COMMUNICATIVE TOLERANCE AS A PSYCHOLOGICAL FACTOR OF JUSTICE IN PEDAGOGICAL INTERACTION

Abstract

The article presents the results of theoretical and empirical study of communicative tolerance. Tolerance is defined as the teacher’s personal formation, which is manifested in their respect for the personality of the student, student rights and is associated with the assertion of the dual dominance of the participants positions in pedagogical interaction. It is specified that the achievement of justice in the relationship between students and teachers is conditioned by the manifestation of the latter’s communicative tolerance. It acts as a quality (value) of the teacher who in communicative dialogic interaction with school students is manifested in the acceptance of the personality of each of them, understanding their behavior motivation, respect for value-notional positions and attitudes. It is noted that the level of development of communicative tolerance of the teacher indicates the degree of value attitude towards students, his/her willingness to build relationships on the principles of humanism and justice. The article provides the results of empirical research, according to which general communicative tolerance is sufficiently developed in a modern native teacher. It is established that both beginner teachers and teachers having acquired professional experience possess medium and high levels of general communicative tolerance. However, it is stated that in different situations, this feature has a different degree of manifestation. Teachers having little teaching experience, compared to senior colleagues, possess the medium degree of ability to accept the individuality of students, assess them on the basis of their own sense of self, hide the negative attitude towards them. It was found that to a greater extent the teachers having sufficient pedagogical experience demonstrate the tendency to accept students with their advantages and disadvantages, not to resort to negative behavioral tendencies and to show adaptability in relationships. It is generalized that the specified features of the teacher and lack of categoricalness while estimating the students are the conditions for achievement of justice in pedagogical interaction.

References

1. Brodskyi, D. (2002). Nekotorie psykholohycheskye osnovi sotsyalnoi tolerantnosty [Some psychological foundations of social tolerance]. Prava rebenka y tolerantnost. Yspolzovanye soobshchestva v ramkakh obuchaiushcheho protsessa, (рр. 142–159). Rostov-na-Donu : Dana, [in Russian].
2. Karpiuk, Yu.Ia. (2019). Komunikatyvna tolerantnist yak determinanta profesiinoi kompetentnosti suchasnoho psykholoha [Communicative tolerance as a determinant of professional competence of a modern psychologist]. Teoriia i praktyka suchasnoi psykholohii, 5(1), 93–99 [in Ukrainian].
3. Klochek, L.V. (2019). Psykholohiia sotsialnoi spravedlyvosti u pedahohichnii vzaiemodii.[Psykholohiia sotsialnoi spravedlyvosti u pedahohichnii vzaiemodii]. Doctor’s thesis. Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
4. Kremen, V.H. (2011). Tolerantnist yak imperatyv: natsionalna identychnist v dobu hlobalizatsii [Tolerance as an imperative: national identity in the age of globalization]. Politychnyi menedzhment, 2, 14–32 [in Ukrainian].
5. Kuzmenko, R.I. (2020). Tolerantnist v liudskomu butti: ekzystentsialni ta henderni vymiry [Tolerance in human existence: existential and gender dimensions]. Doctor’s thesis. Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
6. Lypatov, V.A. (2008). Semantycheskye podkhodі k opredelenyiu sotsyalnoi tolerantnosty [Semantic approaches to the definition of social tolerance]. Materyals mezhdunarodnoho Foruma studencheskykh nauchnskh obshchestv y molodskh uchenskh dukhovnskh y svetskykh uchebnskh zavedenyi, (рр. 46–54). Kursk : Slavianka. Retrieved from http://www.religare.ru/ 2_55331_1_21.html [in Russian].
7. Skok, A.H. (2011). Model navchannia tolerantnosti [Tolerance learning model] Visnyk Chernihivskoho natsionalnoho pedahohichnoho universytetu imeni T.H. Shevchenka: Psykholohichni nauky, 94(II), 162–164 [in Ukrainian].
8. Fetyskyn, N.P. (2002). Sotsyalno-psykholohycheskaia dyahnostyka razvytyia lychnosty y malikh hrupp.[Socio-psychological diagnosis of personality development and small groups]. Moscow : Yn-t Psykhoterapyy [in Russian].
9. Khamytov, N.V. (2009). Etyka y Estetyka. Slovar kliuchevikh termynov. [Ethics and aesthetics. Dictionary of key terms]. Kyiv : KNT[in Ukrainian].
10. De Cremer,, & Ruiter, R.A.G. (2003). Emotional reactions toward procedural fairness as a function of negative information. The Jornal of Social Psychology, 143, 793–795.
11. Garbarino, (2018). The impact of anticipated reward upon cross-age tutoring. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 32(3), 421–428. Retrieved from https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/h0077087.
12. Lei, Shi (2015). The study of the influence of the work stress on job burnout of knowledge-based employee – Based on the regulating effect of emotional intelligence. Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Industrial Technology and Management Science, 1627–1630. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.2991/itms-15.2015.396 .
13. Tourinan, Lopez, & Familia,M. (2008). Escuela y sociedal civil. Agentes de educacion intercultural. La Coruna : Netbiblo.