The use the technology of critical thinking and the progress of the student in cognitive activity

The hierarchy of competencies formed in the process of liberal arts education can be represented as follows.

Private subject competences, that is, competencies that have a specific meaning and the possibility of forming within the framework of academic subjects. Examples: possession of the skills of isolating the plot elements of a literary text (literature); possession of the skills of writing vowels o and e after sibilants and c (Russian). In the science of history, particular subject competences presuppose the knowledge of individual facts of history by students. To master them, schoolchildren need to have a number of skills, for example, use a map, use a chronological table to explain historical events and phenomena.

Private subject competences are associated with processes and phenomena and are related to the categories of the individual and the particular.

General subject competences imply mastery of key subject concepts and methods of action within the framework of the academic subject. Examples:

perform linguistic and stylistic analysis of the text; possession of the skills of analysis and interpretation of a literary text (literature); explain the causes and consequences of the most significant events (reforms, revolutions, wars, the formation of new states, etc.). General content blocks and general methods of activity within a certain subject are a condition for the implementation of integration ties, the construction of integrated lessons.

The subject level of competence is determined by the knowledge of subject concepts and scientific terminology, knowledge of facts, the level of use of subject teaching technologies, methods and techniques.

Their formation is carried out within the framework of several academic subjects. They relate to the general content of education and, in fact, are suprasubject competencies.

A.V. Khutorskoy gives its own typology of key (metasubject) competencies. He refers to them:

• a.    value-semantic;

• b.    general cultural;

• c.    educational and cognitive;

• d.    informational and communicative;

• e.    social and labor;

• f.    the competence of personal self-improvement.

Unfortunately, in his classification, there is little trace of the connection between the content of education and the methods of educational actions. At the same time, metasubject competences presuppose the formation of universal concepts (abstract-universal), which are a "cell" for a concrete understanding of the subject and determine the ways of combining concepts into the structures of knowledge. This is how the interpenetration of several educational subjects occurs based on the proximity of methods or categorical apparatus. In this case, the formation of metasubject competencies, taking into account the specifics of humanitarian subjects, presupposes the path of ascent from the linguistic level of understanding of key words (universals) to the general cultural one, when these words become cultures, denoting the “thickness” of the cultural sphere of the individual.

In this regard, different definitions of metasubject competences can be distinguished.

Currently, there are many definitions of the concept. All of them confirm how complex language and thinking are and how they are interconnected. Therefore, from the standpoint of each specific area of knowledge: linguistics, psychology, history, philosophy, cultural studies, literary studies - the concept acquires its essential characteristics, which must be taken into account in the process of working with them.

Linguistic theories of a concept are the starting points for understanding its essence. Some scientists believe that a concept always has a verbal expression and is denoted by a word. S.V. Kuzlyakin generally identifies the concept and the word. In the theories of these researchers, the word, linguistic nomination is a means of access to conceptual knowledge. It plays the role of a switch, activating the concept in the human mind, "launching" it into the process of thinking.

At the same time, modern psycholinguistic and linguistic studies show that the mechanism of thinking and the mechanism of verbalization are different mechanisms. This can be proved by the fact that there are concepts that can be verbalized not only by lexemes, but also by a wide range of other linguistic units, or described verbally without directly naming the concept itself (attraction of the earth, bow to one's home).

In the process of mental activity, a concept, like a hologram, turns its different sides, actualizing new features that may well not have a linguistic designation in a person's native language. In addition, the understanding of these signs in different people can be completely different, which is determined by their peculiarities of the psyche, life experience, and culture. Therefore, such psychological concepts as, for example, fear, horror, pleasure, etc., for each person can have their own content, moreover, it is so individual that it may not even be fixed verbally in linguistic practice. Here the concept appears as an individual "bundle " of ideas, knowledge, associations, experiences "in the mental world of a person".

In this case, by codes we mean a system of signs, rules by which information is encrypted and stored, which is subsequently decrypted and interpreted. Cultural codes provide a connection between sign and meaning, help translate the world of designations into the world of meanings, decipher the meaning of cultural phenomena.

Competences associated with understanding, interpretation and use of personal and axiological concepts by students, such as: feat, soul, faith, compassion, mercy, etc.

Competences aimed at comprehending artistic and historical pictures of the world (cultural eras, artistic trends, pictures of the world of specific philosophers, historians and writers).

Thus, the metasubject level of competencies is associated with students' possession of universal educational actions, the ability to study independently, the use of meta-categories (universals) in educational, cognitive and artistic-aesthetic activities and is aimed at the prospect of further continuous education and development.

It should be noted that there is no single classification and an agreed list of key competencies. This is largely due to cultural and educational traditions in a particular region or country. The system of competences they proposed assumed a close connection between theory and life, practical actions and results. The range of competencies offered was determined by the following reference words that define specific actions: study, seek, think, cooperate, get down to business, adapt.