Application of Innovative Technologies in the Process of Discipline «International Law» by Students Of Legal Specialties
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31649/2524-1079-2019-4-1-078-088Keywords:
debates, elements of debate, forms of debates, project technology of teachingAbstract
The article deals with the study of pedagogical conditions and methodical aspects of the need for the introduction of free debate during the study of the discipline «International Law» by students of legal specialties.
There have been revealed methodical aspects of using debates in the teaching of law students, such as goals and main elements, choice of format, theme design, organizational preparation and evaluation of results. The main attention is paid to highlighting the peculiarities of the implementation of the debate of the students of legal specialties as the basis for activating their cognitive activity and motivating future professional development. The analysis of pedagogical and legal literature, as well as the experience of practical activities of institutions of higher education, indicate that the need for the implementation of project technologies in the educational process is not fully understood and needs further research. In addition, in the process of analysis and research of the topic, a number of problems were identified in the field of the implementation of free debate as an element of project technology in the educational process of the o institutions of higher education:
- there are a small number of teachers who can take on the role of facilitator and create favorable conditions for the development of free debate in classes;
- lack of quality textbooks and manuals with methodological guidelines for the introduction of free debate in the study of legal disciplines;
- absence of new curricula that meet the requirements of time;
- lack of clear algorithms and procedures for implementing the method of free debate during the study of legal disciplines.
References
Aganina, R. N. (2018). Diskussiya kak metod interaktivnogo obucheniya v obrazovatel'nom processe. Vestnik Universiteta im. O. E. Kutafina, № 3 (43), 108–116.
Annenkova, N. V. (2015). Formirovanie obshchekul'turnyh kompetencij interaktivnymi metodami obucheniya. Prikladnaya psihologiya i psihoanaliz, № 1, 7
Belogorcev, N. N. (2017). Obshchekul'turnye kompetencii budushchih yuristov v kontekste vospityvayushchih tekhnologij sovremennogo vuza. Nauchnoe mnenie, № 9, 83–87.
Bobryshev, I., Bohachenko, P., Brich, Ye., Kozhemiakin, K., Lev, A., & Savosko, S. (2014). Tvii pomichnyk u debatnomu klubi: metodychnyi posibnyk. (Vyd. 3, zmin. i dop.). Ukraina: VMHO «FDU». Za pidtrymky Mizhnarodnoho Fondu «Vidrodzhennia». URL: https://studfiles.net/preview/5081378/page:2/.
Claxton, Nancy E. (2008). Using deliberative techniques in the English as a foreign language classroom: a manual for teachers of advanced level students. New York: IDEA.
Didukh, O. O. (2014). Zahalna kharakterystyka debativ u konteksti rozrobky metodyky navchannia maibutnikh vykladachiv anhliiskoi movy vedennia debativ. URL: https://otherreferats.allbest.ru/ pedagogics/01106454_0.html.
Fedrizzi M. & Ellis R. (2011). Debate. Mason: South Western Cengage Learning.
Firmin, Michael W., Vaughn, Aaron, & Dye, Amanda. (2007). Using Debate to Maximize Learning Potential: A Case Study. Journal of College Teaching & Learning. Vol. 4, Num. 1, 18–30.
Foster, William Trufant. (1917). Argumentation and debating. Boston, New York, Chicago: Houghton Mifflin company.
Frankovskaya, O. N. (2002). Razvitie refleksii u shkol'nikov cherez debatnuyu tekhnologiyu. Debaty: problemy, issledovaniya i perspektivy: sb. Riga: Ped. centr «Eksperiment».
Freeley, Austin J., & Steinberg, David L. (2009). Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making, Twelfth Edition. Boston: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Grebnev, L. S. (2015). Obshchekul'turnye kompetencii i vospityvayushchie tekhnologii. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii, № 10, 48–51.
Gurvich, P. B. (1974). Osnovy obucheniya ustnoj rechi na yazykovyh fakul'tetah: kurs lekcij. CH. ІІ. Vladimir: b. i.
Hutmacher, Walo. (1997). Key Competencies for Europe. Report of the Symposium (Berne, Switzerland, March 27-30, 1996). A Secondary Education for Europe Project. Council for Cultural Cooperation, Strasbourg (France).
Harperskaya enciklopediya voennoj istorii. (2000). Sankt-Peterburg: Poligon.
Johnson, Steven L. (2009). Winning debates: a guide to debating in the style of the world universities debating championships. New York: International Debate Education Association.
Imzharova, Z. (2008). Debaty yak pedahohichna tekhnolohiia. URL: http://ru.osvita.ua/school/method/ technol/369/.
Kalinkina, E. G. (2007). Debaty kak sredstvo formirovaniya kommunikativnoj kompetentnosti pedagogov v usloviyah povysheniya kvalifikacii. (Diss. kand. ped. nauk). Akademiya povysheniya kvalifikacii i personal'noj perepodgotovki rabotnikov obrazovaniya, Moskva.
Kartashova, L. E., & Klyusheva, A. A. (2015). O roli uchebnoj discipliny «Oratorskoe iskusstvo» v formirovanii yurista. Pravo i zakon, № 8, 63–66.
Kirilin, K. A. (2015). Vozmozhnosti ispol'zovaniya innovacionnoj obrazovatel'noj tekhnologii «Debaty» v uchebnom processe: istoriko-filosofskij aspekt. Mir Evrazii, № 1 (28), 37–41.
Kompetentnosti dlia kultury demokratii – Zhyvemo razom yak rivnopravni hromadiany v kulturno bahatomanitnomu demokratychnomu suspilstvi. (2016). Strasburh: Vydavnytstvo Rady Yevropy. URL: http://book.coe.int.
Krouford, A., Saul, V., Metiuz, S., & Makinster, D. (2008). Tekhnolohii rozvytku krytychnoho myslennia uchniv. O. I. Pometun (Nauk. red.). Kyiv: Vyd-vo «Pleiady».
Kuznecova, G. N. (2015). Ispol'zovanie interaktivnyh metodov v sisteme obucheniya budushchih yuristov. Mir nauki, kul'tury i obrazovaniya, № 4 (53), 128–131.
Lipman, M. (2006). Chym mozhe buty krytychne myslennia? Visnyk prohram shkilnykh obminiv, № 27, 17–23. Kyiv: Vyd. dim «Kyievo-Mohylianska akademiia».
Liubashenko, O. & Popova, O. (2018). Dyskusiia yak metod interaktyvnoho navchannia movy v serednii shkoli. Ars linguodidacticae (Mystetstvo linhvodydaktyky): Naukovyi zhurnal, № 2 (1-2018), 4–11. Kyiv: Liv-prynt.
Lubetsky, M., LeBeau, C., & Harrington, D. (2000). Discover Debate. Santa Barbara: Language Solutions.
Nikora, A. (2016). Metodychni aspekty vykorystannia debativ u navchanni studentiv-istorykiv. Naukovyi visnyk MNU imeni V. O. Sukhomlynskoho. Pedahohichni nauky, № 1 (52), 39–42.
Oreshina, E. E. (2008). Metodika obucheniya obsuzhdeniyu problemy v forme debatov. (Diss. kand. ped. nauk). Tambovskij gosudarstvennyj universitet, Tambov.
Panchenkov, A. (2005). Debaty yak efektyvna tekhnolohiia navchannia. URL: http://ru.osvita.ua/school/ method/technol/1121/.
Pometun, O. (2010). Prava liudyny. Prohrama kursu za vyborom dlia profilnykh klasiv. Istoriia Ukrainy, pravoznavstvo ta inshi suspilni dystsypliny, № 28 (668), 9–13.
Pometun, O., & Pyrozhenko, L. (2004). Suchasnyi urok. Interaktyvni tekhnolohii navchannia: nauk.-metod. posibnyk. Kyiv: Vydavnytstvo A.S.K.
Rybold, Gary. (2006). Speaking, Listening and Understanding: debate for non–native-English speakers. New York, Amsterdam, Brussels: International Debate Education Association.
Shnajder, A., & SHnurer, M. (2009). Navchannya cherez debati: rіznomanіttya poglyadіv (adapt. perekl. z angl.). Kiїv: BF «Vchitelі za demokratіyu ta partnerstvo».
Smirnova, E. V. (1999). Razvitie kul'tury inoyazychnogo polilogicheskogo obshcheniya v poslevuzovskom obrazovanii prepodavatelej inostrannogo yazyka. (Diss. kand. ped. nauk). Akademiya povysheniya kvalifikacii i personal'noj perepodgotovki rabotnikov obrazovaniya, Moskva.
Sneider, A. (2008). The Code of Debater: Introduction to Policy Debating. New York: International Debate Education Association.
Sushchenko, I. (2003). Navchannia debativ: zbirka materialiv dlia kerivnykiv debatnykh klubiv ta vchyteliv, yaki navchaiut debativ i dyskusii. Kyiv: b.v.
Sushchenko, I. (2006). Debaty v shkoli. Yak navchyty uchniv arhumentatsii ta publichnoho movlennia?: posib. dlia vchyteliv. Ternopil: Aston.
Svetenko, T. V. (2002). Putevoditel' po debatam. Moskva: ROSSPEN.
Titova, O. (2018a). Debaty kak sredstvo razvitiya obshchekul'turnyh kompetencij v processe podgotovki yuristov v vuze (na primere kursa «konfliktologiya»). Pedagogicheskie nauki, № 15. URL: http://novaum.ru/public/p933.
Titova, O. I. (2018b). Tolerantnost' k neopredelennosti kak faktor otnosheniya k delovomu vzaimodejstviyu v kontekste razvitiya obshchekul'turnyh kompetencij studentov vuza. Sibirskij psihologicheskij zhurnal, № 68. DOI: 10.17223/17267080/68/8.
Toftul, M. H. (1999). Lohika: posibnyk dlia vuziv. Kyiv: Akademiia.
Ur, P. (1993). Discussions that work: Task-Centered Fluency Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Voloshina, N. V. (2006). Debaty kak rechevoj zhanr v professional'noj deyatel'nosti uchitelya. (Diss. kand. ped. nauk). Moskovskij pedagogicheskij gosudarstvennіj unіversitet, Moskva, 2006. Gorelova, L. N., & Korableva, G. N. (2015). Debaty kak uchebnaya igra v vuze. Mir nauki i obrazovaniya, № 3(3), 3.
Yermolenko, A. B. (2015). Debatni tekhnolohii: pedahohichna praktyka. Pisliadyplomna osvita v Ukraini, № 1 (36), 81–85.
Zarefsky, D. (2005). Argumentation: The Study of Effective Reasoning, 2nd edition: Course Guidebook. Chantilly, Virginia: The Great Courses Corporate Headquarters.
Zyma, O. V. (2012). Uchnivski debaty yak sposib rozvytku krytychnoho myslennia starshoklasnykiv na urokakh suspilstvoznavchykh predmetiv. URL: http://ipvid.org.ua/upload/iblock/a09/a09a298a5c7c1 bd9c24a92b0a22a7be3.pdf.
Downloads
-
PDF (Українська)
Downloads: 284
