Styles of pedagogical communication

Pedagogical communication is carried out in a variety of forms, depending mainly on the individual qualities of the teacher and his idea of his own role in this process. In psychological and pedagogical literature, this problem is usually considered in connection with the style of pedagogical activity.

There are several classifications of pedagogical styles based on different grounds.

The generally accepted classification of pedagogical communication styles is their division into authoritarian, democratic and conniving.

Within the framework of an authoritarian style of communication, these roles are strictly regulated, and the student has an initially subordinate role. It is under this condition that training and education are carried out as a targeted effect on the child. Along with the indicated shortcomings, this mechanism is fraught with a gradual lagging behind the increasing abilities of the child, which ultimately leads to a mismatch between the pedagogical style and the student’s formed attitudes.

The extreme opposite of the authoritarian is the style of pedagogical communication, which can be regarded as conniving. Outwardly, it allows you to achieve relaxed relationships, but it is fraught with the possibility of losing the teacher’s control over the behavior of the pupils.

The so-called democratic style of communication seems optimal, in which there is a certain regulation of the roles of the participants in the dialogue, which does not infringe, however, the freedom of manifestation of individual inclinations and character traits. It is this style that allows you to flexibly adjust the mechanisms of interaction, taking into account the growing role of the student as a participant in an increasingly equal dialogue.

As opposed to each other, I single out the regulated and improvisational styles of pedagogical interaction, which can also be considered as styles of pedagogical communication.

The regulated style provides for a strict division and restriction of the roles of participants in the pedagogical process, as well as following certain patterns and rules. Its advantage, as a rule, is in the clear organization of educational work. However, this process is characterized by the emergence of new, unexpected conditions and circumstances that are not provided for by the original regulation and cannot be “adjusted” to it without conflict. The possibilities for correcting pedagogical interaction in non-standard conditions within the framework of a regulated style are very low.

The improvisational style in this regard has a significant advantage, because allows you to spontaneously find a solution to each newly emerging situation. However, the ability to productive improvisation is very individual, so the implementation of interaction in this style is not always possible. The advantages of a particular style are debatable; the harmonious combination of the elements of regulation and improvisation in the pedagogical process seems optimal, which allows us to simultaneously meet the necessary requirements for the process and the learning outcome, and also, if necessary, to adjust the interaction mechanisms.

Famous psychologist V.A. Kan-Kalik identified the following styles of pedagogical communication:

• 1.    Communication on the basis of high professional attitudes of the teacher, his attitude to teaching activities in general. They say about such people: “Children (students) follow him literally on his heels!”

• 2.    Communication based on a friendly location. It involves a passion for a common cause. The teacher plays the role of a mentor, senior comrade, participant in joint educational activities. However, familiarity should be avoided.

• 3.    Communication-distance refers to the most common types of pedagogical communication. In this case, the relationship is constantly traced distance in all areas, in training, with reference to authority and professionalism, in education, with reference to life experience and age. This style forms a teacher-student relationship. But this does not mean that students should perceive the teacher as a peer.

• 4.    Communication-intimidation - a negative form of communication, inhuman, revealing the pedagogical insolvency of the teacher resorting to it.

• 5.    Communication-flirting - characteristic of young teachers who seek popularity. Such communication provides only false, cheap authority.

Most often in pedagogical practice there is a combination of styles in one or another proportion, when one of them dominates.

Of the classifications of pedagogical communication styles developed in recent years abroad, the typology of professional positions of teachers proposed by M. Talen is of interest.

Model I - Socrates. This is a teacher with a reputation as a lover of disputes and discussions, deliberately provoking them in the classroom. It is characterized by individualism, lack of system in the educational process due to constant confrontation; students strengthen the defense of their own positions, learn to defend them.

Model II - “Team Leader.” The main thing in the educational process is the achievement of agreement and the establishment of cooperation between students, playing the role of a mediator for whom the search for democratic consent is more important than the result of the discussion.

Model III - The Master. The teacher acts as a role model, subject to unconditional copying and, above all, not so much in the educational process, but in relation to life in general.

Model IV - The General. Avoids any ambiguity, emphasizes exacting, toughly seeks obedience, because he believes that he is always right in everything, and the student, like an army recruit, must obey implicitly the orders given. This style is more common than all taken together in pedagogical practice.

Model V - "Manager". The style, which has spread in radical schools and is associated with an atmosphere of effective classroom activity, encouraging their initiative and independence. The teacher seeks to discuss with each student the meaning of the problem being solved, quality control and evaluation of the final result.

Model VI - "Coach". The atmosphere of communication in the classroom is permeated with the spirit of corporate spirit. Students in this case are similar to the players of one team, where each individually is not important as an individual, but together they can do a lot. The teacher is given the role of the inspirer of group efforts, for which the main thing is the end result, brilliant success, victory.

Model VII - The Guide. The embodied image of the walking encyclopedia. Concise, accurate, restrained. He knows the answers to all questions in advance, as well as the questions themselves. Technically impeccable and that is why it is often frankly boring.

All this testifies to the necessity of organizing the process of forming the style of pedagogical communication with university teachers in the interest of increasing the efficiency of the process of training specialists.

The analyzed experience of the pedagogical activity of many educators convincingly confirms the fact that the creation of a positive psychological attitude oriented towards increasing the efficiency of the educational process, the atmosphere of mutual exactingness and respect, the establishment of moral relationships between all representatives of student groups to a large extent depends on the communication style.

Sources used:

• 1.    Glukhikh E.V. Pedagogical communication as a factor in the professional self-development of a future teacher: Dis.. Cand. ped sciences. - Khabarovsk, 2000

• 2.    Golubeva E.A. On the ratio of abilities and temperament in the structure of personality. // Systematic study of personality // Thesis. doc. All-Union confer. June 19-22, 1991

• 3.   Kapochena L.F. Pedagogical communication as a condition of socio-

  psychological adaptation of the child to school: Dis. ped sciences. - Shuya, 2002

• 4.   Korotaev A.A., Tambovtseva T.S. The study of the individual style of

  pedagogical communication // Psychology Issues. -1990

"Экономика и социум" №12(67) 2019