Педагогический и образовательный дискурсы как институциональный тип дискурса

As the education system changes, the attention of linguists is increasingly focused on the changes in educational discourse that have emerged as a result of processes such as globalization.

Educational discourse is a type of institutional discourse that reflects the demands of society to a greater extent.

The relevance of this work is determined by the fact that in the era of globalization of higher education, it is institutional discourse that represents a substantial unit of communication for representatives of the university community.

Depending on the consideration of a particular problem, the authors of scientific works actively use not only the term educational discourse, but also a number of others such aseducational discourse (Kozhemyakin, 2009), pedagogical discourse (Karasik, 1999; Karasik, 2004; Robotova 2008; Suvorova, 2012).

Thus, the concept of discourse in pedagogy is commonly understood to mean as a hierarchized speech communication that accompanies the process of socially significant interaction of people, considered from the standpoint of their belonging to a particular social group or in relation to a particular typical speech-behavioral situation.

Pedagogical discourse should be considered both as a pedagogical technology and as a learning technology. As a pedagogical technology, discourse reflects the tactics of implementing educational technologies in the educational process under certain conditions.

Pedagogical discourse should accumulate and embody the general features and patterns of the subject. It displays a model of educational and management processes in an educational institution, combines their content, forms and means, and can also cover specialized technologies that are used in other branches of science and practice – electronic, new information, industrial, valeological, etc.

As a technology of education (education, management of the educational process), pedagogical discourse should model the way of assimilation of a specific educational material (concept) within the framework of the corresponding academic subject, topic, question. In many respects, it is close to a separate technique.

Pedagogical discourse has all the features of the system: the logic of the process, the interconnection of parts, the structural and content integrity, conformity to nature, the intensity of all components of the learning process.

A feature of pedagogical discourse is that it can be attributed to productive innovative activity, since creativity plays a special role among its mandatory components. The specificity of pedagogical creativity lies in the fact that its object and result is the creation of a personality, and not an image, as in art, or a mechanism, as in technology. The pedagogical process is the joint creativity of the teacher and pupil in a situation of pedagogical interaction, in the process of which the pedagogical transformation of a person takes place.

If we are having in mind the pedagogical ideas, we talk about the discourse that covers external (goals, means, object of influence, subject of activity, result) and internal (motivation, content, operations) components. It performs gnostic (cognitive), project (prospective planning of tasks and ways to solve them), constructive (cooperation between the teacher and the student), communicative (the interaction of the teacher with students and colleagues), organizational (step-by-step activity) functions.

The properties of modern pedagogical discourse include: dynamism, sociality, integrativity, personalization, dialogue, contextuality, integrity, coherence, situational conditioning, intentionality, value orientation, indiscreteness.

The construction of pedagogical discourse is a consciously organized and controlled process. The participation of students in the construction of pedagogical discourse will help them in the future to independently build a model of any social interaction in accordance with the norms of cultural activity [1, p. 109].

The vast majority of researchers single out such participants in pedagogical discourse as “teacher” and “student”, and a number of researchers emphasize their status-role inequality. The lack of dialogue in the process of interaction between participants in pedagogical discourse contributes to the development of the “army” model of discourse construction, where the main goal of teaching is the complete subordination of the students [4, p. 17].

An important feature of pedagogical discourse is such a characteristic as personalization, in which the student / student as a person occupies a central place in pedagogical interaction.

All of this points to the fact that, pedagogical discourse is an objectively existing dynamic system of value-semantic communication of the subjects of the educational process, functioning in the educational environment. It includes the participants of the discourse, pedagogical goals, values and content.

According to M.A. Lukatsky, educational discourse is a multidirectional activity, the object of which is “to identify:

• -    specific structure of language communication between teacher and student;

• -    meanings of speech messages addressed to each other by participants in the educational process;

• -    features of their speech behavior, understanding and generation of speech products by them;

• -    mental shifts that have occurred in the linguistic consciousness of the participants in the educational process as a result of their interaction” [7, p. 76].

Some researchers, studying educational discourse, emphasize that this is a communicative activity associated with the process of education in educational institutions, as well as with the processes of translation and reproduction of sociocultural models in the field of educational activity.

This point of view is held by: E.Yu. Dyakova (Dyakova, 2006), E.A. Kozhemyakin (Kozhemyakin, 2010), L.N. Polunina (Polunina, 2011), T.N. Astafurov and D.A. Goncharova (Astafurova, Goncharova, 2014), O.N. Isaeva and I.B. Krivchenko (Isaeva, Krivchenko, 2019).

Plenty of researchers expand the boundaries of this formulation. So, N.A. Dubrovskaya clarifies that educational discourse is a set of texts united by a common theme related to the educational activity of a person, which finds its linguistic reflection in a wide variety of functional and stylistic types of texts - from official business and scientific to everyday colloquial (Dubrovskaya, 2013: 62).

Another characteristic feature of educational discourse is its focus on the future. This feature is directly related to the central function of educational discourse – the creation of a certain model of a harmonious socio-culturally developed personality, which implies “... the socialization of a new member of society, the acquisition of professional knowledge and prestigious qualifications” [2, p. 62].

According to E.A. Kozhemyakin, the process of socialization and education is endless, such a situation is excluded in which one could say that an individual has completed education, has become a full-fledged personality, and now he is finally socialized. In this regard, the result of achievement is always in the future [6].

E.A. Kozhemyakin highlights another specific feature of educational discourse –its gradual, gradually growing character. The above feature is not always implemented so clearly in other types of discourse and is usually provided by the competence of the agent (teacher) to adequately assess the situation: “Evaluative speech strategy expresses the social significance of the agent of education as a “bearer and spokesman” of institutionalized knowledge, sociocultural values and norms and is implemented in the right of the teacher evaluate the state of affairs and the student’s verbalized knowledge” [6, p. 27].

Another characteristic feature of educational discourse, noted by E.A. Kozhemyakin, definition [6, p. 33]. The proposed hypothesis is confirmed by the studies of V.I. Karasik, who believes that educational definition has a triple property - an adequate description of the subject (scientific orientation) is required, the definition of the subject must be clear to the recipient of the speech (address orientation), and the procedural nature of the definition, because the point is not to give a definition, but to teach one to define [5, p. 257].

Educational discourse is usually considered at two levels – the micro level (school class, student audience, conference, seminar, teacher-student conversation, etc.) and the macro level (requires the participation of large social groups of the population arguing about socially significant events such as, for example, the reform of education, the introduction of a unified state exam, the transition from free to paid education).

Thus, educational discourse, like pedagogical discourse, is a kind of institutional type of discourse. Educational discourse to a greater extent reflects the demands of society, and its main task is to form the communicative qualities of the student's personality from the standpoint of scientificity, accessibility as integral factors of functioning.The analysis of these types of discourses contributed to the clarification of the definitions, the differentiation and study of their use, as well as the similarities of both common features and differences between different types of discourses, which it seems possible to reflect in the table.

Table 1. Comparison of pedagogical and education al types of discou rse

	Status inequality of participants	Translation of knowledge	Transfer    of moral    and ethical standards	Limited scope of implementation
Pedagogical discourse	√	√	√	√
Educational discourse	-	√	√	-

In conclusion, it would appear that, the main parameter of both types of discourses is the translation of knowledge. Besides it was revealed that in the pedagogical discourse the participants are characterized by role inequality, sometimes accompanied by the presence of criticism from the “privileged” participant, where the student becomes only a passive recipient of the information being broadcast.

Educational discourse has a certain status division of the participants in communication, but nevertheless, communication takes place in a freer form.

Pedagogical and educational discourse is distinguished not only by the transfer of knowledge (i.e., the implementation of the educational function), but also by the moral and ethical attitudes fixed in certain areas of society, which also makes it possible to realize the educational function, i.e., the education of a full-fledged socialized personality.