ed). (1985). Developing Talent in Young People. New York: Ballantine Books.
Bruner, J. (1964). The course of cognitive growth. American psychologist, 19, 1-15.
Chiknaverova, K. G. (2012). Describing the competence of autonomous speech in a foreign language for undergraduate students. Obrazovanie i samorazvitie, 3(31), 93-98.
Choshanov, M.A. (1996). Flexible technology of problem-modular education. Мoscow: Narodnoye obrazovanie.
Comenius, Y. A. (1982). Chosen Pedagogical Compositions. In 2 vol. Moscow: Pedagogika.
Dewey, J. (1902). The school and society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Diller, K. C. (1978). The Language Teaching Controversy. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.
Finn, Ch. (1991). We Must Take Charge: Our Schools and Our Future. New York: Free Press.
Gillet, M. (1978). Hard, Soft or Medium. McGill Journal of Education, 2.
Golovanova, I. I., Telegina, N. V. (2015). Construct of interactive sessions based on the «world cafe» method. Obrazovanie i samorazvitie, 2(44), 70-75.
Kalnej, V. A. (1999). Monitoring Technology of Learning Quality in “Teacher-Student” System. Moscow: Russian Pedagogical Society.
Kanstroom, M., & Finn, C. (1999). Better teachers, better schools. Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.
Klarin, M. V. (1989). Pedagogical Technology in Educational Process. Moscow: Pedagogika.
Klarin, M. V. (1997). Innovations in Education: metaphors and models: Analysis of foreign experience. Мoscow: Nauka.
Likhachev, B. T. (1996). Pedagogy. Moscow: Prometey.
Makhmutov, M. I. (1975). Problem teaching: the basic questions of the theory. Moscow: Pedagogika.
Maslow, A. (2002). Towards the Existence Psychology. Moscow: EKSMO-PRESS Publishing House.
McKeachie, W. J. (1986). Teaching tips: A guidebook for the beginning college teacher. (8th ed.). Lexington, MA: D. C. Health.
Mitchell, P. D. (1978). Continuing Education. In: D.Unwin (ed.). The Encyclopaedia of Educational Media, Communications and Technology. London: Macmillan.
Monakhov, V. M. (1995). Technological Bases of Projection and Design of Educational Process. Volgograd: Peremena.
Neill A. S. (1960). Summerhill. N. Y.: Hart Publishing Co.
Nigmatov, Z. .G. (1990). Humanistic Principle and its Development in the History of Soviet School (1946-1989 гг.). Doctoral dissertation. Kazan: KSPU.
Novik, N. N. & Podgórecki, J. A. (2015). Model of Developing Communication Skills among Adolescents with Behavioral Problems. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 10 (4), 579-587.
Pidkasistyj, P. I. & Portnov, M. L. (1999). Teaching Art. Moscow: Russian Pedagogical Society.
Plomp, T. & Ely, D.( Eds.). (1996). International encyclopedia of educational technology. 2nd ed. N.Y.: Pergamon.
Polat, E. S. (Ed.) (2001). New Pedagogical and Informational Technologies in the System of Education. Moscow: Academia.
Rogers, K. R. & Freiburg, J. (2002). Freedom to Learn. Moscow: Smysl.
Sakamoto, T. (1974). The role of educational technology curriculum development. Curriculum development by means of educational technology. Paris: Centre of Educational Research and Innovation, OECD
Selevko, G.K. (1996). Modern Educational Technologies. Moscow: Narodnoye obrazovanie.
Shakirova, A. A., Valeeva, R. A. (2014). Humanization of foreign language teaching: foreign experience. Obrazovanie i samorazvitie, 2(40), 72-75.
Sirotnick, K. & Goodlad, J. (Eds.) (1988). School-university partnerships in action. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Skinner, B. F. (1961). "Teaching machines." Scientific American, 205, 90-112.
Slastenin, V. A. & Podymova, L. S. (1997). Pedagogy: innovative activity. Moscow: Magistr.
Stalheim-Smith, A. (1998). Focusing on Active, Meaningful Learning. IDEA-paper, Kansas State University, 34.
Stewick E.W. (1990). Humanism in Language Teaching. Oxford University Press.
Valeev, A. A., Valeeva, L. A. & Sirazeeva, A. F. (2015). Study of University students’ Foreign Language speech ac-tivity formation. Review of European Studies, 7(5), 38-46.
Valeeva, R. A. & Demakova, I. D. (2015). Humanization of Education in the Context of Janusz Korczak Pedagogical Ideas.Review of European Studies,7(4), 161-171.
Valeeva, R. A. (1997). Theory and Practice of Humanistic Education in European Pedagogy (1st part of 20th century). Doctoral dissertation. Kazan: KSPU.
Volkov, I. P. (1988). Teaching creativity. Moscow: Pedagogika.
Widdowson H. G. (1983). Learning Purpose and Language Use. London: Oxford University Press, 128-134
Yanushkevich, F. (1986). Educational Technology in higher education. Moscow: Higher. school.
Yusupova, G. F., Podgorecki, J. & Markova, N. G. (2015). Educating Young People in Multicultural Educational Environment of Higher Education Institution. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 10 (4), 561-570.