2. SYSTEM APPROACHES TO MANAGING INNOVATION ACTIVITIES OF COMPANIES

2.2. Application of modeling in innovation activities and its methodological limitations

Currently, among a fairly wide range of specialists, there is an opinion about the universality and omnipotence of modeling. Therefore, very often when managing companies and economic-production systems (EPS), they resort to modeling, using it as a planning tool. However, as numerous sources indicate, in the practical management of companies, modeling as an optimization management method should be approached more carefully.

According to a number of researchers, economic-mathematical modeling as a discipline that studies the processes of constructing, interpreting and applying mathematical models of economic objects to solve problems of analysis, synthesis and forecasting of their activities cannot currently be considered as independent. According to this opinion, the substantive part of the modeling process (selection of indicators, factors, dependencies) is included in economic theory, and the technical part (which in 9 out of 10 cases means the construction of certain statistical models) is included in econometrics. Thus, economic and mathematical modeling turns out to be, on the one hand, broken, on the other, truncated, and the questions of the relationship between all stages of modeling, the correctness of interpretation of modeling results and, consequently, the value of recommendations based on models, seem to be hanging in the air. As a result, results based on the interpretation of insufficiently adequate models (for example, regression dependencies in which the coefficient of multiple determination R 2 is equal to 0.03) are taken seriously. Sometimes an overly broad interpretation of certain components of the model is allowed.

The reason for the cautious approach in modeling practice is the well-known discrepancy between an object and its model: a model is just a simplified representation of reality. A model is a theoretical construct that has some relation to reality, which can be independently discussed and analyzed.

When constructing a mathematical model, it is inevitably necessary to introduce various assumptions and restrictions, and from the total number of parameters of the object, only a few, in the opinion of the developers, are selected, since: firstly, it is impossible to fully identify all the parameters of the object, and secondly, if everything is taken into account in the model there are a large number of them, then it will become very cumbersome and technically difficult to implement, and the content of the modeling will be lost behind a large amount of data. When comparing an object and a model, the question arises of how accurately it describes the object. It is obvious that for the same object, depending on the tasks set and the number of parameters taken into account, many models can be proposed, each of which describes the object with a certain accuracy (more or less adequacy) and uses one or another mathematical apparatus. It is obvious that the models used or developed are not identical to real objects and ongoing processes; the study of models and its properties is not the study of a real object. Since it is impossible to build an absolutely adequate model (implement it), the question arises about its optimally acceptable adequacy, which will allow, under given conditions and in a given time period, to neglect changes in the object.

The current level of development of mathematical modeling practically does not allow any adequate modeling of real objects. Any such object is infinitely complex, and even its verbal description, necessary at the pre-model stage, would require, generally speaking, a text of gigantic volume, practically excluding the possibility of use. Moreover, it makes no sense to count on modeling an object in the form of certain mathematical structures, i.e. elements of some fundamentally different (mathematical) world.

The problem of model suitability, as stated by G. Ya. Goldshtein, which boils down to establishing a quantitative assessment of the measure of adequacy of the adopted mathematical model to the real objects under study in general, is very complex: its solution is associated with mathematical, economic, expert, technical and even philosophical issues. In fact, how can one solve the question of the quantitative measure of the difference between a mathematical model of an object and the real object itself, if the true (complete) description of such an object is never known to the researcher?

Considering that a model is a simplified representation of reality, a very important problem is to determine the purpose of the modeling. Setting a goal, in turn, determines a quantitative indicator of the adequacy of the developed model. In general, the purpose of modeling is to obtain information about an object over time, starting from cognitive purposes and up to obtaining specific data for making management decisions.

Indeed, if a quantitative measure of the adequacy of the model is not established, then the whole idea of ​​​​conducting simulation machine experiments does not stand up to elementary criticism. Until this issue is resolved, the value of the model remains negligible, and the machine simulation experiment becomes a mere exercise in deductive logic. Moreover, as V.V. Olshevsky and other specialists in the field of simulation modeling of complex systems believe, experimenting on a computer with an inadequate model will bring little benefit, since we will simply imitate our own ignorance.

Of no small importance in practical terms is the cost of obtaining simulation results. This cost includes both the cost of developing the model and the cost of its implementation and obtaining the required information. The high cost of obtaining modeling results already raises the question of whether it is worth using modeling at all.

If we take into account numerous examples of successful modeling of a wide variety of physical, biological and economic objects and processes, and at the same time look at them more closely, it turns out that the direct prototypes for these models were not specific fragments of the real world, but their systemic representations, those. the results of their description in the form of systems using certain system-forming features. These descriptions are incomparably simpler than objects, and therefore they are located between the object and its model.

As can be seen in Figure 10, the connection between an object and its model is indirect, since between the object and its model there is a system description of the object. In this case, the gap between the object and its system description can be quite significant. For example, in a system description of an enterprise, only the process of production of products may actually be reflected, while the processes of reproduction of resources are not reflected, since they are beyond the interests of the researcher. It is logical to assume that if a system description of an object S allows one to unambiguously reconstruct an object Q, then the model M built on the basis of such a system description can be called a system model of the object Q.

Figure 10 – Relationship between an object, its system description and model

Modeling the activities of companies (individual areas of activity) has certain specifics. These features reflect:

Instability of statistical characteristics of dependencies, variability of composition and non-stationarity of the action of factors influencing the nature and course of processes modeled at the microeconomic level;

Instability of the enterprise’s external environment;

The presence of a significant subjective component (the influence of decisions made at a given enterprise) as part of the factors of microeconomic processes;

The problematic nature of using statistical methods and approaches in modeling micro-objects, in particular, the difficulty of forming a homogeneous population from similar objects;

The ability to supplement “external” quantitative statistical information about the values ​​of modeled indicators with “internal” qualitative information about the nature of dependence received directly from insiders;

Lack of continuity in modeling, characteristic of modeling macro-objects, extremely limited number (as a rule, absence) of publications on the progress and results of modeling a given process on a given micro-object.

In order to take into account these features when constructing a model, ensuring its adequacy as the ability to reflect the most significant connections in this aspect between the components of the system description of an object and the elements of its model, it is necessary to ensure maximum transparency and comparability of information about the progress and results of modeling as many microeconomic objects as possible .

The complexity of modeling the activities of a real company, in addition, is determined by a number of factors: heterogeneity of manufactured products; irregular production; internal factors destabilizing production; violations of the regularity of supply; delays and irregularity of financial flows; changes in market conditions; marketing features of products; external threats and opportunities; the general economic, technological and social situation, and so on.

Most of these system parameters are probabilistic in nature and, most importantly, are non-stationary. Planning and management based on average characteristics does not give the desired effect, since while it is being carried out, both the system itself and its environment change. All this is aggravated by the non-stationary nature of probabilistic processes. As a result, the use of formal mathematical models is difficult due to the large dimension of the EPS, insufficient a priori information, the presence of poorly formalizable factors, unclear criteria for evaluating decisions made, and so on.

The economic system, as an object of research and application of economic and mathematical methods, is continuously developing in non-stationary conditions. Mathematical programming models, as stated by V. A. Zabrodsky, do not adequately reflect the conditions for the implementation of plans and do not fully take into account the predicted losses caused by the need to localize interference in time and across an ensemble of subsystems. Econometric models for such conditions have practically not been developed.

A realistic approach to solving the problem of managing a company’s activities, according to I. B. Motskus, may be to abandon the search and implementation of an extremely optimal management model and switch to using approximate solutions. In this case, control options that are close to the absolute optimum are sought, rather than the optimum itself. We can assume that in any problem there is a certain threshold of complexity, which can be crossed only at the cost of abandoning the requirements for the accuracy of solutions. If we take into account the cost of computer implementation of solutions, for example, multiextremal problems, then their exact methods for solving them may turn out to be unprofitable compared to simpler approximate methods. The effect obtained from clarifying the solution will not repay the additional costs of finding it. It should be noted that the very multi-parameter nature of the problem “smoothes out” the optimum of the solution and makes it easier for the control system to fall into a region close to the optimum. Moreover, this becomes more and more obvious with an increase in the number of system parameters and their probabilistic nature.

Back in the 60s of the 20th century, scientists drew attention to the fact that the law of distribution of the target function when designing a system with a large number of arguments tends to converge to normal if the target function (or its monotonic transformation) is expressed by the sum of terms, each of which depends on limited number of variables. This condition is met in most real cases of EPS control. This opens the way to the use of optimization methods in managing the activities of companies that minimize the sum of the expected risk associated with deviation in management from achieving the optimum, and the average losses for finding this solution (the cost of designing a control system).

The presence of many factors that determine control in a real EPS and their probabilistic nature, non-stationarity, conditionality in the used economic and mathematical models make real control only approximately optimal, which leads to the need for approximate optimization based on the use of the principle of “horizontal uncertainty”.

Thus, management of the activities of a real company in the general case, for the reasons stated above, can in principle only be adaptive. This is explained, firstly, by the fundamental impossibility of a mathematically accurate determination of the initial conditions of the control object, secondly, by the fundamental impossibility of a mathematically accurate description of all influences disturbing the control object from the external environment, thirdly, by the fundamental impossibility of describing all mutual connections between the elements of the object, fourthly, the nonstationarity of the characteristics of the external environment and the characteristics of the system , , .

It turns out that the company’s activity management system itself is based mostly on subjective assessments of the parameters of the system, environment and relationships of the real EPS. At present, as V.S. Pugachev and other authors claim, methods for studying control processes simultaneously with a large number of objects that have a certain independence of action and freedom of behavior have not yet been developed (and are unlikely to be developed).

In the practice of innovation management, which is one of the company's activities, the temptation to use traditional economic and mathematical methods of optimization management very often arises. However, due to the specific nature of innovation activity, characterized by a high degree of uncertainty and unpredictability, management of innovation activity can in principle only be adaptive. These conclusions are confirmed by the works of and.

Therefore, the author considers it important in the proposed study to disclose the mechanism of adaptive management, as well as the reasons that create the need for its use in innovation management and innovative activity.

Previous

CHAPTER I. Theoretical foundations of the scientific modeling method.

1.1. General concept of a scientific model.

1.2. Determination of the methodological foundations of the process of modeling educational systems.

1.3. General scientific classification of models.

CHAPTER II. Epistemological analysis of the functions of modeling innovative educational systems.

2.1. Structural and functional features of the process of modeling educational systems.

2.2. Characteristics of general trends in the development of educational modeling functions.

CHAPTER III. Theorists substantiate the logic of modeling innovative educational systems.

3.1. Concept, structure and methods of activating innovative processes in education.

3.2. Justification and determination of conditions for the effectiveness of the process of modeling an innovative educational system.

3.3. Characteristics of the main stages of modeling innovative educational systems.

3.4. Expert characteristics of an innovative educational model.

Introduction of the dissertation in pedagogy, on the topic "Theoretical foundations of modeling innovative educational systems"

The increasing pace of change in modern society and the growing role of scientific and technological progress lead to a significant complication of social reality.

The end of the 20th century was a turning point in the development of domestic education. This period is characterized by a change in the value orientations of the school as a social institution; intensity of innovation processes; the emergence of alternative movements and new types of educational institutions; searching for technologies for implementing the proclaimed ideas of education reform.

Modern pedagogy rethinks its own development from the standpoint of analyzing the new sociocultural situation and prospects, as well as taking into account the integration of world and domestic pedagogy. The social and spiritual spheres of different countries are connected with each other and influence each other. A crisis or rise in some causes corresponding changes in others, since all local educational systems constitute a common, open and dynamic system in which the development of individual elements naturally leads to the transformation of others, and ultimately to a change in the entire system.

The current situation in education lays the foundations for the cultural and educational development of the next century, therefore it is important in theory and practice to reach a new level of synthesis of innovations and the best in various pedagogical concepts of the past and ■ ✓ present.

In line with these processes, there is a rethinking of the philosophical foundations of domestic pedagogy. A humanistic philosophy of education based on the principles of new pedagogical thinking cannot but rely on a broad theoretical foundation built by representatives of various scientific schools, who take a new look at the processes of development and evolution, the mechanisms of formation and testing of new concepts and knowledge, and the features of the construction of modern theories.

What is happening in Russia is very significant for the global education system. The new pedagogical thinking of Russia plays a dual role: it actively absorbs the traditional and innovative experience of various countries and at the same time introduces its own experimental and theoretical developments into the foundation of development. While preserving its traditions, domestic pedagogy becomes at the same time more open and dynamic; it comprehends the directions of its own internal development more accurately and on a broad theoretical basis.

The determining factors in the development of modern pedagogical science and practice are:

A new awakening of interest in the study of the problem of personal self-realization, which includes various mechanisms and forms of its manifestation (self-determination, self-identification, self-affirmation, self-development, self-education, as giving oneself an image);

Polysystemism, diversity of cultural values, along with the democratic rights of the child, are also becoming priorities in education;

The search for new ideological orientations, as a search for a new way and way of life, a new attitude towards people, towards nature, towards society;

The orientation of educational systems towards educating a person capable of thinking creatively, systematically, and predictively; see the world from the perspective of diversity and unity, be able to make decisions and bear responsibility for their consequences.

All this “cannot be taken into account when designing the development of modern educational models, which, on the one hand, is strictly regulated by legislative acts (development guidelines); on the other hand, the effect of the novelty of reform has clearly ceased to play the role of a significant guideline; on the third hand, the task of holistic development with This does not simplify, but becomes more complicated. Thus, the optimization task also becomes more complicated: maintaining the integrity and subjectivity of the educational model; ensuring a development regime; transitioning educational models from the theoretical level of conceptual justification to instrumental support for implementation technology; developing innovative content of education and its methodological base; when This requires compliance with standards strictly set by administrative structures.

On the other hand, the current situation is quite favorable for pedagogical science in terms of understanding the innovative transformations that took place in domestic education over the last decade of the 20th century. Any reform requires a serious analysis of the results obtained, determining the effectiveness of the decisions made and identifying key, basic positions that can become starting points for a new innovative development cycle.

It seems to us that the entry into the new millennium is decisive for the modern educational system in preparing the next cycle of innovative development. A preliminary analysis allows us to state that the innovative processes of the last decade in modern domestic schools:

Have not become systemic;

They were not radical enough: their development did not lead to significant progress in the development of the national school;

Not all areas of school life were covered;

They were often forced and catching up in nature;

Individual innovations were poorly coordinated with each other and were implemented chaotically;

There were no specifically formulated common goals for participants in innovation activities; ■ /

There were no or insufficiently developed conditions that stimulated the maximum involvement of people in the work of developing the school and achieving its maximum results;

There were no departments and services ready to carry out innovative activities in the school.

The analysis carried out and the contradictions identified made it possible to identify the research problem and determine the leading method of its research - the method of scientific modeling. Modeling traditionally refers to quantitative methods of pedagogical research. In pedagogical science, the empirical part is clearly visible, reflecting the richest observational material and? experiments; There are theoretical generalizations that complete the systematization of the material, but so far there is no third logical part that characterizes a developed science - the mathematical one. By supplementing qualitative ideas about its subject with formalized generalizations, pedagogical theory acquires the necessary clarity and stability. The classical mathematical apparatus is not suitable for analyzing phenomena of such complexity as pedagogical ones. This contradiction can be resolved on the one hand -■ ? attempts to present phenomena in such a simplified form that is accessible to analysis using traditional mathematical methods, on the other hand, the development and application of new methods of formalized description. Pedagogy as a science developed mainly through analysis - dividing the whole into parts; modeling is based on a synthetic approach: it isolates integral systems and studies their functioning.

Since pedagogical reality is diverse and multidimensional, it is characterized by a variety of models. The nature and method of teaching, educational programs, interaction situations and the structure of relationships in the process of school management, teaching methods and forms of its organization, educational systems are modeled. The vast majority of created educational models relate to didactic phenomena: optimization of the structure of educational material, models for planning the educational process, management of cognitive activity, management of the educational process, diagnostics, forecasting, training design. It is obvious that the application of the modeling method in the educational process was localized, fragmented, and therefore did not reach high efficiency and effectiveness.

Modern consideration of the possibilities of this method of scientific and pedagogical research is caused by the urgent need of pedagogical practice for a holistic understanding of the educational reform of the end of this century and for the development of well-thought-out plans and coordinated programs for a new cycle of innovative transformations in the educational system of Russia.

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE: Development of theoretical foundations ■ ? modeling of the educational system and their testing in the innovation process.

OBJECT OF RESEARCH: Innovative processes in education.

SUBJECT OF RESEARCH: Modeling of an innovative educational system.

RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS: The study was based on two groups of hypothetical provisions.

I. If the innovative processes of a modern school are studied using the method of scientific modeling, then: The mechanisms that ensure the dynamics of the systemic development of the school model are identified;

Models - analogues are determined that allow expanding the search for components - substitutes for the system in a certain problem space;

The analogue relations determined between the original object and its model form a new systemic integral quality of the model, indicating that the act of modeling has taken place;

The process of analytical research of educational systems becomes a special type of pedagogical experiment - a model experiment;

The process of development of the educational system is characterized by increasing activity, combining adaptive and adaptive functions of the model;

The interaction of components within the educational system, and

/ also, the interaction of the system itself with the social environment acquires an informational character;

In the process of building an innovation model, there is a functional integration of subject-subject relationships (experts - consultants - developers - users).

II. If educational systems are modeled using the simulation method, then:

It brings the system to combinational variation with its own elements and structural connections, which will allow it to move on to new system modifications;

It contributes to the emergence of entropy processes as determining factors in the self-development of the system;

It gives the system an integral quality, which brings the model into a multisystem development mode, which will subsequently determine the “collapse” of the system into temporary “routine” functioning;

It will create conditions for the personal development of school students at a high level of goal setting, creative activity, responsibility for decisions and actions, self-analysis, focus on practical activity and its theoretical understanding.

The purpose, subject and hypothesis of the study predetermined the need to set and solve the following TASKS:

1. Determine the methodological foundations of the method of scientific modeling in relation to the characteristics of educational systems;

2. Identify the functional characteristics of educational modeling, with the definition of classification specifics;

3. Determine the conditions that ensure the effectiveness of the process of modeling educational systems;

4. Determine an original object that can be effective and in demand in modern conditions of development of the national school;

5. Build the logic (stages) of educational modeling;

6. Conduct a model experiment based on the original object;

7. Reveal the content of stage-by-stage educational modeling;

8. Design and begin testing an educational and methodological complex that corresponds to the leading ideas and procedural and technological structure of the innovation model.

THEORETICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL BASIS AND SOURCES OF THE RESEARCH:

Research on the problems of the systems approach and system analysis in education (R. Ackoff, I.V. Blauberg, K. Boulding, J. van Gieg, M.S. Kagan, G.P. Korotkoe, V.V. Kraevsky, N. V. Kuzmina, B.F. Lomov, M.N. Skatkin, E.G. Uemov, G.P. Shchedrovitsky, V.A. Yadov, V.A. Yakunin);

Pedagogical research and theories in the field of design, forecasting and management of the development of educational systems, revealing the dialectic of the naturally occurring and artificially created (A.B. Akhutin, V.G. Vorontsova, S.S. Gusev, E.A. Guseva, B.S. Gershunsky, V.I. Zagvyazinsky, V.I. Zhuravlev, E.D. Dneprov, V.V. Kraevsky, K.N. Kantor, V.I.

Ginetsinsky, V.Yu. Krichevsky, V.I. Zagvyazinsky, F.Kh. Cassidy, ■ ✓

B.C. Lazarev, O.E. Lebedev, A.F. Losev, V.I. Zagvyazinsky, V.F. Sidorenko, M.M. Potashnik, V.Ya. Nechaev, A.I. Rakitov, V.E. Radionov, G. Simon, F.R. Filippov, E.G. Yudin and others)

Works of teachers addressed to the problems of activity, communication and relationships, as elements of the holistic educational process (T.K. Akhayan, B.Z. Vulfov, V.V. Gorshkova, I.P. Ivanov,

S.G. Vershlovsky, I.S. Kohn, V.A. Kan-Kalik, T.E. Konnikova, Z.I.

Vasilyeva, L.I. Novikova, K.D. Radina, N.F. Radionova, A.S. ■ ✓

Robotova, V.I. Slobodchikov, I.S. Batrakova, G.I. Shchukina and others) Works in the field of philosophy, sociology, science, devoted to the analysis of modeling as a method of scientific research (N.T. Abramova, Yu.T. Antamonov, N.V. Bochkina, B.A. Glinsky, B.S. Gryaznov, A. A. Gukhman, D. M. Gvishiani, J. Jeffers, A. J. Wilson, B. S. Dynin, A. B. Katsura, V. V. Kelle, E. P. Nikitin, I. B. Novik, M. E. Puusep, B.G. Tamm, P.P. Tavast, R. Shannon, V.A. Stoff, etc.);

Works that explore innovative processes in pedagogical science and practice, leading to changes in educational models (K. Angelovski, N.V. Bochkina, Yu.V. Gromyko, E.N. Gusinsky, E.S. Zair-Bek, V. O.V. Davydov, E.I. Kazakova, I.A. Kolesnikova, V.A. Karakovsky, V.N. Maksimova, G. Nikolis, I. Prigozhin, I. Stengers, A.P. Tryapitsyna, S.A. Raschetina, V.A. Slastenin, G.S. Sukhobskaya, E.P. Tonkonogaya, etc.);

Research on general theoretical approaches to the construction of training in various educational models, on the problems of organizing a wide educational space in them (A.G. Asmolov, Yu.K. Babansky, B.P. Bitinas, A.K. Gromtseva, M.A. Danilov, G. D. Kirillova, I. Y. Lerner, M. V. Clarin, N. D. Nikandrov, M. N. Pevzner, D. Dewey, W. Kilpatrick, R. Berne, M. Montessori, A. Maslow, K. Rogers, V. Franki, J. Holt, D. Howard, etc.).

The source of the research was also our own experience in designing and modeling innovative educational systems.

EXPERIMENTAL BASIS AND RESEARCH METHODS:

The leading research methods were system analysis, ■ / content analysis, system design, thought experiment, theoretical modeling methods, model experiment, diagnostic methods, strategic planning methods, correction-correlating methods, methods for forecasting and generalizing trends in the development of educational systems, testing methods and correction of educational and methodological complexes and educational programs.

The study of innovative educational systems was carried out on the basis of the Pskov regional and city education departments.

The main basis for the research was the experimental model Bilingual School-Laboratory ■ created by the author / Pskov

The preparation of teachers to work in an innovative mode on the basis of the educational model of the Bilingual School-Laboratory took place at specially organized workshops and at special courses and special seminars for graduates of the Pskov Pedagogical Institute.

The problem of the relationship between the “innovative school-laboratory” and the continuous professional development of managers and ✓ teachers of innovative schools in the city and region was studied through a methodological seminar that is constantly operating at the methodological department of the city Department of Education and during course training at the Institute for Advanced Training of Education Workers of the Pskov Region.

LOGIC AND STAGES OF RESEARCH:

The logical structure of the study included the following sequence of steps: primary theoretical study of the problem of general scientific modeling (1987 - 1990); based on the analysis of general scientific literature, ✓ the theoretical essence of the modeling process in educational systems was identified, the necessary conditions for the implementation of this process were determined, the classification characteristics of educational models were determined at the theoretical level (1990 - 1994); The study of theoretical material and the formulation of conceptual approaches to the process of educational modeling made it possible to determine the stages of the modeling process, approve the plan of experimental work and the strategy of the model school development program ■ ✓ at the Expert Council of the Regional Education Committee, as well as begin a model experiment based on the original object according to models of the reform school system of the early 20th century “Winnetka Plan” and its analogue in modern conditions “School of Tomorrow” - author, Ph.D. D. Howard (USA), (1994-1996); completion of pilot studies of the model experiment, transition of the model from the stage of operational research and comprehension ✓ to the stage of synthesis and transition of new knowledge into the innovative model quality of the newly formed system (1996-1998); at the last stage, the main results and theoretical conclusions were formulated about the possibilities and conditions for using the simulation method in the design of innovative educational systems (1998).

THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS ARE MADE FOR DEFENSE:

1. The method of scientific modeling as a method of innovative transformations in a modern school, the leading characteristics of which are:

Dynamics of systemic development of the school model;

Justification of the need to select an analogue model and substitute components in a certain problem space;

Analogue relationships between the original object and the modeled object;

A special type of pedagogical experiment is a model ✓ experiment;

Adaptive and adaptive characteristics of the educational model;

Active informational nature of the developing school model.

2. Determination of methodological features of educational modeling:

System analysis at the stage of searching and posing problems of the process ✓ modeling of innovative educational systems with leading components: model experiment, system development, system adaptation;

Cognitive approach at the stage of decision-making and forecasting the future of the educational system with leading components: cognitive metaphor, information theory, decision-making theory.

3. Definition of educational modeling as a multidimensional, flexible category, allowing instrumental, combinational variation in the structure of its own intrasystem connections.

4. Main approaches and stages of modeling educational systems ✓ based on the patterns of simulation modeling:

Stage of analytical problem formulation and model selection (descriptive stage);

Stage of creation and operational research of the model (explanatory stage);

Stage of synthesizing and transferring knowledge about the model (prescriptive stage)

5. Classification characteristics reflecting the functional ✓ features of modeling innovative educational systems:

Model-form of knowledge,

Model-research,

Model-idealization,

Model-interpretation,

Forecast model,

Model project, ✓

Model-diagnosis,

Model-retrostory,

The model is a different reality.

6. Criteria for the completion of the process of a model experiment in the educational system;

Transition of the system from conceptual and theoretical support of the modeling process to procedural and technological support;

Participation in the process of creating a third, innovative model, not only of the model developers, but also the active inclusion of a team of teachers and researchers of the model in the process of developing an educational and methodological complex; ■ /

The transition of the educational model to the mode of multifunctional, multi-system self-development with pronounced compilative properties.

Conditions that determine the effectiveness of the process of modeling innovative educational systems: determining the development cycle of educational reform in the region; determining the innovative potential of the development team; development of a research program for the modeling process; / identification of consultants (scientific supervisors) for the research program; structuring the educational system by simplifying the creation of a problem map of the system under study).

Leading features in the development of educational systems at each new round of the innovation cycle: conclusions about the potential possibilities of self-development and self-government of the educational system through the manifestation of new systemic qualitative ■ / characteristics of the model object as evidence of the completed act of the modeling process, conclusions about the general characteristics of the development of educational modeling functions, consisting in tendencies towards theoreticism and tendencies towards heuristics.

SCIENTIFIC NOVELTY AND THEORETICAL SIGNIFICANCE

RESEARCH is that it:

A new technological direction has been developed for the study of educational systems of various conceptual orientations using the method of scientific modeling;

For the first time, the essential methodological foundations / defining features of modeling educational systems are revealed;

The process of modeling educational systems using the simulation method has been substantiated and instrumentally developed step by step;

The fact about the possibility of constructing an innovative educational model using the simulation method has been theoretically established and experimentally proven;

The conditions that ensure the effective functioning of the innovative educational model are substantiated;

The predictive nature of the method of modeling innovative educational systems has been proven, determining and predicting trends in the development of pedagogical theory and practice.

PRACTICAL VALUE OF THE RESEARCH:

Based on the theoretical principles of the study, an innovative educational model “Bilingual School” was created and has been functioning for six years;

A complete package of educational and methodological materials has been developed, providing an innovative procedural and technological cycle of the educational process for the preschool department, primary school and the middle level of the basic school;

As part of the activities of the city Methodological Center, a series of workshops were held on the training and use of simulation modeling techniques in order to introduce effective innovations into the educational process of educational institutions;

A class has been opened on the basis of the chemical-technological lyceum, simulating a new round of innovative transformations based on the educational model “Bilingual School”;

The Pskov Montessori school uses simulation technology to more effectively adapt the system to regional and national characteristics;

The author's technology for organizing the educational process of the "Bilingual School" has been accepted for implementation by the Shchelkovo City Gymnasium, training seminars have been held, and educational and methodological support is being pilot tested;

Through a series of special courses and special seminars at the Pskov Pedagogical Institute with the practical implementation of knowledge and skills on the basis of the “Bilingual School”, young specialists are trained to work in an innovative educational institution;

The conditions and conceptual approaches to the creation of a city Model Educational Center have been determined, the purpose of which will be to carry out systematic research work aimed at proactively identifying and solving new problems in the development of the city’s educational system.

RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY of the main provisions and conclusions of the study are determined by the clarity of the methodological positions; completeness and systematic disclosure of the subject of research in its structural, functional and procedural characteristics and the relationship between them; internal consistency of hypothetical provisions and theoretical conclusions; the variety of research methods used, which were interconnected and interdependent; the duration of the study, which was carried out simultaneously at the theoretical and technological levels using a model experiment; the possibility of using the research results in wider educational circles.

APPROBATION OF THE RESEARCH RESULTS was carried out: /

During the activities of the Expert Council of the Regional and City Education Committees;

Materials were presented at the III and IV All-Russian Congresses of Lyceums and Gymnasiums;

At seminars on the problems of innovative education in Kostroma (1991), St. Petersburg (1991, 1994, 1995); Moscow (1994, 1998), Sochi (1995), Nizhny Novgorod (1997);

In the process of teaching students of PSPI named after. CM. Kirov on

✓ special courses “Alternative educational models”,

Instrumental foundations of modeling educational systems";

At the International Conference "Baltic Triangle" (Finland - Sweden - Norway) -1996, Kuopio, Finland;

In the activities of the Center for Educational Technologies under the Main Directorate of Education of the Pskov Region;

At meetings of the departments of pedagogy of the Russian State Pedagogical University named after. A.I. Herzen, PSPI named after. CM. Kirov, laboratory on the problems of developing schools (1987-1997);

At advanced training courses at the Pskov Institute for Advanced Training of Education Workers in the Region;

At scientific and practical conferences on the problem of “Gifted Children” (Presidential Program);

At the Soros seminars on modern educational technologies (1996 - 1998);

THE STRUCTURE OF THE DISSERTATION corresponds to the logic of constructing applied scientific research in the pedagogical field and consists of an introduction, three chapters, a conclusion, and a list of references

381 works) and applications.

Conclusion of the dissertation scientific article on the topic "General pedagogy, history of pedagogy and education"

CONCLUSION

The results of the study confirmed the correctness of the conceptual provisions of the hypothetical provisions put forward and allowed us to formulate the following conclusions:

1. Educational models can outpace social development. They are always alternative and arise as a result of rethinking the real life goals of civilization (that is, they are born as a result of an innovative idea rather than as a result of practice and experience, the latter only help this idea take final shape and develop into a mature model).

2. Educational models are constantly changing and evolving in social space and time. They constantly interact with each other. Their direct or indirect mutual influences and interdependencies, their opposition and alternativeness, manifestations of diffusion or synthesis of revival in new historical conditions and on a different cultural basis create the diversity of relationships that contributes to the development of education as a global process (that is, they take education beyond the framework of national cultures and make its mediator of their dialogue, a space where different cultures converge).

3. The educational process is complex, so all educational models seem to accumulate the development of previous models. The dynamics of the development of educational models is not a direct, progressive development, but constant return movements, cycles and periods of critical reassessment of the values ​​of education.

4. Ideas for the content and organization of education are associated with a complex of leading ideas that dominate in the consciousness of society. At the same time, educational models are relatively autonomous and can develop (if they are truly culturally appropriate) regardless of the political situation, since educational systems can be guided by certain universal values ​​and ideals. This allows educational models to be valuable in themselves and to change, ■ / obeying their own logic and internal laws of self-development.

Thus, educational systems must have their own cultural imperative, addressed to the inner world of individuality and its creative potential, and therefore not subject to temporary sociocultural influences, ahead of the present and constantly looking to the future.

Dissertation bibliography author of the scientific work: Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences, Svetenko, Tatyana Vladimirovna, St. Petersburg

1. Abaturova L. Algorithmic analysis of brain function and optimization of the learning process. M., 1966. - 220 p.

2. Abdeev R.F. Philosophy of information civilization. Textbook allowance. M.: MAI, 1994. - 334 p.

3. Abramova I.G. Game techniques. St. Petersburg: Education, 1992.-43 p.

4. Abramova I.G. Risk in the teaching profession. St. Petersburg: Education, 1994. - 55 p.

5. Abramova N.T. Cybernetic model and theory building: Experiment, model, theory. M.; Berlin: Science, 1980. - 188 p.

6. Current issues of continuing pedagogical education: vol. 1./ Responsible editor N.F. Radionova. St. Petersburg: Education, 1994. -168 p.

7. Current issues of developing interest in learning. / Ed. G.I. Shchukina. M.: Education, 1984. - 176 p.

8. Akchurin I.A., Vedenev M.F., Skachkov Yu.V. Methodological problems^! mathematical modeling in natural science. // Questions of philosophy. 1966. - No. 4. - P. 64-76.

9. Angelovski K. Teachers and innovations: Book. For the teacher: Per. with maked. M.: Education, 1991. - 159 p.

10. Ansoff I. Strategic management. M.: Economics, 1989. -519 p.

11. Anthology of pedagogical thought in Russia in the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries. / Ed. V.D. Shadrikova. M.: Pedagogy, 1990.

12. Apokin I.A., Maistrov L.E., Edlin I.S. Charles Babidge. M.: Nauka, 1981.- 126 p.

13. Arkhipova V.V. Collective organizational form of the educational process. St. Petersburg: Exclusive, 1995. - 135 p.

14. Afanasyev V.G. Social information. M.: Nauka, 1994. -201 p.

15. Akhayan T.K. Leading pedagogical ideas of Russian pedagogy of the 19th century // Current problems of continuous pedagogical education, vol. 11. St. Petersburg: Education. -1995.-S. 120-141.

16. Babansky Yu.K. Selected pedagogical works. M.: Pedagogy, 1989. - 558 p.

17. Bagrino^sky K.A. Modeling of production management processes. M.: Knowledge, 1974.- 151 p.

18. Bagrinovsky K.A., Egorova N.E. Simulation systems in planning economic objects. M.: Nauka, 1980. - 235 s.

19. Baraeva O.Yu. The director's activity strategy as a factor in school development: Auth. diss. Ph.D. pedagogical sciences St. Petersburg: Institute of Adult Education RAO, 1995. - 16 p.

20. Batrakova I.S. Theoretical foundations of the organization of the pedagogical process in a modern school: Author's dissertation of Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences. St. Petersburg, 1995. - 37 p.

21. Bakhtin M. Aesthetics of verbal creativity. M.: Art, 1979. - 423 p.

22. Belkin P.G. Scientific guidance and adaptation of a young scientist. / Problems of managing a scientific team. M., 1982. S. 150167.

23. Benveniste G. Mastering planning policy: Transl. from English -M., 1994.-304 p.

24. Berdyaev N.A. Free spirit philosophy. M., 1994. - 342 p.

25. Bertalanffy JI. General systems theory: a critical review // Research on general systems theory. M., 1969. - P. 23-82.

26. Bespalko V.P. Components of pedagogical technology. M.:f1. Pedagogy, 1989. 192 p.

27. Bestuzhev-Lada I.V. Search social forecasting: Perspective problems of society. M., 1984. - 222 p.

28. Bim-Bad B.M. Pedagogical trends at the beginning of the twentieth century: Lectures on educational anthropology and philosophy of education. M.: Russian Open University, 1994. -112 p.

29. Blauberg I.V., Mirsky E.M., Sadovsky V.N. System approach and system analysis // System Research. -M., 1982.- P.47-64.

30. Blauberg I.V., Yudin E.G. Philosophical problems in the study of systems and structures. // Questions of philosophy. 1970. - No. 5. - pp. 13-15.

31. Large systems. Theory, methodology, modeling. / Ed. B.V. Gnedenko. M.: Nauka, 1971. - 178 p.

32. Bondarevskaya E.V. Value foundations of personality-oriented education. //Pedagogy, 1995, No. 4, pp. 5-7.

33. Bochkina N.V. Independence of the student’s personality: System-structural analysis. L.: RGPU, 1991. - 86 p.

34. Bratko A.A. and others. Modeling of mental activity. M.: Mysl, 1969. - 383 p.

35. Bruner J. Psychology of cognition: Trans. from English M.: Education, 1977.-412 p.

36. Bruno M. Deep crises and reform // Economic Issues. - 1997. - No. 2. - P. 4-29.

37. Bulat H.JI. Methodology for identifying scientific and social roles in a research team. // Problems of managing a scientific team. M.: 1982. - pp. 295-306.

38. Buneeva" T.K. The problem of collective forms of teaching in pedagogical theory and practice. M., 1945. - 314 p.

39. Bourbaki N. Elements of mathematics. General topology. Basic structures. M.: Fizmatgiz, 1958. - 400 p.

40. Burkov V.N., Daneev B., Naneva T.B. and others. Large systems. Modeling of organizational mechanisms. M.: Nauka, 1989.246 p.

41. Burkov V.N., Irikov V.A. Models and methods of managing organizational systems. M.: Nauka, 1994. - 270 p.

42. Buslenko N.P. Modeling of complex systems. M.: Nauka, 1968.- 261 p.

43. Bush R., Mosteller F. Stochastic models of learning ability. - M.: Fizmatizdat, 1962. - 483 p.

44. Bul V.L. Changing culture: towards a dynamic sociology of culture // Social sciences abroad. 1989.- No. 3.- P. 141-145.

45. Van Gigh>J. Applied general systems theory. M.: Mir, 1981. -726 s

46. ​​Vasilyeva Z.I. Conceptual approach to updating educational programs, standards and systems. //

47. Educational standards and assessment. St. Petersburg : Education, 1995. -S. 7-10.

48. Vasilyeva Z.I. Experimental work in a developing school: Approaches, problems, search. St. Petersburg: Education Committee of the St. Petersburg City Hall, 1993. - 23 p.

49. Introduction to scientific research in pedagogy./ Ed. V.I. Zhuravleva. M.: Education, 1988. - 239 p.

50. Wecker JI.M. Perception and the basics of its modeling. L.: Leningrad State University Publishing House, 1964.- 193 p.

51. Vendrovskaya R.B. Essays on the history of Soviet didactics. -M.: Pedagogy, 1982.- 127 p.

52. Ventzel K.N. The ideal school of the future and ways to implement it: A reader on the history of school and pedagogy in Russia. M.: Education, 1974. - 429 p.

53. Ventzel K.N. Culture and education. // Free education, 1907-08, No. 7. P.28-29.

54. Verbitsky A.D. Active learning in higher education. M.: Higher School, 1991. - 205 p.

55. Vernadsky V.I. Scientific thought as a planetary phenomenon: Reflections of a naturalist. M.: 1977. - 99 p.

56. Vershlovsky S.G. etc. Teacher: close-up. Social and pedagogical problems of teaching. St. Petersburg: SPbGUPM, 1994. - 134 p.

57. Vilenkin N.Ya. Popular combinatorics. M.: Nauka, 1975. -207 p. S

58. Introduction of pedagogical achievements into school practice. /Ed. V.E. Gmurman. M.: Pedagogy, 1981. - 144 p.

59. Vnukov V. Ideas of modern pedagogy. // Military knowledge, 1923, 10.-N.Z-6. ✓

60. Vorobyov G.G. Is it easy to study in an American school? M.: Education, 1993. - 189 p.

61. Woodcock M., Francis D. The liberated manager: Translated from English. -M.: Delo, 1991.-320 p.

62. Gansberg F. Pedagogy. Call for initiative in teaching: Vol. I. St. Petersburg: Publishing house of the newspaper "School and Life", 1916.-96 p.

63. Gasilov V.B. Scientific school phenomenon and research program of scientific studies. // Schools in science. - M., 1977, pp. 119-153.

64. Gastev Yu.A. Homomorphisms and models. M., 1975. - 216 p.

65. Guineria E.A. Criticism of some futurological concepts in US pedagogy. Tbilisi, 1987. - 380 p.

66. Gvishiani D.M. Dialectics of developing systems, development and management. //System aspects of the development concept. M., 1985, issue. 4, pp. 5-13.

67. Gvishiani D.M. Dialectics, systematicity, global modeling. // Questions of philosophy. 1983. - No. 5. - pp. 127-138.

68. Gvishiani D.M. Methodological problems of modeling global development. // Questions of Philosophy. - 1978. No. 2. - P. 1428.

69. Gvishiani D.M. Modeling the processes of global development and cooperation. M., 1991.- 205 p.

70. Gvishiani D.M., Lutkov V.I. Simulation modeling and production management. M., 1978.- 41 p.

71. Ge F. History of education and upbringing. M.: Knigoizdat, 1912. -657 p.

72. Gale D. Theory of linear economic models. / Per. from English/

73. L.I. Gorkova; Ed. N.N. Vorobyova. M.: Publishing house. Foreign lit., 1963.-418 p.

74. Georgieva G.S. Education as a sphere of culture: Ways of renewal. M., 1992. - 170 p.

75. Herder I.G. Ideas for the philosophy of human history. M.: Nauka, 1977.-703 p.

76. Gershunsky V.S., Prukha Y. Didactic prognostication. Kyiv: Vishsha School, 1979. - 239 p.

77. Gessen "S.I. Fundamentals of Pedagogy. Introduction to Applied Philosophy./ Editor and compiler P.V. Alekseev. M.: Shkola-Press, 1995.-448 p.

78. Giddens E. Elements of the theory of structuration // Modern social theory: Bourdieu, Giddens, Habermas. Novosibirsk, 1995.- P. 4 0-72.

79. Gilbukh 3. Attention: gifted children. // Pedagogy and psychology.-1991. No. 9. - 45 p.

80. Ginetsinsky V.I. Fundamentals of theoretical pedagogy. SPb.: SPb. University, 1992. - 149 p.

81. Guitart-i-Lzhel Joan. Linguistic ordering in the education system of Catalonia. // Perspectives: educational issues, 1988, No. 1, pp. 16-18.

82. Glinsky B.A., Gryaznov B.S., Dynin B.S., Nikitin E.P. Modeling as a method of scientific research. Epistemological aspect. M.: Moscow State University Publishing House, 1965. - 246 p.

83. Glushkov V.M. Epistemological nature of information modeling. // Questions of philosophy. 1963, No. 10, pp. 13-18.

84. Gnedenko B.V. Probability theory course. M.: Gostekhizdat, 1954. - 400 p.

85. Goncharov L.N. School and pedagogy in the USA before the Second World War. M.: Pedagogy, 1972.-319 p.

86. Gorelik V.A., Kononenko A.F. Game-theoretic models of decision-making in ecological-economic systems. M.: Radio and communication 1982. - 224 p.

87. Gorsky D.P. Issues of abstraction and concept formation. M.: Publishing house. USSR Academy of Sciences, 1961.-410 p.

88. Gromtseva A.K. Teaching methods at the present stage of school development. ;// Teaching methods in secondary schools. D.: LGPI, 1985. - P. 3-14.

89. Gromtseva A.K. Formation of student readiness for self-education. M.: Education, 1983. - 144 p.

90. Gryaznov B.S., Dynin B.S., Nikitin E.P. Epistemological problems of modeling.// Questions of Philosophy, 1967, No. 2. -P.66-77.

91. Good G.H., Makol R.E. Systems engineering. Introduction to large systems design. M.: Sov. radio, 1962. - 382 p.

92. Guzeev V.V. System bases of educational technology. M.: Knowledge, 1995.- 135 p.

93. Humboldt V. Theory of Education. // Perspectives: issues of education. 1989, No. 1, pp. 138-142.

94. Gurlitt L. Creative education. My life with children. M.: Printing house of the Red Calendar, 1911. - 56 p.

95. Gusinsky E.N. Personality education. M.: Interpraks, 1994. -135 p.

96. Davydov V.V. Problems of developmental education: Experience of theoretical and experimental research. M.: Pedagogy, 1986. - 239 p.

97. Dalton-shgan in the Russian school. Vol. I. Year of work in a difficult school, II degree. /Ed. I.S. Simonov and N.V. Chekhov. JL: Brockhaus-Efron, 1926. - 228 p.

98. Dalton plan in the Russian school./ Ed. I.S. Simonov and N.V. Chekhov. D.: Brockhaus-Efron, 1924. - 138 p.

99. Dalton plan and the latest trends in Russian pedagogical thought./ Ed. Ignatieva B.V. - M., 1925. 98 p.

100. Danilov M.A. General methodology of science and special methodology of pedagogy in their relationships. M.: APN USSR, 1971.-36 p.

101. Danilov-Danilyan V.I., Rybkin A.A. Modeling: system-methodological aspect // System research. - M., 1982. -P. 182-209.

102. De"Kaluwe Marx E., D., Petri M. School development. Models and changes. Kaluga: Institute of Sociology, 1993. - 239 p.

103. Demin M.V. Nature of activity. M.: Publishing house of Moscow University. -ta, 1984. 168 pp./

104. Johnson R. et al. Systems and management. M.: Mir, 1971. - 647 p.

105. Dzhurinsky A.N. Foreign school: history and modernity: textbook. M.: Publishing House of the Russian Open University, 1992. - 177 p.

106. Dzarasov S.S. Everyone about management. - M.: Mysl, 1986. - 155 p.

107. Dialectics and system analysis. / Ed. D.M. Gvishiani. M.: Nauka, 1986. - 335 p.

108. Dixon J. Systems design. Ingenuity, analysis and decision making. M.: Mir, 1968. - 240 p.

109. Dmitriev T.D. A critical analysis of didactic thought in the United States. M.: Pedagogy, 1987. - 102 p.

110. Dneprov" E.D. Modern education reform in Russia: historical background, theoretical foundations, stages of preparation and implementation: Dissertation in the form of a scientific report. Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences. St. Petersburg, 1994. - 88 p.

111. Dneprov E.D. The fourth school reform in Russia: A manual for teachers. M.: Interpraks, 1994. - 248 p.

112. Ezhelenko V.B. Pedagogical method. St. Petersburg: SZO RAO, 1995. -333 p.

113. Zhuravlev V.I. Pedagogy in the system of human sciences. M.: Pedagogy, 1990 - 165 p.

114. Zagvyazinsky V.I. Pedagogical foresight. M.: Pedagogy, 1982.- 160 p.

115. Zaire-Bek E.S. Fundamentals of pedagogical design: Textbook. A manual for undergraduate pedagogical students. SPb.: RGPU im. A.I. Herzen, 1995. - 234 p.

116. Zaire-Bek E.S. Theoretical foundations of teaching pedagogical design: Dissertation of Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences. -SPb.: Russian State Pedagogical University named after A.I. Herzen, 1995. 410 p.

117. Zaripov" R.H. Machine search for options when modeling the creative process. / Edited and with additional assistance by M.G. Gaase Rappoport. - M.: Nauka, 1983. - 232 p.

118. Zeman I. Cognition and information. M.: Progress, 1966. - 253 p.

119. Zinoviev A.A., Revzin I.I. Logical model as a means of scientific research. //Questions of Philosophy, 1960, No. 1. P.82-90.

120. Zinchenko V.P., Morunov E.B. A developing person. M.: Trivola? 1994. - 333 p.

121. Ilyasov I.I., Galatenko N.A. Designing a training course for an academic discipline. M.: Logos, 1994. - 206 p.

122. Innovative management: Textbook for students. M.: Banks, exchanges, UNITY, 1997. - 327 p.

123. Jordanian H.H. Organization of children's environment. M.: Education worker, 1925.- 27 p.

124. Itelson L.B. Mathematical modeling in psychology and pedagogy. //Questions of philosophy. 1965. - No. 3. - P.58-68.

125. Iyapinen L.Ya. On the meaning of the terms “organization” and “self-organization” in modern science and philosophical literature // Uch. notes from the University of Tartu. 1983. - No. 630.-P.84-104.

126. Kagan M.S. Human activity: Experience in systems analysis. M.: Politizdat, 1974. - 328 p.

127. Kagarov E.G. Modern pedagogical movement in Western Europe. .- M.: Education worker, 1928. 294 p.

128. Kazakova E.I. Theoretical foundations of the development of a comprehensive school: Author's dissertation for doctor of pedagogical sciences. St. Petersburg, 1995.-34 p.

129. Kazakova E.I., Tryapitsyna A.P. Dialogue on the ladder of success. St. Petersburg: XXI century, 1997.- 157 p.

130. Karakovsky V.A. Become human. Universal human values ​​are the basis of a holistic educational process. M.: New School, 1993. - 80 p.

131. Karpova T.F. The educational situation in Russia in the first half of the 20th century. Rostov-on-Don.: Pedagogical✓University, 1994.- 278 p.

132. Kartsev V.P., Koroleva G.N. Role profile of the head of a research team and research effectiveness. / Problems of activity of scientists and scientific teams. - M.: 1979 -. Vol. 2, pp. 289-293.

133. Kay E. The Age of the Child. M.: Publication by V.M. Sablin, 1906. - 303 p.

134. Keisler G.J. Cheng-Chen-Chun. Theory of continuous models.

135. M.: Mir, 1971.- 184 p. ✓

136. Kershensteiner G. Selected works. M.: Book publishing house of K.I. Tikhomirov. 1915. - 322 p.

137. Kilpatrick W.H. Basics of the method. M.-L., 1928. - 48 p.

138. Kirillova G.D. Theory and practice of the lesson in the conditions of developmental education. M.: Pedagogy, 1980. - 159 p.

139. Kirpichev M.V. Similarity theory. M.: Publishing House of the Academy of Sciences of the SSR, 1953. - 93 p.

140. Clarin M.V. Innovations in global pedagogy: learning through inquiry, play and discussion. Riga: NPC "Experiment", 1995. - 176 p.

141. Clarin M.B. Innovative teaching models in foreign pedagogical searches. M.: Arena, 1995. - 222 p.

142. Clarin M-V. Pedagogical technology in the educational process. M.: /1. Knowledge, 1986. 75 p.

143. Clark M. Educational technology or pedagogical technology: issues of education. //Prospects. 1983. - No. 2. - P.77-92.

144. Kovalevsky E. Public education in the USA. St. Petersburg, 1895. - 592 p.

145. Kolesnikova I.A. Theoretical and methodological foundations of the modern educational process: Textbook. JL: LGPI, 1988.-82 p. /

146. Kolichenko A.K. Developing personality and pedagogical technologies. St. Petersburg, 1992. - 99 p.

147. Collings E. Experience of the American school using the project method. M.: New Moscow, 1926. - 286 p.

148. Communications in modern science. - M., 1976. 438 p.

149. Queen G.N. The leader and problems of interpersonal perception. // Problems of managing a scientific team. M., 1982.-S. 74-97.

150. Korotyaev B.I. Pedagogy as a set of pedagogical theories. M.: Education, 1986. - 208 p.

151. Koryakov P.P., Sumkov B.G. Simulation of dynamic processes. -M.: Knowledge, 1973.-63 p.

152. Kotlyarevsky Yu.L., Shantser A.S. The art of modeling and the nature of play. M.: Progress, 1992. - 104 p.

153. Kofman A., Debazey G. Network planning methods. M.: Progress, 1968.- 180 p.

154. Kochergin A.N. Modeling thinking. M.: Politizdat, 1969. - 224 p.

155. Krichevsky V.Yu. Democratization of school life. M.: Knowledge, 1991.-40 p.

156. Krichevsky V.Yu. Professional activity of the director of a comprehensive school as an object of interdisciplinary research: Author of Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences. St. Petersburg: RGPU, 1993. - 36 p.

157. Krushanov A.A. About the nature of management. // Information and management. Philosophical and methodological aspects. M.: Nauka, 1985.- 244 p.

158. Kuzmin E.S., Bogdanov V.A. Modeling. // Methods of social psychology. -L., 1977.- P. 151-160.

159. Kulyutkin Yu.N. Heuristic methods in the structure of decisions. M.: Pedagogy, 1970. - 232 p.

160. Kumecker L, Shane JS. Freedom to learn, freedom to teach: A manual for teachers. M.: Public Education, 1994. - 160 p.

161. Kuhn T. Structure of scientific revolutions. M.: Progress, 1977.- 297 p.

162. Kurdyumov S.P., Malinetsky G.G. Synergetics theory of self-organization: ideas, methods, prospects. - M.: Knowledge, 1983. -63 p. ,

163. Kushnir A.M. Pedagogy of a foreign language. // School technologies. 1996. - No. 7. - 191 p.

164. Campbell D. Models of experiments in social psychology and applied research. -M., 1980.- 391 p.

165. Lagosha B.A. Methods and models for improving organizational structures. M.: Economics, 1988.- 190 p.

166. Levin L. New ways of school work. Project method. - M., 1925. - 68 p.

167. Levshin L.A. Logic of the pedagogical process. M.: Knowledge, 1980. -96 p.

168. Lednev B.S. Contents of education. M.: Higher School, 1989.- 360 p. "

169. Leibin V.M. Models of the world and the image of man. A critical analysis of the ideas of the Club of Rome. - M., 1982. - 253 p.

170. Leibman I.I. Science as a social institution. L., 1971.- 177 p.

171. Lem S. System of technologies. - M.: Progress, 1970. - 607 p.

172. Leontyev A.M. Activity. Consciousness. Personality. M.: Politizdat, 1975. - 304 p.

173. Lerner I.Ya. The learning process and its patterns. M.: Knowledge, 1980-96 p.

174. Lessing G. E. Education of the human race. M.: Artist. Literature, 1953. - 640 p.

175. Lynch A.D. Practice of the Dalton Plan in West-Green-skkool. M., 1926. -49 p.

176. Lomov B.F. Methodological and theoretical problems of psychology. M.: Nauka, 1984. - 444 p.

177. Lotov A.B. Introduction to economic and mathematical modeling. -M.: Nauka, 1984.-392 p.

178. McKee W.F. The meaning of languages ​​in the modern world. // Perspectives.- 1993.- No. 1.-S. 14-17.

179. McKee W.F., Siguan M. Education and bilingualism. M.: Pedagogy, 1990.- 180 p.

180. Maksimova V.N. Examination of a pedagogical experiment at school. St. Petersburg: Education Committee of the St. Petersburg City Hall, 1994.-90 p.

181. Mannerman E. Cognitive theory of metaphor // Theory of metaphor.-M., 1990.- pp. 357-386.

182. Markova A.K., Matis T.A., Orlov A.B. Formation of learning motivation. ?M.: Education, 1990. 191 p.

183. Marchuk G.I. Mathematical modeling in environmental problems. M.: Nauka, 1982.- 317 p.

184. Maslow A. Self-actualization: Personality Psychology. M., 1982. -110 p.

185. Mede V., Piorkovsky G. Children's giftedness. Experimental methods for selecting gifted children. M.: Education worker, 1925.- 49 p.

186. Meerovich M., Shragina JI. Fundamentals of a culture of thinking. // School technologies. 1997. - No. 5. - P. 200.

187. Interdisciplinary approach to the study of scientific creativity./ Ed. V.V. Davydova. M.: Nauka, 1990. - 172 p.

188. Meiman E. Essay on experimental pedagogy. M.: Mir, 1916. - 462 p.

189. Mesarovic M., Mako D., Takahara I. Theory of hierarchical multi-level systems: Transl. from English - M.: Mir, 1972. - 280 p.

190. Methodological problems in the development of pedagogical science. //

191. Ed. P.R.Atutov, M.S.Skatkin, Ya.S.Turbovsky. M.: Pedagogy, 1985. - 240 p.

192. Methods of systematic pedagogical research. D.: Leningrad State University, 1980.- 172 pp.t

193. Mizhuev P.G. School and society in America. St. Petersburg, 1902. - 160 p.

194. Models and methods for studying socio-economic processes. / Scientific ed. Dan. Yu.N. Gavrilets.- M.: Publishing house. Center, Economics and Mathematics Institute of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1976.- 219 p.

195. Models and methods for studying social and economic processes. M.: Publishing House Center. Economics Mathematics Institute of the USSR Academy of Sciences.-219 p.

196. Models and methods for the formation and multi-criteria selection of preferred system options. - M., 1981. - 360 p.

197. Modeling and control in developing systems./ Ed. member corr. USSR Academy of Sciences Tsypkina.- M.: Nauka, 1978.- 264 p.

198. Modeling of pedagogical situations./ Ed. Yu.N. Kulyutkina, G.S. Sukhobskaya. M.: Pedagogy, 1981. - 119 p.

199. Modeling of global development processes and cooperation. /Ed. D.Ya.Gvishiani. M.: Nauka, 1991.- 206 p.

200. Modeling of socio-economic processes. / Ed. ./Dan. Yu.N. Gavrilets. M.: Publishing house. Center, Economics and Mathematics Institute of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1991.- 99 p.

201. Moiseev N.H. Elements of the theory of optimal systems. M.: Nauka, 1975.- 436 p.

202. Young teacher in the system of continuing education. / Ed. S.G. Vershlovsky. M.: APN USSR, 1986 .- 97 p.

203. Montessori M. Method of scientific pedagogy. M.: Montessori Center, 1993. - 168 p.

204. Moskalenko A.T. Methodology of scientific knowledge as a special philosophical discipline. Methodology in the field of theory and practice. Novosibirsk, 1988. - p.

205. Mochenov G.A., Nochevnik M.N. On the issue of the social ✓psychological climate of the research team. - M., 1970. - 22 p.

206. Murakami Y., Kumon S., Sato S. Society as a civilization // Problems of the philosophy of history: tradition and innovation in the sociocultural process. - M.: INION, 1989. pp. 126-155.

207. On the path to pedagogical self-education. Experience in applying the Dalton principle. /Ed. MM. Rubinstein. M.: Mir, 1925.-319 p.

208. Nechaev "A.P. Practical guide to experimental research of children. M.: Mir, 1925. - 120 p.

209. Nechaev V.Ya. Sociology of education. M.: MSU, 1992. - 200 p.

210. Nikandrov N.D. Problems of bourgeois didactics of higher education: Dr. diss. D., 1973. - 374 p.

211. Nikitina A.G. Foresight as a human ability. M.: Mysl, 1975.- 149 p.

212. Nikitina G.V., Tryapitsyna A.P. Development of creative and research skills of students. D.: LGPI. - 1989. - 59 p.

213. Novik I.B. On modeling complex systems. M.: Mysl, 1965. - 334 p.

214. New views on geographical education: Translation from English. /Ed. V.P.Maksakovsky, L.M.Pancheshnikova M.: Progress, 1986.- 461 p.

215. New values ​​of education: Ten concepts and essays: Collection: Vol. 3. M.: Innovator, 1995. - 154 p.

216. New values ​​of education: Cultural and multicultural environment of schools: Collection: Vol. 4. M.: Innovator, 1996. - 184 p.

217. New values ​​of education: Contents of humanistic education: Collection: Vol. 2. M.: Innovator, 1995. - 104 p.

218. New ""values ​​of education: Education and community: Collection: Vol. 5. M.: Innovator, 1996. - 144 p.

219. New values ​​of education: Thesaurus for teachers and school psychologists: Collection: Vol. 1. M.: Innovator, 1995. - 114 p.

220. Education in the world on the threshold of the 21st century. / Ed. Malkova Z.I. idr.-M., 1991.-67 p.

221. Public education in the United States. / Comp. Hippo. St. Petersburg: Publishing house of A. Kochetov, 1872.- 373 p.

222. Ovakimyan Yu.O. Modeling the structure and content of the learning process. M.: MGPI im. V.I.Lenin, 1976. - 123 p.

223. Opoytsev V.I. Equilibrium and stability in models of collective behavior. M.: Nauka, 1977.- 111 p.

224. Experience in applying the Dalton principle: On the path to pedagogical self-education. / Ed. M.M.Rubinshtein. M.: Mir, 1925.-319 p.

225. Main directions and trends in the development of pedagogical science in the late 19th and early 20th centuries: Coll. Scientific works / Ed. K.I. Salimova. M.: Rotaprint NII OP APN USSR, 1980. - 164 p.

226. Parkhurst E. Education and training according to the Dalton plan. -M., 1925.- 44 p.

227. Peltz D., Andrews F. Scientists in organizations. M., 1973.- 250 p.

228. Perlaga I. Innovation in organizations. M. - 1980. - 143 p.

229. St. Petersburg school. Theory and practice of forming a multivariate educational system. / Ed.

230. O.E.Lebedeva. St. Petersburg: Education Committee of the St. Petersburg City Hall, 1993. - 62 p.

231. Pikelnaya N.V. Creative fundamentals of management. M., 1990. - 198 p.

232. Pinkevich A.P. Pedagogy: T 2.: Labor school. M.: Education worker, 1927. - 263 p.

233. Planck M. Unity of the physical picture of the world: Sat. Articles. M., 1966.-23 p.

234. Plekhanov A. Pedagogical theory and practice of M. Montessori. // Prospects. 1993. - No. 1. - P.81.

235. Plotinsky Yu.M. Analysis of the risk of social reforms // On the way to post-industrial civilization. Materials of the 11th International Kondratieff Conference. - M., 1996. - P.228-237.

236. Plotinsky Yu.M. Theoretical and empirical models of social processes: Textbook. Benefit. M.: Logos Publishing Corporation, 1998. - 280 p.

237. Plotinsky Yu.M. Cyclical models for forecasting the development of the United States // Bulletin of Moscow State University. Ser. 18 "Sociology and political science". - 1996. - No. 2. - P. 68-70.

238. Polya D. Mathematics and plausible reasoning. M.: Foreign. lit., 1957. - 440 p.

239. Polyakov "S.D. In search of pedagogical innovation. M., 1993.62 p.

240. Popper K. Logic and the growth of scientific knowledge: Transl. from English / Comp., ed. and entry article by Sadovsky V.N. M.: Progress, 1983. - 346 p.

241. Pospelov G.A., Irikov V.A., Kurilov A.E. Procedures and algorithms for the formation of complex programs. M.: Nauka, 1985.- 420 p.

242. Potashnik M.M. Pedagogical creativity: Developmental problems and experience: A manual for teachers. K.: Rad.shk., 1988. - 187 p.

243. Prigozhin A.I. Innovation: incentives and barriers. M.: Politizdat, 1989. - 270 p.

244. Prigozhin I., Nikolis G. Self-organization in nonequilibrium systems. M.: Mir, 1979. - 511 p.

245. Prigozhin I., Stengers I. Order from chaos: A new dialogue between man and nature. M.: Progress, 1986. - 429 p.

246. The nature of models and models of nature. M.: Mysl, 1986.- 269 p.

247. Professional competence and mobility of teaching staff: Conference materials. / Ed. S.G. Vershlovsky, G.S. Sukhobskaya. St. Petersburg : Institute of Adult Education RAO, 1994. - 140 p.

248. Radina K.D. Methodological foundations of pedagogy // Current problems of continuous pedagogical education, Vol. 11. -SPb.: Education, 1995. P.111-120.

249. Radionov V.E. Analysis of the approach to pedagogical design of schools of a new type. // Humanitarianization of education. L.: LGPI, 1990. - pp. 178-182.

250. Radionova N.F. , Raschetina S.A., Titova E.V. Methodological recommendations for preparing for experimental work at school St. Petersburg: Education, 1992. 43 p.

251. Reitman W.R. Cognition and thinking. Modeling at the level of information processes. - M.: Mir, 1968. - 300 p.

252. Rakitov A.I. Philosophy of the computer revolution. M.: Politizdat, 1991. - 287 p.

253. Raschetina S.A. The relationship between the goals and methods of education in the educational process: Author's note. ped. Sci. JL, 1988.

254. Rogers K. Towards the science of personality. // History of foreign psychology (30-60 years of the XX century). Texts. - M., 1986. - P.228.

255. Rozanov V.V. Twilight of enlightenment. - M.: Pedagogy, 1990. - 480 p.

256. Rothberg Iris. US bilingual education policy. // Perspectives.- 1988.- No. 2.- P. 16-21.

257. Sadovsky V.N. Foundations of general systems theory. M.: Nauka, 1974.- 276 p.

258. Sadovsky V.N. Systems approach and general systems theory: status, main problems and development prospects //System Research. M., 1987. - pp. 29-54.

259. Simon V. Society and education: Translated from English. M.: Progress, 1989.-200 p.

260. Self-organization: psycho and sociogenesis. - St. Petersburg Publishing House. University, 1996. - 197 p.

261. Independent work of students and issues of programmed learning. // Kalinin, 1968

262. Sventsitsky A.JI. Social psychology of management. JI., 1986.176 p.

263. Sventsitsky A.P. Social psychology of management. JL, 1986. -176 p.

264. Sergeev V.M. Cognitive methods in social research // Language and modeling of social interaction. - M.: Progress, 1987. - P. 3-20.

265. Serikov V.V. Personal approach in education: Concept and technology. Volgograd: Peremena, 1994. - 150 p.f

266. Skatkin M.H. Methodology and methods of pedagogical research. M.: Pedagogy, 1986. - 152 p.

267. Smirnova B.E. Modeling the activity of a specialist based on a comprehensive study. - D., 1984. - 176 p.

268. Smirnova B.E. Modeling the activities of a specialist based on a comprehensive study. L., 1984. - 176 p.

269. Smolkin A.M. Active learning methods. M.: Higher School, 1991.- P75 p.

270. Joint activities: Methodology, theory, practice. M.: Nauka, 1988. - 232 p.

271. Current state of operations research theory. / Ed. N.N. Moiseeva.- M.: Nauka, 1979.- 311 p.

272. Modern problems of the history of education and pedagogical science: Interuniversity collection: in 3 volumes / Ed. Z.I.Ravkina. M.: RAO, 1994.

273. Spencer; D. Mental, moral, physical education. -St. Petersburg, 1906.-p.

274. Xuequn Yan. Bilingualism in China. // Perspectives: Educational Issues.- 1988.- No. 1.- P. 26-34.

275. Talyzina N.F. Theoretical problems of programmed learning. M., 1969.- 210 p.

276. Tamm B.G., Puusep M.E. and others. Analysis and modeling of production systems. / Ed. Tamma B.G. M.: Finance and Statistics, 1987. - 191 p.

277. Tarasov V.V. What to be a teacher in a new school. M.: Pedagogy Press, 1992. - 157 p.

278. Tarrow N. Language, interculturalism and human rights // Perspectives. - 1993. - No. 4.-S. 11-18.

279. Theoretical foundations for the formation of professional skills of school leaders: Collection of scientific works. / Ed. E.P. Tonkonogoy. - M.: Publishing House of the Academy of Pedagogical Sciences of the USSR, 1988. 74 p.

280. Turner J. Analytical theorizing // THESIS.- M., 1994.- T.2. No. 4. - pp. 119-157.

281. Titova E.V. If you know how to act: Conversation about educational methods: Book. for the teacher. M.: Education, 1993. - 192 p.

282. Tretyakov P.I. Managing a school based on results: The practice of pedagogical management. M.: New School, 1998. - 288 p.

283. Tryapitsyna A.P. Organization of creative educational and cognitive activities of schoolchildren. D.: LGPI, 1989.-91 p.

284. Tryapitsyna A.P. Pedagogical foundations of educational and cognitive activity of schoolchildren: Dissertation for Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences. D., 1991. - 307 p.

285. Tryapitsyna A.P. The development of pedagogical science as a scientific problem.// Herzen readings: Current problems of the development of pedagogical science. St. Petersburg: RGPU, 1995. -S. 10-12.

286. Uemov A.I. Analogy in the practice of scientific research. From the history of physical and mathematical sciences. M.: Nauka, 1970. - 264 p.

287. Uemov A.I. Logical foundations of the modeling method. M.: Mysl, 1971.- 310 p.

288. Uemov A.I. Systems approach and general systems theory. M.: Mysl, 1978 - 272 p.

289. Umov N.A. The evolution of worldviews in connection with the teachings of Darwin. /

290. Preface to the book. K. Stern. Evolution of the world. T.1.- M., 1911.- P./30.

291. Unt I. Individualization and differentiation of training. M.: Pedagogy, 1990. - 192 p.

292. Management based on results: Translated from Finnish. / General ed. and limit. J.A.Leymann. M.: Progress, 1993. - 320 p.

293. School development management. /Ed. M.M. Potashnik and V.S. Lazarev. M.: New School, 1995. - 462 p.

294. Ufimtseva N.V. Ethnic and cultural stereotypes:/cross-cultural research. // News of the USSR Academy of Sciences: series of literature and language. Vol. I.- 1995.- No. 3.- P. 180.

295. To the teacher about pedagogical technology. / Ed. L.I. Ruvinsky. -M.: Pedagogy, 1987. 160 p.

296. Ushinsky K.D. Pedagogical essays in 6 volumes: T.2. M.: Pedagogy, 1987. - 294 p.

297. Fedorets G.F. The problem of integration in the theory and practice of teaching: Paths of development. L.: LGPI, 1990. - 82 p.

298. Feldsh^ein D.I. Psychology of personality development. M.: MPA, 1994.- 192 p.

299. Filatova E. Socionics for you. - St. Petersburg, 1994. - 314 p.

300. Filippov V.A., Larichev O.I., Boychenko V.S. Methods for long-term planning of scientific research and development. // Sociological problems of science. - M., 1974. - P. 498.

301. Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary. M.: Soviet Encyclopedia, 1989. - 814 p.

302. Philosophical and psychological problems of educational development. /Ed. Davydova V.V. - M., 1981. - 260 p.

303. Forrester D. World dynamics. M.: Nauka, 1978, - 166 p.

304. Fortunatov A.A. The theory of the labor school in its historical development: 4.1: From Thomas More to Karl Marx. M.: Mir, 1926. - 374 p.

305. Franks V. Man in search of meaning. M.: Progress, 1990. - 278 p.

306. Froebel F. Pedagogical works in 4 volumes. Human education: T.1. M.: Publication by K.I. Tikhomirov. - 1913. - 369 p.

307. Frolov I.T. Problems and prospects for philosophical studies of scientific knowledge. // Questions of philosophy. -1984.- No. 1.- P. 40-44.

308. Fromm "E. Anatomy of human destructiveness. M.: Republic, 1994. - 447 p.

309. Fagerlind I., Shestedt B. Europe: Trends and problems. // Perspectives. - 1992. - No. 1-2.

310. Hublin D. Formation of educational skills: Transl. from English M.: Pedagogy, 1986. - p.

311. Haken, Herman. Synergetics: Hierarchies of instabilities in self-organizing systems and devices. / Per. from English Yu.A. Danilova; Ed. and with a preface. Yu.L. Klimontovich.- M.: Mir, 1985.- 419 p.

312. Khantseverov F.R., Ostroukhov V.V. Modeling of space systems for studying the Earth's natural resources. M.: Mechanical Engineering, 1989. - 263 p.

313. Harre R. The second cognitive revolution // Psychological Journal. - 1996.-T. 17.-No. 2.-S. 3-15.

314. Heckhausen X. Motivation and activity, - M., 1986. 392 p.

315. Hicks Ch. Basic principles of experimental design. M.: Mir, 1967.- 406 p.

316. Khmel T. Pragmatic pedagogy and its role in American school education. M., 1970. - 291 p.

317. Howard X. School of Tomorrow: Trans. from English M.: Moscow Center for Interethnic Comparative Education, 1992.- 20 p.

318. Hall A.D. Experience in methodology for systems engineering. M.: Soviet radio, 1975. - 446 p.

319. Chavchanidze V.V., Gelman O.Ya. Modeling in science and technology // Cybernetics, thinking, life. M.: Mysl, 1964. - 510 p.

320. Chernikov M.V. Self-organizing systems: methodological approaches and the problem of management // Society and people: Ways of self-determination. Vol. 1.- St. Petersburg, 1994. pp. 79-88.

321. Cherry K. Man and information. M., Communication. - 1979, - 180 p.

322. Chekhlova Z.F. Activities are the basis for the formation of a student’s personality: Auth. Doctor of Ped.Sc. - St. Petersburg; 1992. - 20 p.

323. Chekhov N.V. Types of Russian school in their historical development. - M.: Mir, 1923. - 148 p.

324. Shapiro E.L. The place of scientific and information activities in culture // Informatics and culture. Novosibirsk: Nauka, 1994. -P.82-94.

325. Shapovalenko S.G. Theoretical problems of programmed learning. // M., 1965

326. Sharrelman T. Labor school. M., 1918.-91 p.

327. Schwalbe B., Schwalbe X. Personality, career, success: Translation with him. M.: Progress, 1993. - 240 p.

328. Shannon K. Works on information theory. M.: Publishing house Foreign. lit., 1963.-829 p.

329. Shannon R. Simulation modeling art and science. -M.: Mir, 1978.-418 p.

330. Shilkov Yu.M. Epistemological foundations of mental activity. St. Petersburg : University, 1992. -183 p.

331. Shmalgauzen I.I. Factors of evolution. M.; D.: USSR Academy of Sciences, 1968. -451 p.

332. Schopenhauer A. About education. / Per. with him. V.A. Popova. M.: Russian creativity of printing and publishing, 1902.- 16 p.

333. Steingauz M.M. Laboratory classes. 3rd ed. M., Mir, 1925.29 p.

334. Shtoff V.A. Modeling and philosophy. - M.: Nauka, 1966.300 pp.✓

335. Shtoff V.A. The role of models in cognition. D., 1963.- 128 p.

336. Shulgin V.N. Social work of the school // GUS Programs. Pedagogical courses at home. 1926. - No. 8-9.

337. Shchedrovitsky G.P. and others. System of pedagogical research: Methodological analysis. // Pedagogy and logic. M.: Kastal, 1993. -S. 16-200.

338. Shchedrovitsky G.P. Selected works. M.: School of cultural politics, 1995. - 800 pp.✓

339. Shchedrovitsky P.G. Essays on the philosophy of education. M.: Ped. Center "Experiment", 1993. - 156 p.

340. Shchukina G.I. Activation of students' cognitive activity in the educational process. M.: Education, 1979. - 160 p.

341. Shchukina G.I. Pedagogical problems of forming cognitive interests of students. M.: Pedagogy, 1988. -203 p.

342. Eddinal E. Persiva F. Games, imitations and the social significance of science. // Impact: Science and Society. - 1984. No. 2. - P. 77-87.

343. Yusufbekova N.R. General foundations of pedagogical innovation: experience in developing the theory of innovative processes in education. g-M., 1991.-p.

344. Yaglom A.M., Yaglom I.M. Probability and information. M., 1973.511 p.

345. Yakunin V.A. Learning as a management process: Psychological aspects. D.: Ed. Leningrad University, 1988. - 160 p.

346. Yakunin V.A. Psychology of management of educational and cognitive activity. Students. D.: Leningrad State University, 1986. - 44 s.

347. Yanzhul E.H. Practice of the project method in American schools. G

348. D.: Brockhaus-Efron, 1925.- 111 p.

349. Yaroshevsky N.G. Program-role approach to the study of a scientific team. // Questions of psychology. - 1978. - No. 3. P. 4053.

350. Yaroshevsky N.G. History of psychology. 3rd ed. - M., 1985. - 571 p.

351. Ackoff R. L., Gharajtdadhi J. Reflection on Systems Practice // Systems Research. 1996. Vol. 13. No. 1. P. 13-23.

352. Boyd W., King E.J/ The History of Western Education. N.Y., 1954. -487 p. "

353. Broadbeck M. Models, meaning and theory.- N.Y.: L.Gross, 1959. -373 p.

354. Bruce Tina. Time to Play in Early Childhood Education. London.: Ward Lock Educational. - 1992. - 241 p.

355. Burt C. Mental and Scholastic Tests. Dublin, 1941. - 69 p.

356. Davies L.J., Ledington W.J. Creativity and metaphor in soft systems methodology // J. of Applied Systems Analysis 1987. Vol. 15. P. 31-35.

357. Eden C. Cognitive mapping // Eur. J. of Operational Res. 1988. Vol. 36. No. l.P. 1-13.

358. Enhancing the Curriculum for Able Students: A Staff Developmentf

359.Package. Edinburgh. - 1994. - 73 p.

360. Fichte J.G. Roden an die deutsche Nation. Stuttgart, 1994. - 270 p.

361. Flood R.L. Total Systems Intervention (TSI): a Reconstitution // J. of the Operational Res. Soc. 1995. Vol. 46. ​​No. 2. P. 174-191.

362. Forrester J.W. Nonlinearity in high-order models of social systems // Eur.J.of Opnl. Res. 1987. Vol. 30. P. 104-109.

363. Forrester J.W. System Dynamics and the Lessons of 35 years // A Systems based approach to Policymacking / Ed.by De Green U.B. Boston: kluwer, 1995. P. 199-239.

364. Gaines B. General Systems Research: Quo Vadis // General Systems Yearbook. 1979. Vol. 24. P. 1-9.

365. Goldenweiser A. The Principle of Limited Posibilities // Journal of American Folklore. 1913. Vol. 26. P. 259-290.

366. Green K. B.de. Cognitive Models of International Decisionmaking and International Stability // Systems Research. 1987. Vol. 4. No. 4. P. 251267.

367. Gruber A. Time for a Change: On the Pattern of Diffusion of Innovation//Datdalus. 1996. No. 1. P. 19-42.

368. Hallinan M.T. The sociological study of social change. 1996 Presidential Address // American Sociological Review. 1997. Vol. 62 No. l.P. 1-11.

369. Harvey D.L., Reed M. Social Science as the Study of Complex Systems // Chaos Theory in the Social Sciences/ Ed. by L. D. Kiel and E. Elliot Ann Arbor.The Univ.of Michigan Press, 1996.P. 295-323.

370. Herbart J. F. Pedagogische Schriften / Zweiter Band /. Leipzig.: Verlag von Leopold voss, 1875. - 694 p.

371. Introduction to the Traditional Reform-Schools in the Netherlands.-Amst. $995.- 114 p.

372. Kawerau S. Bunt entschiedener schulreformer. Berlin, 1992. - 141s.

373. Kerschensteiner G. Begriff der Arbeitsschule. B. G. Teubener in Leipzig und Berlin, 1913. - 143 p.

374. King E. G. Society, Schools and Progress. London, 1956. - 178 p.

375. Klaus G. Kibernetik in philosophischer Sicht. Berlin, 1961. P. 246.

376. Maruyana M. The Second Cybernetics: Deviation-Amplifiing Mutual Causal Processes // Technological forecasting and social change. 1994. Vol. 45. 1. P. 93-102.

377. Mingers J. A Comparison of Maturana,s Autopoietic Social Theory and Giddens Theory of Structuration // Systems Research. 1996. Vol. 13. No. 4. P. 469-482.

378. Modis T. Fractal Aspects of Natural Growth // Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 1994. Vol. 47. No. 1. P. 63-73.

379. Montessori M. The Montessory Method.-Edinborugh, 1912.-123 p.

380. Oliva T.A. Information and Probability Estimates: Modeling the Firm’s Decision to Adopt a new Technology // Management Science. 1991. Vol. 37. No. 5. P. 607-623.

381. Parkhurst H. Education on the Dalton Plan. London, 1922.- 187 p.

382. Richardson G.P. System Dynamics: Simulation for Policy Analysis from a Feedback Perspective // ​​Qualitative Simulation, Modeling and Analysis / Ed. P.A.Fishwick.N.Y.: Springer. 1991. P. 144-169.

383. Schon D.A. Generative metaphor: A perspective on problem-solving in social policy // Metaphor and Thought / Ed.A. Ortony.Cambridge: Univ.Press. 1993. P. 137-163.

384. Sewell W. A theory of structure: Duality, agency and transformation // American journal of sociology. 1992. Vol. 98. No. 1. P. 1-30.

385. Terman L.M. The Intelligence of Schoolchildren.- Thomson and1. Thomson, 1921.- 67 p.f.

386. The Early History of Science and Learning in America // Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society .- 1943, Vol. 87, No. 1, July 14.

387. Tsouvalis C., Checland P. Reflecting on SSM: The Divining Line Between “Real World” and “Systems Thinking World” // Systems Research. 1996. Vol. 13. No. 1. P. 35-45.

388. Vermeersch E. An analysis of the concept of culture. In: The concept and dynamics of culture/ Ed. B. Bernardi. The Hague: Mouton, 1977. - P. 9-70.

389. While L.X. The concept of cultural systems: A key to understanding of tribes and nations.- N.Y.: Columbia Univ. Press, 1975. 183 p.

Modeling - as an innovative approach in teaching preschool children

Kokshetau - 2016

Content

1. Introduction

1.1 Relevance of the modeling method

1. 2 Psychological and pedagogical coverage of the modeling method.

2. Modeling in the educational process

2.1 Types of models

2.2 Modeling in a speech development class

2.3 Modeling as a way to develop cognitive interest in children

Conclusion.

List of used literature

Relevance of the topic.

The new millennium needs a new modern education system that would meet the requirements of the state and society, that is, it is necessary to keep up with the times. Today, as many scientists around the world note, instead of basic education, which served as the foundation for a person’s entire professional activity, “education for life” is required. The main mechanism of activity of a developing preschool institution is the search and development of innovations that contribute to qualitative changes in the work of a preschool institution. Nowadays, the teaching profession does not tolerate lags behind the times. Therefore, the educational activities of our kindergarten combine time-tested technologies and new developments. I build my work in an innovative direction: “Modeling method in teaching preschoolers.” Modeling is one of the relativelybad" methods of mental training.

The relevance of using visual modeling in working with preschoolers is that:

A preschool child is very flexible and easy to teach, but most children are characterized by rapid fatigue and loss of interest in activities. Using visual modeling creates interest and helps solve this problem.

The use of symbolic analogy facilitates and speeds up the process of memorizing and assimilating material, and forms techniques for working with memory.

Using a graphic analogy, children learn to see the main thing and systematize the acquired knowledge.

The formation of visual modeling skills occurs in a certain sequence with an increase in the share of independent participation of preschoolers in this process. From here, we can distinguish the following stages of visual modeling:

Assimilation and analysis of sensory material;

Translating it into sign-symbolic language.

Using visual modeling in my work, I teach children:

obtain information, conduct research, make comparisons, draw up a clear internal plan for mental actions and speech statements;

formulate and express judgments, draw conclusions;

the use of visual modeling has a positive impact on the development of not only speech processes, but also non-speech ones: attention, memory, thinking.

The modeling method is effective because it allows the teacher to maintain the cognitive interest of preschoolers throughout the entire lesson. It is the cognitive interest of children that promotes active mental activity and long-term and sustained concentration of attention. With the help of diagrams and models, preschoolers learn to overcome various difficulties; the positive emotions they experience - surprise, the joy of success - give them confidence in their abilities.

In the preparatory period I use the following games: “What does it look like?”, “Who is hiding?”

At the initial stage of work, in early preschool age, models are used that are similar to real objects and characters, then you can use geometric shapes whose shape and color resemble the object being replaced. Starting from the middle group, I use models with a minimum of details, as well as mnemonics for composing descriptive stories, retelling fairy tales, asking riddles, and independently composing fairy tales for children of senior preschool age.

The versatility of the support patterns allows them to be used in various types of children's activities. Modeling is used in directly organized activities (in educational areas) and in the independent activities of children to generalize their ideas about the environment.

To successfully achieve the goals of an educational institution, a variety of material resources and trained personnel are required, as well as the desire of the teachers themselves to work effectively and creatively. In recent years, as a result of the introduction of the achievements of psychological and pedagogical science and advanced pedagogical experience into the work of educators, many new effective forms and methods of improving the professional skills of teachers have emerged. The experience of our kindergarten shows that the most effective forms are master classes, workshops, open viewings of organized learning activities and integrated events.

At the present stage of work of preschool educational institutions, the topic of interaction between all participants in the educational process is relevant. The most significant area is cooperation with the families of pupils.

Currently and in my future work, I will continue to use the modeling method in the integration of the educational process.

Psychological and pedagogical coverage of the modeling method.

Many famous teachers deal with the problem of modeling. In modern didactic literature, the idea of ​​modeling as one of the teaching methods is widespread, although modeling has been known as a scientific method for a very long time.

V. A. Shtoff defines a model as “a means of displaying, reproducing one or another part of reality for the purpose of its deeper knowledge from observation and experiment to various forms of theoretical generalizations.”

V.V. Kraevsky defines a model as “a system of elements that reproduces certain aspects, connections, functions of the subject of research.” Friedman notes that “in science, models are used to study any objects (phenomena, processes), to solve a wide variety of scientific problems and thereby obtain some new information. Therefore, a model is usually defined as a certain object (system), the study of which serves as a means for obtaining knowledge about another object (original).

Issues of modeling are considered in logical-philosophical works from the standpoint of using models to study certain properties of the original, or its transformation, or replacing the original with models in the process of any activity (I.B. Novikov, V.A. Shtoff, etc. ).

The widespread dissemination of similar views among preschool teachers in the 90s of the 20th century led to the fact that preschoolers often came to 1st grade in these years, brought up in the position of rejecting systematic learning and targeted intellectual development in a preschool educational institution. And this discrepancy had a particularly painful impact on school teaching in the two leading subjects in primary school: mathematics and the Russian language.

An analysis of the literature in which the term “model” is used shows that this term is used in two meanings: 1) in the meaning of a theory and 2) in the meaning of an object (or a process as a special case of an object), which is reflected by this theory. That is, on the one hand, the model is abstract in relation to the object (abstract model), and on the other, concretizing (concrete model). Consistently considering the main meanings of the term “model”, the author of the monograph “Modeling and Philosophy” V.A. Stoff offers the following definition: “A model is understood as such a mentally represented or materially realized system that, by displaying and reproducing an object, is capable of replacing it in such a way that its study gives us new information about this object.”

Modeling is one of the means of understanding reality. The model is used to study any objects (phenomena, processes), to solve various problems and obtain new information. Consequently, a model is a certain object (system), the use of which serves to obtain knowledge about another object (original). For example, a geographical map.

The visibility of models is based on the following important pattern: the creation of a model is carried out on the basis of the preliminary creation of a mental model - visual images of the objects being modeled, that is, the subject creates a mental image of this object, and then (together with children) builds a material or figurative model (visual). Mental models are created by adults and can be transformed into visual ones with the help of certain practical actions (in which children can also participate); children can also work with already created visual models.

To master modeling as a method of scientific knowledge, it is necessary to create models. Create together with children and ensure that children take a direct and active part in making models. On the basis of such work, important changes occur for the full mental development of children - mastery of the system of mental actions in the process of internalization.

Modeling is directly related to a model and is a system that provides knowledge about another similar one. Cognitive transformations are carried out on an object - a model, but the results are related to the real object. An idealized object is also a type of modeling, but an imaginary constructed object that has no analogue in reality. Modeling is a logical operation, with the help of which a given object and characteristics that are inaccessible to perception are examined. Basically, there are models: subject, subject-schematic and graphic.

The concept of “model” implies different things: a certain design, a reproduction of an object for a specific purpose, an ideal sample. To fulfill these properties, the modeling and the modeled object must be similar. The reproduction is not complete, but the object is presented in a form for analysis. It can be ideal or material in natural or artificial form. The content of an object is determined by what was obtained during the modeling process. It can represent things, properties or relationships of a structural, functional or genetic type. Models have: clarity, abstraction and fantasy, hypotheticality and similarity . Keeping in mind the properties of the object that is being reproduced, models can be: substrate, structural and functional. They are also: cognitive and non-cognitive (educational). They have a creative, representative and heuristic function. Providing insight into the object and reproduction of its properties and relationships, the model embodies the goal and is a tool for achieving it. Modeling involves preliminary knowledge about an object, transfer of knowledge from model to object, and practical testing of acquired knowledge. Modeling always has a pre-fixed goal and is not just a form of materialization of a relationship previously discovered in the mind, but the action of its construction, which gives it a heuristic character. Cognitive models provide the acquisition of new knowledge, and educational models provide for the mastery of this knowledge.

Types of models

For preschoolers, different types of models are used:

1. First of all, subject ones, in which the design features, proportions, and interrelationships of parts of any objects are reproduced. These can be technical toys that reflect the principle of the mechanism; building models. An object model is an earth globe or an aquarium that models an ecosystem in miniature.

2. Subject-schematic models. In them, essential features, connections and relationships are presented in the form of mock-up objects. Nature calendars are also common subject-schematic models.

3. Graphic models (graphs, diagrams, etc.) convey generally (conditionally) the characteristics, connections and relationships of phenomena. An example of such a model would be a weather calendar kept by children using special symbols to indicate phenomena in inanimate and animate nature. Or a plan of a room, a doll's corner, a route diagram (the path from home to kindergarten), labyrinths.

For the purpose of introducing, as well as consolidating the images of models, didactic, role-playing games are used, games that satisfy children's curiosity, help to involve the child in the active assimilation of the world around them, and help master the ways of knowing the connections between objects and phenomena. The model, revealing the connections and relationships necessary for cognition, simplifies the object, representing only its individual aspects, individual connections. Consequently, the model cannot be the only method of cognition: it is used when it is necessary to reveal for children this or that essential content in an object. This means that the condition for introducing models into the process of cognition is the preliminary familiarization of children with real objects, phenomena, their external features, specifically represented connections and mediations in the surrounding reality. The introduction of a model requires a certain level of development of mental activity: the ability to analyze and abstract the features of objects and phenomena; imaginative thinking that allows you to replace objects; ability to establish connections. And although all these skills are formed in children in the process of using models in cognitive activity, introducing them, mastering the model itself and using it for further cognition requires a level of differentiated perception, imaginative thinking, coherent speech and a rich vocabulary that is already quite high for a preschooler. Thus, the development of the model itself is presented in the form of children’s participation in creating the model, participation in the process of replacing objects with schematic images. This preliminary mastery of the model is a condition for its use to reveal the connection reflected in it. Visual modeling stimulates the development of children’s research abilities, attracts their attention to the features of an object, helps determine ways of sensory examination of an object and consolidates the results of the examination in a visual form.

Forming independence, sociability, and the ability to operate with language symbols will help the child in his studies at school. Thus, sign-symbolic activity is constantly used in school. Each academic subject has its own system of signs and symbols. With their help, the student encodes the information being studied. Modeling occupies an important place in the educational activities of primary schoolchildren. This is a necessary component of the ability to learn, and correct speech is one of the indicators of a child’s readiness for school, the key to successful literacy and reading. The introduction of visual models into the learning process allows for more targeted development of children's speech, enriching their active vocabulary, strengthening word formation skills, forming and improving the ability to use various sentence structures in speech, describe objects, and compose a story. When using visual modeling techniques, children become familiar with a graphical way of presenting information - a model.

In the senior and preparatory groups, visual modeling methods include: designating objects using a variety of substitutes; use and creation of different types of conditionally schematic images of real objects and objects; the ability to read and create a graphic image of the characteristics of objects belonging to a particular class, species, genus (transport, plants, animals, etc.); the ability to navigate in space using its schematic representation; the ability to create a plan of a real space (plan of a room, a kindergarten site, a street, etc.);

the ability to use a space-time model when retelling and composing stories; independent creation of models according to your own plans.

Schemes and models of various structures (syllables, words, sentences, texts) gradually accustom children to observing language. Schematization and modeling help the child see how many and what sounds are in a word, the sequence of their arrangement, and the connection of words in a sentence and text. This develops interest in words, speech sounds, communication, and improves the child’s speech and thinking activity. When organizing work to familiarize children with objects and natural phenomena, I pay attention to ensuring that children can notice and highlight their main properties, as well as explain certain patterns of nature. Diagrams, symbols, models help with this. Visual modeling in this case is that specific tool that teaches one to analyze, highlight the essential, teaches observation and curiosity.

It is better to start working with maps and symbols by learning how to compose descriptive stories about vegetables, fruits, clothes, dishes, and seasons. At first, when composing stories, it is suggested to move the card with the described object from point to point (windows with a schematic representation of the properties and characteristics, distinctive features of the object). This is done to facilitate the completion of the task, since it is easier for children to describe an object when they directly see the desired point on the diagram map next to the object being described. Then you can separate them from each other: hold the card with the item being described in your hand and tell it in order in accordance with the points of the map-scheme.

When organizing work with children to develop imagination and the ability to visually model in visual activities, tasks were offered where children had to analyze the appearance of objects, identify characteristic features, and use the analysis of diagrams depicting a characteristic feature. And then they were asked to create detailed images that were close to real images themselves.

Modeling in a speech development class

S.L. Rubinstein says that speech is the activity of communication - expression, influence, message - through language, speech is language in action. Speech, both one with language and different from it, is the unity of a certain activity - communication - and a certain content, which designates and, designating, reflects being. More precisely, speech is a form of existence of consciousness (thoughts, feelings, experiences) for another, serving as a means of communication with him, and a form of generalized reflection of reality, or a form of existence of thinking. The development of human thinking is significantly related to the development of articulate speech. Since the relationship between the word and the signified in sound speech is more abstract than the relationship between a gesture and what it represents or points to, sound speech presupposes a higher development of thinking; on the other hand, more generalized and abstract thinking, in turn, needs sound speech for its expression. They are thus interconnected and were interdependent in the process of historical development.

Among the problems of children's speech development, two main ones have been identified: speech creation and dialogue as the most important components of communicative initiative, the most important areas of personal self-development. Creativity in speech activity manifests itself at different levels to varying degrees. A person does not invent his own sound system and, as a rule, does not invent morphemes (roots, prefixes, suffixes, endings). He learns to correctly pronounce sounds and words in accordance with the norms of his native language, construct sentences in accordance with the rules of grammar, and formulate statements in the form of texts of a certain structure (with a beginning, middle, ending) and a certain type (description, narration, reasoning). But, mastering these linguistic means and forms of speech that exist in culture, the child shows creativity, plays with sounds, rhymes, meanings, experiments and constructs, creates his own original words, phrases, grammatical constructions, texts that he has never heard from anyone. . In this form, the child learns linguistic patterns. He comes to fluency in language, linguistic flair through an elementary awareness of linguistic reality. He comes to normality through experiment (through its violation).

Peer dialogue is of particular importance in the speech development of preschool children. It is here that children truly feel equal, free, and relaxed. Here they learn self-organization, initiative, and self-control. In dialogue, content is born that neither of the partners possesses individually; it is born only in interaction. In a dialogue with a peer, you have to focus to the greatest extent on the characteristics of your partner, take into account his capabilities (often limited) and therefore arbitrarily construct your statement using contextual speech. Dialogue with a peer is a new exciting area of ​​cooperation pedagogy and self-development pedagogy. Direct instructions, educational motivation, and strict regulation are inappropriate here. And yet, as research shows, dialogue with a peer needs to be taught. Teach dialogue, teach language games, teach verbal creativity.

An effective way to solve the problem of developing a child’s intelligence and speech is modeling, thanks to which children learn to generalize the essential features of objects, connections and relationships in reality. It is advisable to start teaching modeling in preschool age, since, according to L.S. Vygotsky, F.A. Sokhin, O.S. Ushakova, preschool age is the period of the most intensive formation and development of personality. As the child develops, he actively masters the basics of his native language and speech, and his speech activity increases.

An important role in the development of children’s coherent speech is played by didactic games for describing objects: “Tell me which one”, “Who knows and names more”, “Guess by the description”, “Wonderful bag”, “Toy store”. These games help teach children to name characteristic features, qualities, actions; encourage children to actively participate and express their opinions; form the ability to coherently and consistently describe the subject. Didactic games for the formation of ideas about the sequence of actions of characters by solving the corresponding picture-schemes: “Tell a fairy tale using pictures”, “Say what comes first, what comes next”, “I’ll start, and you finish”, “Who knows, continues on” . Such games promote coherent storytelling and a consistent description of the plot of the work.

The modeling method is based on the principle of substitution: the child replaces a real object with another object, its image, or some conventional sign. Initially, the ability to substitute is formed in children through play (a pebble becomes candy, sand becomes porridge for a doll, and he himself becomes a dad, a driver, an astronaut). The experience of substitution also accumulates during the development of speech and in visual activities.

When using visual modeling techniques, children become familiar with a graphical way of presenting information - a model. The use of modeling in the process of speech development has two aspects:

)serves as a certain method of cognition;

) is a program for analyzing new phenomena.

It is advisable to base classes on the development of coherent speech in children on tasks aimed at identifying the ability to answer questions in complete sentences, compose a story-description based on a model, and conduct a dialogue.

The use of visual modeling in working with preschoolers is that: a preschool child is very flexible and easy to teach, but our children are characterized by rapid fatigue and loss of interest in activities. Using visual modeling creates interest and helps solve this problem. The use of symbolic analogy facilitates and speeds up the process of memorizing and assimilating material, and forms techniques for working with memory. Using a graphic analogy, we teach children to see the main thing and systematize the knowledge they have acquired. Visual modeling technology requires adherence to the following teaching principles:

) developing and educational nature of training;

) scientific content and methods of the educational process;

) systematicity and consistency;

)consciousness, creative activity and independence;

) visibility;

) availability;

) rational combination of collective and individual forms of work.

The development of coherent speech is an important task in the speech education of children. This is due to its social significance and role in the formation of personality. In coherent speech, the basic, communicative functions of language and speech are realized. Coherent speech is the highest form of speech and mental activity, which determines the level of speech and mental development of the child.

At present, there is no need to prove that the development of speech is closely related to the development of consciousness, knowledge of the surrounding world, and the development of personality as a whole. The central link with which a teacher can solve a variety of cognitive and creative problems is figurative means, or more precisely, model representations.

Forms of working with the model

1. An object model in the form of a physical structure of an object or objects that are naturally connected (a planar model of a figure that reproduces its main parts, design features, proportions, relationships of parts in space).

2. Subject-schematic model (sign). Here, the essential components identified in the object of cognition and the connections between them are indicated with the help of substitute objects and graphic signs. (for older children - calendars)

3. Graphic models (graphs, formulas, diagrams)

4. Analog model. The model and the original are described by a single mathematical relation (electrical models for studying mechanical, acoustic, hydrodynamic phenomena)

Based on the models, you can create a variety of educational games.

Using picture-models, organize various types of oriented activities for children.

Models can be used in classes, in collaboration with a teacher, and in independent children’s activities.

Parents and children can be involved in creating models: relationship – teacher+parent+child

Time orientation

For a child, reflecting time is a more difficult task than perceiving space.

T.D. Richterman identifies at least three different aspects of temporal representations:

adequacy of reflection of time intervals and their correlation with activities (the ability to organize one’s activities in time);

understanding words indicating time (from simpler “yesterday-today-tomorrow” to more complex “past-present-future”, etc.);

understanding the sequence of events, actions, phenomena

System of work according to T.D. Richterman

Familiarization with the parts of the day on a visual basis using pictures, reflecting the activities of children in different parts of the day

Orientation using landscape pictures based on basic natural indicators: sky color, position of the Sun in the sky, degree of daylight illumination

Transition to the conventions of landscape pictures using a color model, where each time of day is indicated by a specific color

How to generalize knowledge about time - familiarity with the calendar as a system of time measures

System of work according to E.I. Shcherbakova

She developed a three-dimensional model of time in the form of a spiral, each turn of which, depending on the solution to a specific didactic task, clearly showed the movement of changes in processes, time phenomena, properties of time (one-dimensionality, fluidity, irreversibility, periodicity)

The “days of the week” model is similar to the first, but differs in that its dimensions are larger and one turn of the spiral includes seven segments, sequentially colored in different colors, correlated with certain days of the week.

The “seasons” model differs from the previous one by its significantly larger size and four-color design.

Sequence of teaching temporal concepts

Methodology for introducing time concepts

Development of a sense of time in children of senior preschool age

“Day” models for different age groups

Model of the day (according to A. Davidchuk)

A circle with an arrow, divided into 4 colored segments: morning – pink (the sun is rising); day – yellow (it is light and the sun is shining brightly); evening – blue (gets dark 0; night – black (dark). Day and night occupy most of the sectors, because they last longer.

Working with the model:

Find the corresponding sector for the named part of the day

Reproduce the sequence of parts of the day, starting from any of them

Set the number of parts per day

Determine the “neighbors” of each part of the day

Select the appropriate picture for the sector (landscape or activity)

The model shows the part of the day that has been lived.

Model "yesterday-today-tomorrow"

3 identical circles (based on the model of the day, located one behind the other horizontally)

Working with the model:

Show time periods “yesterday morning”, “today afternoon”, “tomorrow evening”, etc.

Show the time when an event occurred

Write a coherent story about the event

Show “was”, “will be”, “is happening now”, etc.

The “part of the day” model

Consists of plot pictures depicting human activity at different times of the day

Goal: Introducing children to units of time, learning to navigate the parts of the day

D/game “When does this happen?” (parts of the day)

Goal: To consolidate the parts of the day and their sequence.

Material: pictures: toothbrush, pillow, plate, toy, etc.; pictures with actions: morning exercises, activity, watching an evening story, sleeping child.

In front of the children are pictures that depict the activities of people or objects corresponding to one or another part of the day. The children are invited to consider them and correlate them with the corresponding sectors on the model.

Model of the week (according to R. Chudnova)

A circle with an arrow on which are placed small circles (stripes) with dots, numbers from 1 to 7, or with color substituents (according to the rainbow spectrum) indicating the days of the week. An expanded model is possible, which also includes seasons, days, etc.

Working with the model:

Determine what each symbol means

Name the days of the week, etc. in order, in reverse order, starting from any

Name the symbols that the arrow shows

Determine the order of symbols by count (which day of the week, etc.)

Name the missing symbol among those named

Determine the total number of characters (7 days of the week, 4 parts of the day, 3 months - season, 12 months - year)

a model of a clock, the inner circle of which reflects the model of the day - divided into four sectors, the middle circle - the days of the week (seven sectors with the colors of the rainbow), the outer circle a model of the year (twelve sectors painted in shades of colors characteristic of the seasons)

Game guide “Circle of Time”

Formation of ideas about time in older preschool children.

1. Introduce children to units of time.

2. Learn to navigate the parts of the day, days of the week, seasons, highlight their sequence and use the words: yesterday, today, tomorrow, before, soon.

3. Fix the names of the days of the week and months.

4. Develop speech activity in children.

5. Develop children's cognitive needs.

Game: “When does this happen?” (Seasons)

Goal: To consolidate the features of the seasons and their sequence.

Material: pictures with seasonal features and activities.

Progress: In front of the children are pictures that depict the activities of people or objects corresponding to a particular time of year. The children are invited to consider them and correlate them with the corresponding sectors on the model.

(second option)

Children are asked to guess the riddle and place the chip in the corresponding sector on the model:

The snow is melting, the meadow has come to life.

The day comes - when does it happen? I.t.

Game: “Define the day of the week”

Goal: To consolidate the names and sequence of the days of the week.

Children are asked to answer cognitive questions, for example: “Define what color is Thursday if Monday is red?”; “Show the model on weekends”; “What color is the environment?”; “Find out what day of the week it is and put the chip in the corresponding pocket.”

Complication: the children are offered cards with the names of the days of the week; they need to read and place the cards in pockets according to the day of the week.

“Denote the sequence of days of the week with numbers”, “What number will Friday be”, “Distribute the Smeshariki by day of the week”, “Which of the Smeshariki will come to visit us on Friday?”, “On what day of the week will Nyusha come to visit us? » etc.

Before playing with Smeshariki, preliminary work must first be done. The guys determine that Nyusha is coming to visit us on Monday, because... it is pink, which corresponds to the red color of Monday, on Tuesday - Kopatych, it is similar to the orange color of Tuesday, etc., thus, they distributed all the days of the week, but since there is no green Smesharik, they decided that Thursday would be Hedgehog's day, he lives under the Christmas tree. Thus, Smeshariki help to remember the sequence and names of the days of the week.

Game: “All Year Round”

Goal: To consolidate the names and sequence of seasons and months.

Children are offered tasks such as “Find November on the model”, “Name the month indicated in blue”, “Show the winter and spring months on the model”, “Show the month that begins winter and ends the year”, “Rank the names of the months in order” , “Indicate the autumn months,” etc.

Game: "Count it"

Goal: To consolidate the ability to perform arithmetic operations.

On the model, there are numbers in the small and middle circles, in the large outer circle an arithmetic sign, for example +, the teacher shows with arrows which numbers need to be added, and the child performs the action and places the corresponding number in the large circle.

Model “room” for orientation in space

Peculiarities of space perception by preschoolers

Spatial perception in preschool age is characterized by a number of features:

– concrete-sensual character: the child is guided by his body and determines everything in relation to his own body;

– the most difficult thing for a child is to distinguish between the right and left hands, because the distinction is based on the functional advantage of the right hand over the left, which is developed in the work of functional activity;

– the relative nature of spatial relationships: in order for a child to determine how an object relates to another person, he needs to mentally take the place of the object;

– children navigate more easily in static conditions than in movement;

– it is easier to determine spatial relationships to objects located at a close distance from the child.

System of work on the development of spatial concepts in preschoolers (T.A. Museybova)

1) orientation “on yourself”; mastering the “scheme of one’s own body”;

2) orientation “on external objects”; highlighting different sides of objects: front, back, top, bottom, sides;

3) mastering and using a verbal reference system in the main spatial directions: forward - backward, up - down, right - left;

4) determining the location of objects in space “from oneself”, when the initial point of reference is fixed on the subject himself;

5) determination of one’s own position in space (“standing point”) relative to various objects, the reference point in this case is localized on another person or on some object;

6) determination of the spatial placement of objects relative to each other;

7) determination of the spatial arrangement of objects when oriented on a plane, i.e. in two-dimensional space;

determination of their placement relative to each other and in relation to the plane on which they are located

Room model

Consists of a room layout and pieces of doll furniture

First, the child examines and examines the layout of the doll's room, remembers the location of the rooms and furniture in it. Next, with the help of a doll, he plays, moving around the rooms of the doll’s apartment, accompanying his actions with descriptions (the doll went into the room on the left, stopped at the closet standing to the right of the window, etc.) The teacher himself can ask questions and give instructions, directing visual perception child (go to the doll table, etc.) and activating various spatial concepts in speech (left, right, further, near, above, under, etc.)

Model "number houses"

"The house where signs and numbers live"
(numeric houses)

Purpose of application:

Strengthen children's ability to form numbers from two smaller ones; add and subtract numbers;

Give children an idea of ​​the composition and immutability of numbers and quantities, subject to differences in summation;

Learn or strengthen the ability to compare numbers (more, less, equal).

Model structure:

The model is a storey house, on each floor there is a different number of windows where signs and numbers will live, but since the house is magical, signs and numbers can only move into the house with the help of children.

Number Ladder Model

Number ladder

Goal: development of computing skills within 10; development of ideas about the number series, the composition of numbers

A staircase consisting of steps of a different color in each row. There are 10 rows in total: the bottom row is 10 segments, the top row is 1 segment. Each row corresponds to a certain number from 1 to 10, and reflects their composition.

Working with the model:

Familiarization with the composition of numbers by the number of segments in each step of the ladder

Counting while going up and down stairs

Determining the place of a number in a number series (ladder) - 3 is before 4, but after 2, etc.

Determining the “neighbors” of a number

Counting in forward and reverse sequence

Comparison of numbers

Hourglass model

Visual three-dimensional hourglass model (from plastic bottles)

Purpose of application:

teach children to measure time using an hourglass model; actively participate in the experimentation process.

Model structure: three-dimensional, three-dimensional model.

To be able to measure time, you need to open the bottom cap of one of the bottles and pour in exactly as much sand as is needed so that in 1 minute the sand passes from one compartment of the clock to another. This must be done through experimentation.

Description of working with the model:

Using the hourglass model, you can first conduct an educational orientation session. Show children pictures depicting different hourglasses, then demonstrate the model, talk about the origin of hourglasses, why they are needed, how to use them, how they work. Then, together with the children, be sure to conduct experiments: for example, an experiment proving the accuracy of a watch.

Visual planar model "Counting cake"

Purpose of application:

Teach children to solve arithmetic problems and develop the child’s cognitive abilities;

Learn to identify mathematical relationships between quantities and navigate them.

Model structure, the model includes:

1. Five sets of "sweet counting pieces", each of which is divided into parts (both equal and different parts). Each counting cake in the form of a circle has its own color.

2. Ovals cut out of white cardboard, which represent “whole” and “part”. In a game situation, they will be called plates, where children will place pieces of the counting.

Description of working with the model:

in an arithmetic problem, mathematical relationships can be thought of as "whole" and "part".

First, it is necessary to give children an understanding of the concepts of “whole” and “part.”

Place a counting cake in front of the children on a plate indicating “whole” (all its parts, tell them that mom baked a whole cake and that we are placing it strictly on a plate that indicates “whole.” Now we will cut the cake into two parts, each of them Let's call it "part". Explain that now that the whole (the whole cake) has been divided into parts (into 2 pieces), then there is no longer a whole, but only 2 parts. Which cannot remain on someone else's plate and must be moved to their places - plates indicating "part". One part on one plate, the other part on another plate. Then put the 2 pieces back together and show that you get a whole again. Thus, we have demonstrated that connecting parts gives a whole, and subtracting a part from a whole gives a part.

Preschool education is the first stage in the education system, therefore the main task of teachers working with preschoolers is to develop interest in the learning process and its motivation, development and correction of speech. Today it is absolutely possible to identify the emerging contradictions between the normative content of education common to all pupils and the individual capabilities of children.

The main goal of speech development is to bring it to the norm determined for each age stage, although individual differences in the speech level of children can be extremely large. Every child should learn in kindergarten to express their thoughts in a meaningful, grammatically correct, coherent and consistent manner.

The problem of speech deficiency in preschoolers is that currently the child spends little time in the company of adults (more and more at the computer, watching TV or with his toys), and rarely listens to stories and fairy tales from the lips of his mother and father.

The relevance of this topic is seen in the fact that visual modeling makes it easier for middle-aged children to master coherent speech, thus, the use of symbols, pictograms, substitutes, diagrams facilitates memorization and increases the amount of memory and generally develops the speech activity of children.

For middle-aged preschoolers, the development of imagination and imaginative thinking are the main directions of mental development, and it would be advisable to focus on the development of imagination and the formation of the ability to visually model in different types of activities: when familiarizing themselves with fiction; when introducing children to nature. These types of activities attract children and are age appropriate.

It is important to choose the optimal form of classes that can ensure the effectiveness of work, the main goal of which is the development of children’s intellectual abilities and their mental development. And the main thing will be mastery of various means of solving cognitive problems. Development will occur only in those cases when the child finds himself in a situation where there is - specifically for him - a cognitive task and solves it. It is very important that the emotional attitude is connected with the cognitive task through an imaginary situation that arises as a result of playful or symbolic designation. To do this, it is advisable to conduct educational games-activities with the inclusion of problem situations, riddle tasks, some kind of fairy-tale or educational material connected by one plot, which includes tasks for the development of imagination, memory, and thinking.

Schemes and models serve as didactic material in the teacher’s work on the development of coherent speech in children. They should be used to: enrich vocabulary; when learning to compose stories; when retelling a work of art; when guessing and composing riddles; when memorizing poetry.

Based on the experience of leading teachers, when organizing visual modeling classes, diagrams and tables are used to compile descriptive stories about toys, dishes, clothes, vegetables and fruits, birds, animals, insects. These diagrams help children independently determine the main properties and characteristics of the object in question, establish the sequence of presentation of the identified characteristics; enrich children's vocabulary.

As a result of work on the development of coherent speech, we can come to the conclusion that the use of visual modeling in classes on speech development is an important link in the development of coherent speech in children. At each age stage, children develop:

the ability to express one’s thoughts in a grammatically correct, coherent and consistent manner;

ability to retell short works;

improving dialogic speech;

the ability to actively participate in the conversation, answering and asking questions in a clear way for listeners;

the ability to describe an object, a picture;

ability to dramatize short tales;

cultivate a desire to speak like an adult.

When using the visual modeling method, children become familiar with a graphical way of presenting information - a model. Symbols of a diverse nature can act as conditional substitutes (elements of the model): geometric shapes; symbolic images of objects (symbols, silhouettes, contours, pictograms); plans and symbols used in them; contrasting frame - fragmentary storytelling technique and many others.

A story based on a plot picture requires the child to be able to identify the main characters or objects of the picture, trace their relationship and interaction, note the features of the compositional background of the picture, as well as the ability to think out the reasons for the occurrence of a given situation, that is, to compose the beginning of the story, and its consequences - that is, the end story.

In practice, stories independently compiled by children are basically a simple listing of the characters or objects in the picture.

Work to overcome these shortcomings and develop the skill of telling a story based on a picture consists of 3 stages: identifying fragments of the picture that are significant for the development of the plot; determining the relationship between them; combining fragments into a single plot.

The elements of the model are, respectively, pictures - fragments, silhouette images of significant objects in the picture and schematic images of fragments of the picture. Schematic images are also elements of visual models, which are plans for stories based on a series of paintings. When children master the skill of constructing a coherent statement, creative elements are included in the models of retellings and stories - the child is asked to come up with the beginning or end of a story, unusual characters are included in a fairy tale or the plot of a picture, characters are assigned qualities unusual for them, etc., and then compose a story with taking into account these changes.

Thus, the use of substitutes, symbols, and models in various types of activities is a source of development of mental abilities and creativity in preschool childhood. Since at this age the development of imagination and imaginative thinking are the main directions of mental development, it was advisable to focus on the development of imagination and the formation of the ability for visual modeling in different types of activities: when familiarizing with fiction; when introducing children to nature, during drawing classes. These types of activities attract children and are age appropriate. Also, in these conditions, it was important to choose the optimal form of classes that could ensure the effectiveness of the work, the main goal of which is the development of the intellectual abilities of children, their mental development. And the main thing will be mastery of various means of solving cognitive problems.

CONCLUSION

In children of senior preschool age, speech development reaches a high level. Most children correctly pronounce all the sounds of their native language, can regulate the strength of their voice, the pace of speech, the intonation of a question, joy, and surprise. By older preschool age, a child has accumulated a significant vocabulary. The enrichment of vocabulary (the vocabulary of the language, the set of words used by the child) continues, the stock of words that are similar (synonyms) or opposite (antonyms) in meaning, and polysemantic words increases.

Vocabulary development is characterized not only by an increase in the number of words used, but also by the child’s understanding of different meanings of the same word (polysemantic). Movement in this regard is extremely important, since it is associated with children’s increasingly complete awareness of the semantics of the words they already use. At senior preschool age, the most important stage of children's speech development - the acquisition of the grammatical system of the language - is completed. The proportion of simple common sentences, complex and complex sentences is increasing. Children develop a critical attitude towards grammatical errors and the ability to control their speech.

LIST OF SOURCES USED

1.Alekseeva, M.M. Methods of speech development and teaching the native language to preschoolers. - M.: Academy, 1997. - 219 p.

Arushanova, A.G. Speech and verbal communication of children: A book for kindergarten teachers - M.: Mozaika-Sintez, 1999.- 37-45p.

Bogoslavets, L. G. Modern pedagogical technologies in pre-school education: educational method manual / L. G. Bogoslavets. - St. Petersburg Childhood-press, 2011. - 111 p.

Borodich, A.M. Methods of speech development for preschool children / A.M. Borodich. 2nd ed. - M.: 1984.- 252 p.

Wenger, L.A., Mukhina, V.S. Psychology. textbook for university students. - M.: Education, 1988.- 328s

Galperin, PL. Teaching methods and mental development of the child. - M.: Education, 1985. - 123-125 p.

Zhuikova, T.P. Characteristics of the modeling method in the formation of spatial concepts in children of senior preschool age. -M.: Young Scientist Publishing House, 2012. -41-44s

Matyukhina, M.V., Mikhalchik T.S., Prokina N.F. Developmental and educational psychology.-M.: Education, 1984. - 12-18 p.

Leontiev, A. A. Language, speech, speech activity. - M., 1969.- 135 p.

Leontyev, A.A. Pedagogical communication / A.A. Leontiev - M., 1979 - 370 p.

Sapogova, E.E. The modeling operation as a condition for the development of imagination in preschoolers. - M.: Pedagogy, 1978. - 233p.

Tikheyeva, E.I. Children's speech development. manual for kindergarten teachers / E.I. Tikheeva. - M.: 1981.- 345 p.

Tkachenko, T.A., Tkachenko D.D., Entertaining symbols. -M.: Moscow, Prometheus, 2002.- 89-100 p.

Moskalev Igor Evgenievich - Civil Registry Office under the President of the Russian Federation, deputy head of the department. organization of social systems and crisis management, Ph.D.

In the conditions of innovative development of modern society and increasing uncertainty of social changes, there is a need for effective methods for diagnosing the social-innovative environment, predicting the future and assessing risks based on adequate scientific models. However, today there is a serious gap in communication between managers with knowledge and practical experience in the field of state and municipal management and specialists proficient in mathematical and computer modeling methods. This situation is largely due to the fact that it is extremely rare for state and municipal managers to have competencies sufficient not only to independently develop rigorous mathematical models of social systems and processes, but also to formulate a request for research data to specialists in mathematical modeling.

In the conditions of innovative development of modern society and increasing uncertainty of social changes, there is a need for effective methods for diagnosing the social-innovative environment, predicting the future and assessing risks based on adequate scientific models. However, today there is a serious gap in communication between managers with knowledge and practical experience in the field of state and municipal management and specialists proficient in mathematical and computer modeling methods. This situation is largely due to the fact that it is extremely rare for state and municipal managers to have competencies sufficient not only to independently develop rigorous mathematical models of social systems and processes, but also to formulate a request for research data to specialists in mathematical modeling.

We see one of the ways to solve this problem in a broader understanding of the modeling process as a dynamic process of forming a holistic image in the mind of the research subject, reflecting the essential characteristics of the simulated reality. At the same time, we assume that this image can be constructed using various languages ​​and tools, which means that the world of strict mathematical models can be systematically coupled with a complex of flexible means of description (intuitive, qualitative, cognitive), acting as a communicative intermediary between specialists from different disciplines and fields of activity. The qualitative models discussed in this article allow, in our opinion, to capture the main characteristics of social reality, thereby simplifying the complexity (both in the understanding of the object and the means of expression) and forming a holistic image necessary for an adequate assessment of the situation by the person making managerial decisions. solutions, as well as setting tasks for more rigorous, quantitative research.

Thus, we are talking about the need to develop “model thinking” skills among managers through mastering methods of qualitative modeling of social processes.

In the context of the reflexive management paradigm, taking into account the reflexive nature of social processes and the situation of the involved observer, we argue that the model of a social system performs not only a heuristic and predictive function, but is also a means of communication between the subjects of management themselves, as well as a means of communication between the subject of a management decision and its object .

Multifactor model

One of the well-known techniques for constructing an image that describes a complex social situation is to construct a diagram of factors that have the strongest impact on the integrity of the social system, the possibilities of its development, and the quality of life of citizens.

Fig. 1 Diagram of indicators of satisfaction with social needs.

The model shown in Fig. 1 reflects the hypothesis about the main factors of development of the social system, expressed in indicators of satisfaction with social needs. As a reference state, we can take the outer contour of the resulting profile corresponding to 100% satisfaction with each factor. However, this reference condition must be adjusted to take into account regional specifics and certain situational factors.

Quantitative estimates of model indicators can be obtained both by the method of expert assessments and by the method of sociological survey.

This model allows us to take into account in the process of developing and implementing reform the most problematic areas from the point of view of development of the social sphere, which can be both the immediate goals of government reform and sources of risks.

Scale of innovative development of the innovative social environment of the region

Based on the methodology proposed by Charles Landry for measuring the innovative development of the urban environment, we propose the following system for assessing the innovative development of the region.

Grade	Criteria for evaluation
	Creativity is not perceived as an important part of the life of the region. There is no public discussion of issues related to creativity and innovation.
	And the administration is beginning to understand the importance of innovation. There are attempts to stimulate creativity on the part of the municipality, for example, by celebrating achievements. The organization and management of the region remain traditional. There is still an outflow of promising personnel from the region.
	Several pilot projects and studies are being carried out by universities. The “brain drain” is being stopped.
	There is infrastructure that supports innovation. Technology transfer is taking place. Exchange programs are carried out in business, education and the municipal sphere.
	In the region, support for creative projects is felt at all levels, aimed at retaining the most talented specialists. The territory attracts talented people, but some resources are still lacking.
	The territory has received national and international recognition as a creative hub. The region is home to the headquarters of important research institutes and innovative companies.
	The region has become a self-sufficient place where a cycle of self-renewing, self-critical and reflective creativity has been created. Opportunities and infrastructure of the highest level, facilities and organizations of global significance are being created in the city region.

This assessment structure allows us to determine indicators of the ideal state of the social innovation environment and the vector of its development. It should be noted that the evaluation criteria take into account the openness of the observed system and the reflexivity of management subjects represented by the administration.

Four-factor model of innovative development of the social environment

One of the most important tasks in the process of managing government reform is the task of developing a basic measurement system, thanks to which a multidimensional and complexly formalized social innovation environment is transformed into a space that reflects certain characteristics of this environment and allows one to establish basic guidelines for fixing the current state of the social system.

In the context of our approach, we propose the following four-factor model for assessing the innovative development of a social system, graphically presented in the form of a diagram. This technique makes it possible to give a quantitative assessment of qualitative phenomena that are difficult to formalize. Each of the parameters can be assessed according to a scale we have developed based on a system of observed indicators.

Rice. 2. Example of a rating scale

Table 1. Example of constructing a rating scale

Factor	Characteristic	Indicators	Units of measurement of indicators
Creative potential	Creating an environment conducive to creativity, the generation of new ideas and innovative projects	Innovators and inventors. Innovative organizations. Social circles. Social movements. Creative personalities	-Number of scientific and educational institutions. The number of new technologies, the number of participants in creative associations.
Motivation	The degree of interest of social actors in the implementation of innovative projects.	Presence of unmet needs Social instability	-The number of citizens dissatisfied with the present. Number of protests. Percentage of media publications aimed at change
Activity	Implementation of innovative projects, activity of social actors, availability of resources for implementation	Public outcry from the implementation of projects Implementation of projects to transform the social environment	-Number of people involved in the innovation project; Costs for implementing changes; The number of activities aimed at changing and developing the social sphere.
Social reflection	Degree of awareness of the consequences of implementation, risk assessment, controllability of processes	Degree of comprehension Management of risks Monitoring	Availability of special events to discuss the actions of the administration. Conducting surveys, referendums, forums.

Factor of innovation potential

The creative potential of a social system is formed by the subjects of social change themselves, who can be represented both by specific individuals and by various groups acting consciously (purposefully) or unconsciously, i.e. without linking your actions to specific changes. As the main actors of social innovation, P. Sztompka identifies the following six types of subjects of social change, by the presence of which we will determine the creative potential of the social environment:

• Individual people who come up with innovations (an inventor of a new technology, a politician who proposed a reform, an entrepreneur who reorganized an enterprise, etc.).
• Innovative roles (artists, scientists, inventors, experts, shamans, etc.).
• Innovative organizations (legislative committees, parliaments, commissions, design bureaus, etc.).
• Social circles of an innovative nature (aristocratic “bohemians”, students, jazz musicians, film masters, etc.).
• Social movements (youth, political, feminist movements).
• Ordinary people who create new practices in their daily lives (ways of speaking, treating others, entertainment, etc.)

Motivation factor

In order for the social environment to realize its creative potential, there must be sufficiently strong motives. The degree of motivation in our system characterizes the need of social actors for changes and their desire to make an effort to implement an innovative project. The assessment of motivation in the context of the concept of innovation in public administration should be carried out from the point of view of the state, society and the state-society system.

P. Sztompka points out the following four circumstances that influence the fact that a subject, immersed in the existing normative structure, can suddenly somehow free himself from it and make efforts to change this structure:

1. The imperfection of the processes of socialization and control, due to which no one is ever completely, completely formed by the culture of his society.
2. Differences in the degree of submission to socialization and control among different people groups.
3. Heterogeneity, pluralism, conflicting nature of the normative structure of each society.
4. Distancing some groups from their own society and accepting them as a model of another society and its culture.

In assessing motivation for innovative changes, we propose to consider the following factors, on the basis of which the corresponding system of indicators is built.

• Presence of unmet needs
• Degree of protest mood
• Focus on the future (system of expectations)
• Social instability
• Dissociations (contradictions, tensions, conflicts)

Here it should be noted the existence of both positive motivation (striving for the best, ideal, development) and negative (avoiding threats, conflicts and contradictions). Moreover, these motives can be identified at a conscious and subconscious level.

Factor of innovation activity

The activity of social actors and their involvement in innovative projects characterizes real changes in the social environment. This factor can be assessed using indicators such as:

• number of people involved in an innovative social project;
• costs of implementing changes;
• public response from the implementation of projects.

Of course, when assessing the profile of innovative development of the social environment, an important indicator is not only the values ​​of each factor separately and their comparison with the ideal state and the state in other regions, but also the degree of balance of all 4 factors. For example, high innovative activity without sufficient managerial reflection may not only be ineffective, but also create additional threats. On the other hand, the high creative potential of the social environment may be unclaimed in conditions of weak motivation and in the absence of a sufficiently active position of social actors.

Qualitative models of the social-innovative environment of government reforms

K. Lewin's force field theory

From the point of view of managing risks associated with possible resistance to targeted social changes, for example, such as government reforms, K. Lewin’s concept of the force field is of interest, according to which any organized changes in the social system can be considered in the context of the struggle between motivating and limiting forces. Managing change in a social organization comes down to balancing these forces.

Rice. 3. Force field diagram.

Any innovative change caused by certain motives (driving forces) encounters resistance from limiting forces. To make a management decision aimed at introducing social innovation, it is necessary to analyze the force field, identifying all the forces and their direction. Let us consider the structure of the force field that emerged in the situation of the reform of social benefits in 2005.

Criteria for assessing social innovation

For differential diagnosis of social innovations and tasks of public administration, it is necessary to develop selection criteria that allow assessing social innovations from the point of view of the main priorities for the development of society.

Criteria for assessing social innovation and the ideal model:

The reform promotes effective interaction between social institutions and social groups, promotes the formation of identity and the reproduction of values.

The reform opens up new opportunities for positive changes expressed in the parameters of the quality of life of citizens in accordance with Art. No. 7 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

The reform provides the social subject with the right to freely choose to use new development opportunities.

Let us apply this system of criteria to evaluate the reform of social benefits in 2005.

Evaluation criterion	Positive influence	Negative influence	Consequences not defined
Preserving the communicative integrity of the system		V
Increase in social capital (as a resource of trust)		V
Possibility of development of the social system			V
Possibility of choice for a social subject		V

According to our estimates, the reform of social benefits violated the integrity of the social system of beneficiaries, i.e. contributed to social disunity by introducing different forms of benefits for beneficiaries of the same category, but living in different regions. As a consequence of such measures, trust in the authorities was undermined. The reform was introduced with virtually no public examination and was simply imposed on beneficiaries even without sufficient prior information to the population. Changes in the system of social benefits, according to the majority of respondents, did not entail noticeable positive changes in the quality of life.

Cognitive modeling

If, as Einstein put it, the problems that we solve are not solvable using the way of thinking in which we create them, then the task of managing the way of thinking itself arises, which is possible only due to a sufficiently high degree of reflection of the subject of control. Through reflection, the subject makes observable his way of thinking in the process of solving a complex problem. In this regard, the method of cognitive modeling is one of the simplest from the point of view of implementation technology, but at the same time it makes it possible to visualize not only the main factors of the social environment and the structure of their relationships, but also to reflect the very logic of thinking of the modeling subject.

The essence of the method is that a group of experts identifies the most significant factors (in the case of public administration, these may be factors influencing the implementation of government reform) of the observed process, and also analyzes possible relationships between them. The relationship between factors can be either direct (an increase in one factor leads to an increase in another) or inverse (an increase in one factor leads to a decrease in another). This configuration is displayed in the form of a directed graph (see Fig. 4.).

Rice. 4. Cognitive model of the social benefits reform environment.

To identify key factors and determine the strength and nature of their relationships, you can use both the method of statistical factor analysis of data obtained through a sociological survey of citizens of the region under study, and the method of expert assessments.

This method is of greatest value in the process of collective analysis of the situation and decision-making.

When constructing a cognitive model, it is necessary to ensure that the number of factors considered is minimal (no more than 12), because excessive complexity of the model will not allow the expert to identify the most significant mechanisms and relationships.

The model also allows you to visually display stabilizing and destabilizing feedbacks, which can both ensure homeostasis of the system and cause significant changes. M. Maruyama proved that “a circuit enhances deviation if and only if it contains an even number of negative arcs or does not contain them at all, otherwise it is a circuit that counteracts deviation.” Based on the cognitive model, the manager makes decisions regarding:

1. influence on certain factors;
2. change in connection strength;
3. changes in the nature of the relationship;
4. inclusion of new factors in the system;
5. inclusion of new interaction mechanisms.

3.4 Models of the dynamics of social innovation

Life cycle model

The rate of introduction of new things or diffusion of innovations depends on the internal characteristics and parameters of the system. We can agree with Yu.M. Plotinsky, that the demand for innovation also depends on the phase of the life cycle of the social system. Based on the general model of the life cycle of an organization, we can assume that the period of greatest demand for innovation is the period of formation of the organization, as well as the period of crisis associated with the saturation or exhaustion of resources for new growth.

Rice. 5. Life cycle model

In this case, a social system in a state of development is more ready for reforms than a system in a state of stabilization. At the stage of increased demand for innovation, there is a risk of lagging behind the real needs of society for changes, which can lead to spontaneous transformations and contradictions with the existing management system. These changes, coming from below and aimed at changes in the management system, can be described as revolutionary.

Perception of innovation – perception of novelty. Innovation is associated with the individual’s subjective perception of the opportunities and threats of the upcoming change. Therefore, innovations that have a clear set of expected benefits and simple rules of social interaction are introduced faster.

Rice. 6. Principle of selection of innovative social strategies

Effective social strategies can be copied by social actors, both consciously and unconsciously, which ensures the diffusion of innovation. The very principle of copying someone else's effective experience is a social strategy that ensures the integrity of the social system and its coherent development.

Nonlinear dynamics models

Nonlinear dynamic models play a special role in the analysis of the complex dynamics of social change. Let's consider some of their applications to modeling innovative social processes.

The evolutionary curve based on logistics management clearly shows the main stages of innovation diffusion.

Rice . 7. Logistic model of innovation diffusion

x t +1 = ax t (1-x t)+x t ;

x t– number of participants in the innovation process at time t.

a– speed of spread of innovation.

“Diffusion is the process of spreading innovations within a given social system, as well as from one social system to another.” The speed at which innovation spreads depends on the effectiveness of communication channels and society’s readiness for change (the degree of instability of the social system).

Innovation in systems with dynamic complexity is difficult to predict because causes and effects are connected in a circular manner and may not be comparable in their effects. At the same time, synergetic methods for modeling social processes make it possible to transform uncertainty into risks, identify the range of system attractors, play out scenarios, and identify new meanings and management strategies.

For example, the logistic model takes into account both the autocatalytic mechanism of the spread of innovation and the possibility of some saturation due to the depletion of resources. At the same time, this model demonstrates a huge range of different scenarios for the spread of innovation (depending on the ratio of parameters responsible for the resource capacity of the environment and the activity of social agents), from reaching a stationary state, to periodic fluctuations with different periods and a chaotic regime.

Fig.8. Chaotic mode.a= 3; M= 1000.

x t+1 = ax t (M - x t)+x t ;

M– medium capacity.

The model of the dynamics of the innovation process considered below is based on the model of the dynamics of the electoral campaign, developed by a group of authors (Arshinov V.I., Budanov V.G., Moskalev I.E., Tarasenko V.V.) in the interdisciplinary research sector of the Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences. We see the practical application of this approach in the use of the proposed model and research methodology in the work of the RAGS situation center under the President of the Russian Federation.

The first stage of modeling consists of identifying key factors (groups of factors) that determine the dynamics of the spread of social innovation. This problem is solved by brainstorming. The data obtained are compared with the basic assumptions of the model of the dynamics of social innovations.

According to the basic settings of the model, the process of recruiting reform supporters is determined by the following parameters:

N– the total number of people participating in the process;

N i- number of existing supporters i-th innovation (anti-innovation) strategy;

N u- the number of people not participating in the innovation process;

c i- campaign activity of supporters i-th innovation;

A i- attractiveness i-th innovation;

a i — relative attractiveness i-th innovation;

a u– the relative attractiveness of non-participation in innovation processes.

The mathematical model that describes the competition between supporters and opponents of the reform is a system of nonlinear balance-type equations:

dN i /dt = c i N i (N u a i - N i a u)

N = ? N i + N u

a i =A i /(A 1 +A 2 +…+A n)

The influence of these parameters on increasing the number of supporters of one of the innovative strategies can also be presented as follows.

Fig.6. Factors influencing the increase in the competitiveness of innovation 1 in relation to innovation 2.

If the benefits reform is implemented, we have the following groups of citizens: 1) supporters of monetization; 2) opponents of change; 3) citizens who have not determined their attitude to the reform.

Next, the statement of the problem is played out for qualitative and quantitative analysis of factors: determining the number of supporters of innovations; setting a task to study the campaign activity of supporters; identifying by brainstorming factors influencing the attractiveness of an innovation; making decisions on the timing and methods of research.

To conduct a qualitative and quantitative analysis of the situation, we can use data from population surveys for 2004-2006, posted on the website of the Public Opinion Foundation www. fom. ru.

Analysis of public opinion poll data (

In Russia, the development of innovation is one of the national priorities. However, activities aimed at developing innovation activities are not systematic. Is it possible to propose a new model of the innovation process, designed to provide a systematic approach to the problem of innovation development - both at the federal and regional levels?

Innovation activity is associated with the transformation of ideas (usually the results of scientific research, development, etc.) into technologically new or improved products or services introduced on the market, into new or improved technological processes or methods of production (transfer) of services used in practical applications. activities. Innovative activity involves a whole range of scientific, technological, organizational, financial and commercial activities that lead to innovation in their entirety.

The innovation process, in turn, is a complex of successive stages or events associated with the initiation, development and production of new products, technology, etc. With the development of the theory of innovation, models of the innovation process have also evolved: from simple linear to more complex nonlinear models.

There are various models of the innovation process, including linear (combined and chain) and nonlinear (integrated). Linear models assume successive stages of creating innovative products. Nonlinear models allow parallel implementation of some (or all) groups of actions aimed at creating innovative products, and focus on the nature of interaction between subjects of the innovation process.

In modern science, preference is given to nonlinear models of the innovation process. An example of an integrated model of the innovation process is presented in Fig. 1.

Fig.1. The IV generation innovation process model is an “integrated” model.

This model does not allow us to identify critical areas during the innovation process - areas on the successful completion of which the further course of the process depends.

Presenting an integrated model of the innovation process in the form of a block diagram allows you to track its dynamics and detect critical areas. In this case, parallelism of some parts of the processes is provided. Block diagram shown in Fig. 2 was developed based on the definition of .

Fig.2. Dynamic model of the innovation process developed by the author.

The developed model contains two blocks of initial factors (scientific, technical and economic), which are key to initiating the innovation process.

The scientific and technical block includes the following factors:

• number of organizations carrying out research and development,
• number of people engaged in research and development,
• amount of research and development funding.

The economic block contains the following factors:

• emergence of new enterprises,
• competitive fight,
• decreased demand for traditional products,
• availability of venture capital.

Provided that the initial factors ensured the beginning of the innovation process, there are areas where the innovation process can be interrupted without ensuring the receipt of innovative products. This may happen in the following cases:

• As a result of the research and development carried out, no protectable intellectual property was obtained;
• In the absence of production capabilities, when the owner of the intellectual property rights does not have the opportunity to open an enterprise for the production of innovative products, and also does not have the opportunity to transfer the right to use the intellectual property to another person who has such capabilities.

Another unfavorable condition for the progress of the innovation process is the unprofitability of the production of innovative products (for example, due to insufficient demand). This obstacle is surmountable: a specific type of innovative product can be adapted to market requirements identified as a result of marketing research before launching into production.

Thus, the developed model of the innovation process, which includes the initial factors for initiating the innovation process, as well as the identified critical areas of the innovation process, allows for analysis of the progress of innovation activities and ensures the adoption of management decisions to optimize the innovation process and develop innovation activities at the regional level. * * *

The study was carried out with financial support from the Russian Humanitarian Fund (project No. 11-02-00647a).

Literature

1. Russian statistical yearbook. Stat. Sat. 2011. M.: Rosstat, 2011. P.76.
2. Garmashova E.P. Development of the theory of innovation processes / E.P. Garmashova // Young scientist. - 2011. - No. 2. T.1. - pp. 90-94