Mechanisms for Optimizing and Updating the Content and Methodological Training of Future Primary School Teachers

The article presents a structural practice-oriented model of preparing a future teacher for an active professional activity, taking into account the educational standards of primary general education, based on practical forms of educational activity, provided with a high level of theoretical knowledge and possession of the methodology and technologies of self-knowledge. The model embodies the original scientific and methodological support for the process of professional training of future teachers at Kazan University, the system priority of which was the realization of the student's personal capabilities through interactive methods of his cognitive, communicative and axiological activities. Scientific and methodological support is considered as an applied empirical mechanism for optimizing and updating the content and methodological training of future teachers who are capable of creative organization of the process of teaching younger students, of effective adjustment and development of basic educational programs in elementary school.

The information-logistical approach has become the leading one in the study of the problem, which is important in conditions when the content of education is shiſting from memorization to the search, selection and comprehension of information, and teacher training is carried out in an environment that provides an integrated perception of experience, allowing him to be included in the advanced design of the content of education.

The article describes a system of interrelated practice-oriented activities, determined by the dynamics of content modules, the conditions for their implementation and evaluation criteria, aimed at developing the professional competencies of future teachers, improving their qualifications and professional skills in obtaining personal, meta-subject and subject results. The original scientific and methodological support for the process of professional training of future teachers offers interactive methods that represent innovative and unique tools for designing the learning process and predicting its effectiveness, allowing you to most accurately determine the advantages and problems of the real educational process of teacher training when testing new technologies and teaching methods. The implementation of the proposed scientific and methodological support expands and actualizes the resource content of the educational process through empirical research based on the study, analysis and generalization of real innovative pedagogical experience.

1. Ambrosetti, A., Capeness, R., Kriewaldt, J., & Rorrison, D. (2018). Educating future teachers: Insights, conclusions and challenges. In J. Kriewaldt, A. Ambrosetti, D. Rorrison & R. Capeness (Eds.), Educating future teachers: Innovative perspectives in professional experience (pp. 235-244). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5484-6

2. Asmolov, A. G. (1997). Additional education as a zone of proximal development of education in Russia: from traditional pedagogy to development pedagogy. Vneshkol'nik – Out-of-school student, 9, 6-8.

3. Buylova, L.N. (2015). Modern trends in updating the content of additional general educational programs. Innovative science, 8-1(8), 83-89

4. Gnatyuk, O. L. (2014). Modern models of higher education. Part 2: Dilemmas of choosing the Russian model of higher education. Vestnik LGU imeni A. S. Pushkina – Pushkin Leningrad State University Journal, 2(3), 202-210.

5. Gukalenko, O. V., Tkach, L. T., & Panova, L. D. (2018). Preparation of the future teachers to the professional activity in a multicultural educational environment. Otechestvennaya i zarubezhnaya pedagogika – Domestic and Foreign Pedagogy, 1(3(50)), 153-163.

6. Guney, Z. (2019). Visual literacy and visualization in instructional design and technology for learning environments. European Journal of Contemporary Education, 8(1), 103-117. https://doi.org/10.13187/ejced.2019.1.103

7. Huang, K. L. (2010). Planning and implementation framework for a hybrid e-learning model: The context of a part-time LIS postgraduate programme. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 42(1), 45-69. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000609351367

8. Hungerford-Kresser, H., & Amaro-Jimenez, C. (2020). The teacher preparation initiative: a professional development framework for faculty. Journal of Education for Teaching, 46(1), 117-119. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2019.1708631

9. Ibragimov, G. I. (2019). Methodology of research-oriented training in the teacher education system. Obrazovaniye i samorazvitiye – Education and Self Development, 14(3), 117-127. https://doi.org/10.26907/esd14.3.11

10. Jeantheau, J.-P., & Johnson, S. (2020). Assessment innovation and reform in France. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 27(3), 290-308. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1577218

11. Kamalova, L. A., & Zhirkova, C. P. (2021). Developing teacher competences: Key issues and values. In I. Gafurov et al. (Eds), Risks of Early Emotional Burnout in Young Teachers: Causes and Prevention (pp. 243-273). Nova Science publishers.

12. Kamalova, L. A., Sabirova, E. G., & Sadovaya V. V. (2019). Mentorship model “Educator-Student-Pupil» in the system of continuing education of Kazan Federal University. ARPHA Proceedings, 1, 295-308. https://doi.org/10.3897/ap.1.e0277

13. Kayumova, L. R. & Vlasova, V. K. (2017). Risks in educational setting: The issue of identification. In R. Valeeva (Ed.), IFTE 2017, vol. 29 European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences (pp. 919-923). https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2017.08.02.105

14. Kayumova, L. R., Zakirova, V. G., & Vlasova, V. K. (2019). Experience of using foresight sessions in preparing teachers to deal with risks. Scientific and methodological electronic journal ‘Koncept’, 2, 67-77. https://doi.org/10.24411/2304-120X-2019-11014

15. Khairova, I. V., & Zakirova, V. G. (2019). Development of future primary school teachers’ linguistic and methodological competence. ARPHA Proceedings, 1, 333-344. https://doi.org/10.3897/ap.1.e0314

16. Kondakov, A. M., & Sergeev I. S. (2020). Education in a convergent environment: Problem statement. Pedagogika – Pedagogy, 12, 5-21.

17. Latham, D. (2002). The role of technical and professional communication in the LIS curriculum. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 42(1), 155-163. https://doi.org/10.2307/40323976

18. Maksimenkova, O. V., & Neznanov, A. A. (2019). Collaborative technologies in education: how to build an effective system for blended learning? Universitetskoye upravleniye: praktika i analiz – University management: practice and analysis, 23(1-2), 101-110. https://doi.org/10.15826/umpa.2019.01-2.008

19. Maxwell, B. (2017). Codes of professional conduct and ethics education for future teachers. Philosophical Inquiry in Education, 24(4), 323-347. https://doi.org/10.7202/1070690ar

20. Mikhailov, V. Yu., Kirilova, G. I., & Vlasova, V. K. (2009). Modern methods of modeling pedagogical systems. Kachestvo. Innovatsii. Obrazovaniye – Quality. Innovation. Education, 7(50), 2-8.

21. Morozov, A. V., & Shorina, T. V. (2017). The structure of scientific and methodological support of visualization of the educational information in modern higher education system. Upravlenie obrazovaniem: Teoriya i praktika – Education Management Review, 28(4), 14-24.

22. Redkina, T. M., Firova, I. P., & Solomonova, V. N. (2020). Hybrid forms of education - a means of ensuring the global competitiveness of Russian education. Globalnii nauchnii potencial – Global Scientific Potential, 115(10), 163-165.

23. Sabirova, E. G. (2016). Pedagogical guest room as an educational form of students’ pedagogical competence development. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 11(6), 1059-1064.

24. Sabirova, E. G., & Zakirova, V. G. (2012). Types of interactions of subjects in the information and educational environment. Kazanskiy pedagogicheskiy zhurnal – Kazan Pedagogical Journal, 1, 159-163.

25. Sergeev, N. K., & Borytko, N. M. (2014). Conceptions and technologies of teacher training in the system of continuous pedagogic education. Izvestiya Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta – Ivzestia of the Volgograd State Pedagogical University, 94(9), 31-39.

26. Sokolova, V. A., Zakirova, V. G., Kayumova, L. R., & Ivanov, D. V. (2021). Safe behavioral models of younger schools on the internet. Vestnik NTsBZhD, 47(1), 31-39.

27. Sun, T. (2020, May 16). How to create effective learning for students online. World University Press. https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20200515072512826

28. Talanchuk, N. M. (1991). Introduction to neo-pedagogy: A guide for innovative educators. Assotsiatsiya 'Professional'noye obrazovaniye'.

29. Toffler, E. (2002). Future Shock. AST Publishing House.

30. Valencia, S. W., Martin, S. D., Place, N. A., & Grossman, P. (2009). Complex Interactions in Student Teaching: Lost Opportunities for Learning. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(3), 304-322. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487109336543

31. Vlasova, V. K., & Zakirova, V. G. (2012). Updating the content of pedagogical education under modern conditions. Filologiya i kul'tura – Philology and Culture, 29(3), 243-247.

32. Vlasova, V. Yu. (2020). How the student’s life activity changes in the new conditions: problems and opportunities. Skif. Voprosi studencheskoi nauki – Questions of Student Science, 51(11), 138-142.

33. Zagvyazinsky, V. I. (2016). On a systematic approach to the reform of domestic education. Pedagogika – Pedagogy, 1, 12-18.

34. Zakirova, V. G., Kamalova, L. A., & Galieva, G. N. (2020). Methods of working with online simulators at the university: a teaching aid for bachelor students of pedagogical universities and universities. Kazan: Otechestvo.