Teaching practicies: research and its platformization in the digital age

Pedagogical tradition, academic research and international reports of educational systems lead us back to teaching
practices. Many works are devoted to their normative and empirical description. In this article, we want to draw attention to the importance of describing effective teaching practices in the digital age. Who and how exactly achieves academic progress and wellbeing of students? How is such work “set up” at different levels: a teacher, a team of teachers, a school team? The authors analyze the current situation and conclude that there is a lack of high-quality empirical research on specific teaching practices with good results. The authors propose the ideas and design of an empirical study of effective teaching practices at different levels: individual, team, collective, and call for the creation of global cooperation to understand modern “teacher’s secrets”.

1. Age and individual characteristics of younger adolescents / Ed. D.B. Elkonin, T.V. Dragunov. Moscow: Education, 1967.

2. Archakova T. O., Veraksa A. N., Zotova O. Yu., Perelygina E. B. (2017). Sub’ektivnoe blagopoluchie u detej: instrumenty izmereniya i vozrastnaya dinamika. Psihologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie, 22(6),68–76. (in Russian).

3. Asmolov A. G., Shekhter E. D., Chernorizov A. M. (2017). Preadaptaciya k neopredelennosti kak strategiya navigacii razvivayushchihsya sistem: marshruty evolyucii. Voprosy psihologii, 4, 3–26. (in Russian).

4. Barber M., Murshed M. (2008). Kak dobit’sya stabil’no vysokogo kachestva obucheniya v shkolah. Uroki analiza luchshih sistem shkol’nogo obrazovaniya mira (per. s angl.). Voprosy obrazovaniya, 3, 7–60 (in

5. Russian).

6. Bettinger E., Fairlie R. W., Kapuza A., Kardanova E., Loyalka P., Zakharov A. (2020), Does EdTech Substitute for Traditional Learning? Experimental Estimates of the Educational Production Function. National Bureau of Economic Research. Series NBER Working Paper, 26967.

7. Davydov V. V. (1986). Problemy razvivayushchego obucheniya. M.: Pedagogika. (in Russian).

8. Filmer D., Nahata V., Sabarwal S. Preparation, Practice and Beliefs. A Machine Learning Approach to Understanding Teacher Effectiveness Retrieved from https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/737101636989604541/pdf/Preparation-Practice-and-Beliefs-A-Machine-Learning-Approach-toUnderstanding-Teacher-Effectiveness.pdf (accessed 26.12.2021). (in Russian).

9. El’konin B. D. (2021). Posrednicheskoe Dejstvie v periodizacii detstva. Praktiki razvitiya: obrazovatel’nye paradigmy i praktiki v situacii smeny tekhnologicheskogo uklada : Materialy XXVII nauchno-prakticheskoj konferencii, Krasnoyarsk, 12–14 noyabrya 2020 goda, 26–39. Krasnoyarsk: Avtonomnaya nekommercheskaya obrazovatel’naya organizaciya «Institut psihologii praktik razvitiya». – S. (in Russian).

10. Ermakov D. S., Kirillov P. N., Koryakina N. I., et al. (2020). Personalizirovannaya model’ obrazovaniya s ispol’zovaniem cifrovoj platformy. M. (in Russian).

11. Federyakin D. A., Larina G. S., Kardanova E. Yu. (2021). Measurement of basic mathematical literacy in primary school. Education Issues / Educational Studies Moscow, 2, 199–226. (in Russian).

12. Frumin I. D., Dobryakova M. S., Barannikov K. A., Remorenko I. M. (2018). Universal’nye kompetentnosti i novaya gramotnost’: chemu uchit’ segodnya dlya uspekha zavtra. Predvaritel’nye vyvody mezhdunarodnogo doklada o tendenciyah transformacii shkol’nogo obrazovaniya. M.: NIU VSHE. (in Russian).

13. Goddard R. D., Hoy W. K., & Woolfolk Hoy A. (2000). Collective teacher efficacy: Its meaning, measure, and impact on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 37(2), 479–507.

14. Gordeeva T. O., Sychev O. A., Sidneva A. N. (2021). Ocenivanie dostizhenij shkol’nikov v tradicionnoj i razvivayushchej sistemah obucheniya: psihologopedagogicheskij analiz. Voprosy obrazovaniya, 1, 213–236. (in Russian).

15. Gordeeva T. O., Sychev O. A., Lunkina M. V. (2019). Shkol’noe blagopoluchie mladshih shkol’nikov: motivacionnye i obrazovatel’nye prediktory. Psihologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie, 24(3), 32–42. (in Russian).

16. Gref G. O. Reformy v Rossii nuzhno svesti k razvitiyu kachestva upravleniya. https://ria.ru/economy/20150528/1066861341. (in Russian).

17. Gusel’ceva M. S. (2021). Problema cheloveka v rossijskoj psihologii i za ee predelami. Vestnik RGGU. Seriya «Psihologiya. Pedagogika. Obrazovanie», 2, 72–95. DOI:10.28995/2073-6398-2021-2-72-95. (in Russian).

18. Hattie D. (2017). Visible learning. Moscow: National Education. (in Russian).

19. Kazakova E. I., et al. (2019). Personalized model of education: a methodological guide. M.: ANO «Platform of a new school», 27–33. (in Russian).

20. Kuz’minov Yа. I., Frumin I. D., Abankina I. V., Alashkevich M. Yu., et al. (2019). Kak sdelat’ obrazovanie dvigatelem social’no-ekonomicheskogo razvitiya? M.: Izdatel’skij dom NIU VSHE. (in Russian).

21. Larina G. S., Kapuza A. V. (2020). Cognitive processes in teaching: connection with students’ achievements in mathematics. Education Issues, 1, 70–96. (in Russian).

22. Lebedev O. E. (2004). Kompetentnostnyj podhod v obrazovanii.Shkol’nye tekhnologii, 5, 3–12. (in Russian).

23. Leont’ev D. A., Osin E. N., Dosumova S. Sh., Rzaeva F. R., Bobrov V. V. (2018), Perezhivaniya v uchebnoj deyatel’nosti i ih svyaz’ s psihologicheskim blagopoluchiem. Psihologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie, 23(6), 55–66. (in Russian).

24. Life in the classroom. (2016). M .: Ed. House of the Higher School

25. of Economics. (in Russian).

26. Lonka K., Makkonen J., Berg M., Talvio M., Maksniemi E., Kruskopf M., Lammassaari H., Hietajärvi L., & Westling S. K. (2018). Phenomenal Learning from Finland. Edita.

27. Maire Q., Lamb S., & Doecke E. (2017). Key Skills for the 21st Century: An evidence-based review. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331952440_Key_Skills_for_the_21st_Century_An_evidence-based_review.

28. Odinokova V. A., Rusakova M. M., Usachyova N. M. (2017). Opyt ocenki blagopoluchiya detej v uchrezhdeniyah dlya detej-sirot. Monitoring obshchestvennogo mneniya: ekonomicheskie i social’nye peremeny, 2,

29. –144. (in Russian).

30. OECD (2016). PISA 2015 Results (Volume II): Policies and Practices for Successful Schools. PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264267510-en.

31. OECD (2017). PISA 2015 Results (Volume III): Students’ Well-Being. PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264273856-en.

32. OECD (2021). Positive, High-achieving Students? What Schools and Teachers Can Do. TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/3b9551db-en.

33. Leontiev D. A. (ed.). (2011). Personal potential: structure and diagnostics. Scientific. M .: Smysl. (in Russian).

34. Polivanova K. N. (2020). New educational discourse: well-being of schoolchildren. Cultural-Historical Psychology, 16(4), 26–34. (in Russian).

35. Polivanova K. N., Bochaver A. A., Pavlenko K. V. (2020). Razvitie povedencheskoj avtonomii podrostkov i roditel’skij kontrol’ na primere nezavisimyh peremeshchenij po gorodu. Sovremennaya zarubezhnaya

36. psihologiya, 9(4), 45–55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17759/jmfp.2020090404.

37. (in Russian).

38. Polivanova K. N., Bochaver A. A., Nysskaya A. K. (2017). Growing up of fifth-graders: 1960s vs 2010s. Education Issues, 2, 185–205. (in Russian).

39. Popov A. A. (2019). Didaktika otkrytogo obrazovaniya: Monografiya. Moskva: OOO «Nacional’nyj knizhnyj centr». ISBN 978-5-4441-0273-2. (in Russian).

40. Rubcov V. V., Koul M., Verch Dzh. V., Asmolov A. G., El’konin B. D., et al. (2018). Tvorcheskij potencial kul’tury i chelovecheskoe razvitie (kruglyj stol metodologicheskogo seminara pod rukovodstvom V. V. Rubcova

41. i B. D. El’konina). Kul’turno-istoricheskaya psihologiya, 14(4), 41–51. doi:10.17759/chp.2018140406. (in Russian).

42. Reeves, S., Peller, J., Goldman, J., & Kitto, S. (2013). Ethnography in qualitative educational research: AMEE Guide No. 80, Medical Teacher, 35:8, e1365-e1379. DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2013.804977.

43. UNESCO (2021). Reimagining our futures together: a new social contract for education. Report from the International Commission on the futures of education. https://en.unesco.org/futuresofeducation/.

44. UNICEF (2021). The Changing Childhood Project, UNICEF, New York. ISBN: 978-92-806-5281-9

45. Volkov A. E., Kuzminov Ya. I., Remorenko I. M., Frumin I. D., et al. (2008). Russian education – 2020: a model of education for a knowledge-based economy. Council of Rectors, 9, 11–20. (in Russian).

46. Yakimanskaya I. S. (2000). Personality-oriented education technology. M. (in Russian).

47. Yakimanskaya I. S. (2011). Fundamentals of personality-oriented education. Monograph Moscow: BINOM. Knowledge Laboratory. ISBN 978-5-9963-0198-0. (in Russian).

48. Zeer E. F. (2021). Teoretiko-prikladnye osnovaniya personalizirovannogo obrazovaniya: perspektivy razvitiya. Pedagogicheskoe obrazovanie v Rossii, 1, 17–25. DOI 10.12345/2079-8717_2021_01_02. (in Russian).

49. Znamenskaya O. V., Ostroverkh, O. S., Ryabinina L. A., Khasan B. I. (2009). Monitoring the individual progress of schoolchildren’s educational actions. Problems of Education, 3, 53–74 (in Russian).