Activity theory (activity approach in psychology). Integrated and systematic approaches in domestic psychology

Activity approach (in psychology) activity approach- a set of theoretical, methodological and concrete empirical studies in which the psyche and consciousness, their formation and development are studied in various forms of objective activity of the subject, and among some representatives of the D.P. psyche and consciousness are considered as special forms (types) of this activity, derived from its externally practical forms. Prerequisites The activity approach developed in Russian psychology in the 1920s.

They became:

1. the need for a new methodological orientation capable of leading psychology out of the crisis that began in the 1910-1920s;
2. a shift in the topic of Russian psychology from laboratory studies of abstract laws of consciousness and behavior to the analysis of various forms of work activity;
3. historically conditioned appeal of psychologists to the philosophy of Marxism, in which the category of activity is one of the central ones.

In the 1930s there are 2 most developed variants of D. p., presented by the research of psychological schools of S.L. Rubinstein, on the one hand, and A.N. Leontyev - with others. Currently, both variants of D. p. are being developed by their followers not only in our country, but also in Western European countries, as well as in the USA, Japan and Latin American countries.

The works of Rubinstein in the 1930s played a major role in the methodological substantiation of dynamic psychology, where he formulated the fundamental theoretical principle of dynamic psychology - the unity of consciousness and activity. In parallel, Leontyev and other members of the Kharkov school are theoretically and experimentally developing the problem of the common structure of external and internal activities.

The differences between the two variants of D. p. were clearly formulated in the 1940-50s. and affect mainly 2 circles of problems. 1. This is a problem in the subject of psychological science. With t.zr. Rubinstein, psychology should study not the activity of the subject as such, but “the psyche and only the psyche,” however, through the disclosure of its essential objective connections and mediations, incl. through action research. Leontiev, on the contrary, believed that activity must inevitably be included in the subject of psychology, since the psyche is inseparable from the moments of activity that generate and mediate it, moreover: it itself is a form of objective activity (according to P.Ya. Galperin, indicative activity).

2. The disputes concerned the relationship between external practical activity itself and consciousness. According to Rubinstein, one cannot talk about the formation of “internal” mental activity from “external” practical activity through interiorization: before any interiorization, the internal (mental) plan is already present. Leontyev believed that the internal plane of consciousness is formed precisely in the process of interiorization of initially practical actions that connect a person with the world of human objects. At the same time, he argued that when solving the problem of the unity of consciousness and activity, Rubinstein did not go beyond the dichotomy he himself criticized: consciousness is still considered not in an “activity key”, but as “experiences”, “phenomena”, as “internal ”, and activity appears as something fundamentally “external”, and then the unity of consciousness and activity appears only as a postulated unity, but unprovable. Leontiev proposed his own version of “removing” this dichotomy: the real opposition is the opposition between image and process (the latter can exist in both external and internal forms). The image and the process are in unity, but the leading one in this unity is the process that connects the image with the reflected reality (for example, generalizations are formed in the process of real practical “transfer” of one method of action to other conditions). Hence Leontiev’s introduction of the concepts “consciousness-image” and “consciousness-process”, consideration of the relationships between which is largely a matter for the future.

Specific empirical developments of the principle of the unity of consciousness and activity in psychological development (with all the differences in its theoretical understanding) can be divided conditionally into 6 groups according to forms of mental development:

1. in phylogenetic studies, the problem of the emergence of mental reflection in evolution and the identification of stages of mental development of animals depending on their activity was developed (A.N. Leontiev, A.V. Zaporozhets, K.E. Fabry, etc.);
2. in historical and anthropological research, in a specifically psychological sense, the problem of the emergence of consciousness in the process of human labor activity was considered (Rubinstein, Leontiev), the psychological differences between human tools and auxiliary means of activity in animals (Halperin);
3. Sociogenetic studies examine differences in the relationship between activity and consciousness in different historical eras and different cultures (A.N. Leontiev, A.R. Luria, M. Cole, representatives of Critical Psychology, etc.), however, the problems of the sociogenesis of consciousness have not yet been sufficiently developed in D. p.;
4. From the most numerous ontogenetic studies in line with dynamic psychology, independent activity-oriented theories arose (the theory of periodization of mental development in ontogenesis by D. B. Elkonin, the theory of developmental learning by V. V. Davydov, the theory of the formation of perceptual actions by A. V. Zaporozhets, etc. );
5. functional genetic studies based on the principle of the unity of consciousness and activity (the development of mental processes in short time periods) are represented by the works of not only the schools of Leontiev and Rubinstein, but also other famous psychologists (B.M. Teplov, B.G. Ananyev, A. A. Smirnov, N.A. Bernshtein, etc.);
6. patho- and neuropsychological studies of the collapse of higher mental functions and the role of specific forms of activity in their restoration (A.R. Luria, E.D. Khomskaya, L.S. Tsvetkova, B.V. Zeigarnik, etc.).

Within the framework of the listed areas of research in dynamic psychology, a number of the most important theoretical problems of psychology were developed, including: the problem of the macro- and microstructure of human activity (activity - action - operation - functional block), the problem of the structure of consciousness-image (sensory tissue, meaning, personal Meaning), the problem of interiorization as the most important mechanism for the formation of consciousness, the problem of periodization of mental development using the concept of “Leading activity” developed in D. P., etc. Based on general psychological ideas of D. P., activity-oriented theories are being developed in various branches of psychology (social, child psychology, pathopsychology, etc.). (E.E. Sokolova)

Adding edit .: In the situation of the owls. “ideological community”, when not only many scientific directions, but entire branches and even sciences began to be prohibited, Rubinstein and Leontiev acted quite witty and wisely, giving psychology “for Preservation” to a philosophical category of activity unceremoniously privatized by Marxism. Psychologists, for whom the category of activity did not fit, hid behind Lenin’s “theory of reflection” (and the mirror poses as a know-it-all. - O. Mandelstam). The category of activity served for Rubinstein and Leontyev as a kind of reserve, a reservation, a means of ideological defense of psychology and its survival as a science. The psyche was either identified with activity, or activity acted as practically the only explanatory means, a synonym for the so-called. the principle of determinism of the entire psyche. As a result, psychology found itself within a relatively safe environment, from an ideological point of view. circle of activity and/or “circle of reflection”, which allowed it to exist. Both, especially Leontiev, did not write in the simplest language, which closed the entry to the territory of the D. p. to the profane. They discussed private matters with each other. Under the protection of D. p., a number of remarkably philosophical and ideologically carefree scientists conducted psychological research. The real subject of their work was not activity as such, but some special types of it, and even then not in full, for example, gaming, educational, labor, sports. In their study, the conceptual apparatus of dynamic analysis was used and developed. A large number of conceptual schemes for analyzing activity were proposed, none of which has obvious advantages over others.

The main achievement of the activity approach is that within its framework a productive direction has been formed - the psychology of action, which represents the quintessence of dynamic psychology (see E.G. Yudin). Sensory, perceptual, objective, performing, mnemonic, mental, affective and other actions, as well as their structural components: motives, goals, tasks, methods of implementation and conditions for implementation were studied. The reduction of the psyche to action turned out to be no worse, and in many ways better, than the reduction of the psyche to reflexes, reactions, associations, gestalts, behavior, reflection, cognition, experience, humanism, neurons. The listed forms of reduction are still alive. Assessing D.'s claims to the creation of a psychological theory, we have to admit that they are excessive. The activity itself needs explanation. On the path from consciousness, personality, soul, spirit to activity, psychology takes its first steps. Now psychology must repay its debt and take “for Preservation” D. p., of course, releasing its consciousness, freeing itself from slavish dependence on it, from complete identification of itself with it. Cm . also see Phylogenesis), historical (see Sociogenesis), ontogenetic (see. Ontogenesis) and functional development.

Basic principles Activity approach: principles of development and historicism; objectivity; activity, including supra-situational activity as a specific feature of the human psyche; interiorization-exteriorization as mechanisms for assimilating socio-historical experience; unity of structure of external and internal activities; systemic analysis of the psyche; dependence of mental reflection on the place of the reflected object in the structure of activity.

In the context of the activity approach, the criteria for the emergence of the psyche and the stages of development of the psyche in phylogenesis are highlighted, ideas are developed about leading activity as the basis and driving force for the development of the psyche in ontogenesis, about assimilation as a mechanism for forming an image, about the structure of activity (activity, action, operation, psychophysiological functional systems ), about meaning, personal meaning and sensory tissue as forming consciousness, about the hierarchy of motives and personal meanings as units of personality structure. The activity approach acts as a specific scientific methodology for special branches of psychology (age, pedagogical, engineering, medical, etc.)

Dictionary of psychiatric terms. V.M. Bleikher, I.V. Crook

Neurology. Complete explanatory dictionary. Nikiforov A.S.

no meaning or interpretation of the word

Oxford Dictionary of Psychology

no meaning or interpretation of the word

subject area of ​​the term

1. Psychological theory of activity and its foundations

1.1. Psychological theory of activity

1.2. Three levels of psychological theory of activity and its initial

preconditions

2. Activity-based approach to learning

1. Psychological theory of activity and its foundations

1.1. Psychological theory of activity

The theory of activity, which considers personality in the context of the generation, functioning and structure of mental reflection in processes of activity, was developed in the second half of the 20th century. in the works of Leeontyev.

What is being considered in the psychological theory of activity is the integral activity of the subject as an organic system in all its forms and types. The initial method for studying the psyche is the analysis of transformations of mental reflection in activity, studied in its phylogenetic, ontogenetic and functional aspects.

Geneetically, the initial source is external, pre-objective, sensory-practical activity, from which all types of internal mental activity of the individual and consciousness are derived. Both of these forms have a social-historical origin and a fundamentally common structure. The constitutive characteristic of activity is subjectivity. Initially, activity is determined by the object, and then it is mediated and reregulated by its image as its subjective product.

The mutually transforming units of activity are considered to be needs<=>motive<=>tseel<=>conditions and related activities<=>actions<=>operations. By action we mean a process whose action and motive coincide with each other. The motive and the object must be reflected in the psyche of the subject: any other action is deprived of its meaning for it.

Action in the Theory of Activity is more internally connected with personal meaning. Psychological fusion into a single action of the department. private actions represents the transformation of the latter into operations, and the content, which previously occupied the place of the realized goals of private actions, occupies the structural place of the conditions for its implementation in the structure of the action. Another type of operation arises from the simple adaptation of an action to the conditions of its implementation. Operations are the quality of actions that form actions. The genesis of an operation consists in the correlation of actions, their inclusion in one another.

In the Theory of Activity, the concept of “motive-purpose” is introduced, i.e. it. a conscious motive, acting as a “general goal” and a “zone of goals”, the allocation of which depends on the motive or a specific goal, and the process of goal formation is always associated with the testing of the goal by action.

Together with the birth of this action, ch. "units" of human activity, the main, social, by its nature, "unit" of the human psyche arises - the meaning for a person of what its activity is directed towards. Geogenesis, the development and functioning of consciousness are derived from one or another level of development of the forms and functions of activity. Together with the change in the structure of a person’s activity, the internal structure of his consciousness also changes.

The emergence of a system of subordinate actions, i.e. complex action, denotes a transition from a conscious goal to a conscious condition of action, the emergence of more levels of awareness. The division of labor and production specialization give rise to a “shift of motive to purpose” and the transformation of action into activity. There is a birth of new motives and needs, which entails a qualitative differentiation of awareness. Further, it assumes a transition to internal mental processes, internal actions appear, and subsequently - internal activity and internal operations formed according to the general law of shift of motives. Activity, ideal in its form, is fundamentally separated from external, practical activity, and both of them are meaningful and meaning-forming processes. Ch. The processes of activity are the internalization of its form, leading to the subject, the image of reality, and the externalization of its internal form as a definition of the image, as its transition into an objective, ideal property predominates.

Meaning is the center, the concept with the help of which the situational development of motivation is explained and a psychological interpretation of the processes of meaning formation and re-regulation of activity is given. Personality in the Theory of Activity is an internal moment of activity, a certain unique unity that plays its role as the highest integrative authority that controls mental processes, an integral psychological new formation that is formed in the life relationships of the individual as a result of the transformation of his actions activity. Personality arises for the first time in society. A person enters history as an individual endowed with natural properties and abilities, and he becomes a personality only as a subject of societies and relationships.

The concept of “personality” denotes a relatively late product of the social-historical and ontogenetic development of the human society of Societies; relationships are realized by a set of diverse activities. The hierarchical relations of activities, behind which there are correlations of motives, characterize the personality. The latter is born twice: the first time - when the child manifests in obvious forms multimotivation and subordination of her actions, the second time - when her conscious personality arises.

The development of personality is the development of personal meanings. Personality psychology is crowned by the problem of self-awareness, since the main thing is awareness of oneself in a system of communities and relationships. Personality is what a person creates from himself, affirming his human life. The Theory of Activity proposes to use the following grounds when creating a typology of personality: the richness of the individual’s connections with the world, the degree of hierarchy of motives, their general structure.

At each age stage of personality development, the Theory of Activity more than any other type of activity is represented, which acquires leading significance in the formation of new mental processes and properties of the child’s personality. The development of the problem of leading activity was the fundamental contribution of Leeontyev to child and developmental psychology . This scientist not only characterized the change of leading activities in the process of child development, but also laid the foundation for the study of the mechanisms of this change, the transformation of one leading activity into another.

Based on the Theory of Activity, activity-oriented theories of social psychology of personality, child and developmental psychology, pathopsychology of personality, etc. have been developed and continue to be developed.

1.2. Three levels of psychological theory of activity and its initial

prerequisites

The psychological theory of activity can be presented (or, more accurately, should be presented) as a unity of three levels.

Firstly, these are the initial theoretical and methodological premises, developed with the help of various more particular conceptual schemes and ensuring its unity of the psychological theory of activity as a special scientific school (Vygotsky’s school).

Secondly, this is the actual psychological conceptual apparatus used in the psychological theory of activity and undergoing development and transformation in connection with the emergence of new research tasks and the expansion of research into new areas. And, thirdly, it is a system of specific interpretations of factual material.

The following can be considered as the initial theoretical and methodological (extremely abstract level of theory) premises of the psychological theory of activity. Overcoming the “postulate of non-mediocrity” by introducing the category of pre-substantive activity, defined as “a specifically human form of active relationship to the surrounding world, the content of which is the purposeful change and transformation of this world on the basis of the mastery and development of existing forms of culture”

The idea of ​​activity as its unity of processes of transformation and reflection of reality.

The idea of ​​the unity of “external” and “internal” forms of activity and the formation of the “internal” through the interiorization of the “external”.

The idea of ​​the unity of the subjective and objective, individual and social in activity and through activity.

Historical and genetic principle of analysis, implementing a systemic approach in the sense of K. Marx.

The psychological theory of activity was created in Soviet psychology and has been developing for more than 50 years. It is indebted to the work of Soviet psychologists: L. S. Vygotsky, S. L. Rubinshtein, A. N. Leeontyev, A. R. Luria, A. V. Zaporozhets, P. Ya. Galpeerin and many others.
The psychological theory of activity began to be developed in the 20s and early 30s. By this time, the sun had already set on the psychology of consciousness and new foreign theories were in full bloom - behaviorism, psychoanalysis, Gestalt psychology and a number of others. Thus, Soviet psychologists could already take into account the positive aspects and disadvantages of each of these theories.

But the main thing was that the authors of the theory of activity adopted the philosophy of dialectical materialism - the theory of K. Marx, and above all its main thesis for psychology that consciousness determines being, activity, and, on the contrary, being, activity of a person determines her consciousness. This general philosophical thesis found a concrete psychological development in the theory of activity.

The theory of activity is most fully expounded in the works of A. N. Leeontyev, in particular in his latest book “Activity. Consciousness. Personality.” Ideas about the structure of activity, although they completely exhaust the theory of activity, form its basis. Later, and especially in subsequent lectures, you will become acquainted with the application of the theory of activity to the solution of fundamental psychological problems, such as the subject of psychology, the origin and development of the psyche in philohontogeenesis, the origin of human consciousness, the nature of personality, etc.

Human activity has a complex hierarchical structure. It consists of several “layers” or levels. Let's name these levels, moving from top to bottom. This is, firstly, the level of special activities (or special types of activities); Let's start with the level of actions, the next is the level of operations, and finally, the lowest is the level of psychophysiological functions.

2. Activity-based approach to learning

2.1. The concept of the activity approach

The specificity of the activity approach to education and training lies in its primary orientation towards assisting the student in becoming a subject of his life activity. This fact determines the saturation of the conceptual apparatus with subjective issues. What kind of reality is the “subject” in psychology and pedagogy? This concept is considered in two meanings:

1) as a subject of activity, capable of mastering it and creatively transforming it;

2) as a subject of his life, inner world, capable of planning, building, evaluating his actions, actions, strategy and tactics of his life.

The vital meaning of pedagogy’s orientation towards the formation of the child’s subjectivity is as follows. A person must perform this or that activity, creatively transform it not due to the influence of circumstances on him, but due to an internal impulse emanating from the conscious necessity of this action. From the conviction of its truth, value, significance for him, society, for loved ones. The shortcoming of all previous theory and practice of education was precisely that activity was understood as any activity of the child, mainly reactive activity carried out in response to the demands of the teacher. In the context of the activity approach, only the activity of a self-determining personality, that is, a subject, is understood. Only in this way can activity be considered as a factor in education. The concept of the subject goes beyond the related concept of sanity, which has been largely forgotten by the theory and practice of education. In fact, sanity is one of the subjective properties of a person. To be sane means to be capable and ready to be responsible for one’s actions, actions, results of activities and communications. This quality of personality is easy to identify in real everyday behavior, especially when someone tries to justify the unseemly consequences of his action by “objective” circumstances and actually denies himself the right to be called a person due to the fact that he does not impute to himself his own action, refuses it. This is an example of insanity, evidence of the underdevelopment of the subjective principle, the absence of subjective properties. By revealing the concept of sanity, it is easy to reach another subjective characteristic of a person, provided by the concept of “personal dignity”.

The dignity of a person is determined precisely by what a person imputes to himself, what he takes under his responsibility. If he is not able to become responsible even for his own action, each time figuring out who to shift its consequences onto, then can we talk about the dignity of such a person? Dignity and sanity as subjective characteristics of a person are, as it were, merged; they can only be discussed in conjunction. Insanity is like a sentence of refusal to be a person, of inability to be responsible for something. Dignity, that is, a measure of the value of a person, is determined both by the skills and abilities of a person and not by the presence of talent or skills.

Personal dignity as a subjective property is manifested in the ability to take responsibility for a matter, for an action. And the more significant the deed, the action imputed to oneself, the higher the dignity of the individual. It is in this sense that dignity is a measure of the value of an individual. From this we can draw two important conclusions for assessing the activity approach from a moral perspective:

¨ the concepts of sanity and dignity represent the approach as focused on the moral foundations of a child’s existence;

¨ expose the most sensitive aspects and “places” for the application of educational efforts of the teacher: acquiring the qualities of sanity and dignity is the most attractive prospect for a youth.

Subjective personality traits are also manifested in a person’s ability to communicate, interact, establish personal contacts, and achieve mutual understanding. The ability to enter into dialogue and maintain it, the main thing is the developed ability to make semantic transformations not only in oneself, but also in others. To become a subject means to represent oneself to others, to be reflected in others, to continue oneself in them, to “be sealed.” The possibility of broadcasting and interchange of subjectivity lies the deep meaning of pedagogical interaction. The noted personality properties are represented by a whole “family” of concepts that reflect the subject’s focus on realizing his “self” - “self-esteem”, “self-education”, “self-analysis”, “self-restraint”, “self-identification”, “self-determination”, “self-education”.

We will highlight the third block of basic concepts, taking as a basis the methodological and methodological components of the approach, that is, what is designated in the definition of the approach as organization and management. The concepts of “organization” and “management” are interpreted in approximately the same way as is accepted in most successfully implemented concepts of education, namely, as the organization of the educational process and management of personal development by creating favorable conditions for it, which include the educational environment. Motivation of the teacher and the student, the personality of the teacher. At the same time, in the concepts of different authors, flexibility, indirectness, and diversity of forms of this management process are noted, which allows us to speak not so much of strict regulation, but of a carefully organized direction of development. This block includes categories and concepts: educational space, method, mechanisms of education, organization of the educational process, space of activity, result of education, situation of activity, situation of education, sociocultural educational space, means of education, subjective space, management of personality development, forms of education, goal education.

The peculiarity of the above list lies in its saturation with the ideas of situational education. The basic category in this regard is the activity situation, which is a modification of the concept of a pedagogical situation. The specific position of the activity approach in education regarding the relationship between the subject and the situation of activity is the fundamental lack of adaptation to be a person, a subject, which means to emancipate from the situation, to be above it, to strive for its transformation. At the same time, “to be above it” and “to be emancipated” is not only not to depend on the facts of the situation, but also to rise through the means of overcoming, “exceeding” tasks, to move above the situation, to enrich the situation with a set of possible activities. The concept of “upbringing mechanism” reflects the individual’s own activity, included in the educational process as a subject and co-author. However, in the case of the activity approach, it is not enough to indicate “one’s own activity.”

Not every activity is an activity in the educational aspect. The mechanism of education is focused on “non-adaptive activity”, which manifests itself in the phenomena of creativity, cognitive activity, in the creative transformation of the situation, in self-development, in the readiness not only to follow the intended goal, but also in the process of activity to construct new, more significant and interesting goals and meanings . The mechanism of education is also concentrated in “trans-situational activity” as a person’s readiness not only to independently and consciously perform various actions and deeds, but also to strive for something new, unplanned within the framework of already carried out activities.

The concept of “content of education” includes a joint search for values, norms and laws of life, their study in specific types of activities. It is important in this definition to clarify that the form of search is a modern reflective dialogue between teacher and student, in which the meaning of activity and life itself is found, and the subject of search is new forms, means, combinations and connections.

The concept of “education result” is associated with the category of quality. This is due to the fact that education differs from other pedagogical processes in its focus not on quantitative, but on qualitative transformations of the student (as well as the teacher himself). The child is introduced not only to knowledge, but mainly to the meaning of activities, events, his life, which constitutes the essence of a new quality of a person.

2.2.Activity approach to learning

Activity approach in education– a system of principles, forms and methods that ensure the priority acquisition of knowledge and skills necessary for effective and satisfying activities in various areas of practical life.

The technology of the activity method is a tool that allows you to solve the problem of changing the paradigm of education - from formative to developmental, i.e. to build an educational space in which students’ activity abilities are effectively developed. Today it is necessary to master not just one of the educational technologies within the framework of the old method, as happened before, but it is necessary to change the method itself - to move from explaining new knowledge to organizing the “discovery” of it by children. This means changing the teacher’s worldview and the usual ways of his work.

In the new conditions, the student’s personality, his ability to “self-determination and self-realization”, to independently make decisions and bring them to execution, and to reflectively analyze his own activities come to the fore.

With the activity approach, the teacher does not choose the teaching method, but develops it himself in accordance with the goals. program of activities yours and your students. By the program of activities of the teacher and students we understand the sequence of organizing actions of the teacher and the actions of students, which constitute the content of the types of activities specified in the development goals . This program can be presented briefly (condensed) in the form of the structure of the lesson and its individual parts and expanded in the form of a lesson script with fairly detailed reasoning from the teacher and expected reasoning from the students. As a result of pedagogical research, procedures for developing the structure and script of lessons of different types have been established.

An activity-based approach to developing lesson structure.

Since knowledge and experience are acquired by a person only through his own activities, the main stages of the lesson are naturally stages, each of which is devoted to the mastery of one type of activity indicated for development purposes. The lesson must, in addition, contain at least two auxiliary stages. Firstly, at the beginning of the lesson, previously acquired knowledge and actions are updated, on which the study of new material is based. Secondly, the lesson ends with control over the assimilation of new material, with students realizing their own achievements.

Each of the main stages of the lesson has its own structure - a number of substages. Mandatory substages are the motivation to learn new things (only what is the goal of the activity is realized) and the organization of students’ activities.

In addition to traditional means, the activity approach uses special means to manage the process of assimilation of knowledge and actions. The need to use such tools comes down to the following. If with traditional teaching the teacher prefers to explain the material, considering it inaccessible for independent study, then with the activity approach the teacher looks for such means of support that will allow students to carry out the planned actions independently. For example, when teaching students to solve problems on a particular topic in a school course, generalized solution methods provide significant assistance. At the initial stages of training, to organize students’ activities in creating a method for solving problems, you can use a set of cards on which the individual actions that make up the method are written out. Students are asked to establish a sequence of actions by placing the cards in order.

A textbook is a necessary condition and means of solid assimilation of educational material. The textbook creates an opportunity for children to return to this material in order to think more deeply and consolidate this material or its individual parts. The use of a textbook in the classroom has not yet been sufficiently studied. And facts show that some students do not prepare homework from the textbook, but answer in class using only what they have learned from the teacher.

Work on developing students' skills in working with a textbook should be carried out by teachers at all stages of education: when communicating new material, when comprehending and consolidating knowledge, when checking homework.

The didactic apparatus of a traditional textbook includes:

Educational information presentation device (text, signs, drawings, photographs);

Apparatus orientation (table of contents, preface, conclusion, indexes, dictionaries, application system);

Apparatus of development (examples of solving problems of various types, tables and diagrams as a means of systematizing educational information, a system of tasks and questions, tests for self-control).

The basis for the development of a modern textbook is the laws of psychology of perception and assimilation of various types of information, the laws of logic and methodology of knowledge, the provisions of general and specific didactics. It is important to note that the teaching potential of the traditional textbook in this direction is far from being exhausted.

The activity approach, in its primary focus on the formation of the child’s subjectivity, seems to compare in functional terms both spheres of education - teaching and upbringing: when implementing the activity approach, they equally contribute to the formation of the child’s subjectivity.

At the same time, the activity approach, implemented in the context of the life of a particular student, taking into account his life plans, value orientations and his other parameters of the subjective world, is essentially a personal-activity approach. Therefore, it is quite natural, in order to comprehend its essence, to distinguish two main components - personal and activity.

The activity approach to education in the totality of components is based on the idea of ​​the unity of the individual with his activity. This unity is manifested in the fact that activity in its diverse forms directly indirectly carries out changes in the structures of the personality; the personality, in turn, simultaneously directly and indirectly selects adequate types and forms of activity and transformations of activity that satisfy the needs of personal development.

The essence of education from the point of view of the activity approach is that the focus is not just on activity, but on the joint activity of children with adults in the implementation of jointly developed goals and objectives. The teacher does not provide ready-made examples of moral and spiritual culture, he creates and develops them together with younger comrades, a joint search for the norms and laws of life in the process of activity and constitutes the content of the educational process, implemented in the context of the activity approach.

The educational process in the aspect of the activity approach is based on the need to design, construct and create a situation of educational activity. They, leaving part of the educational process and the realization of the pupil’s existence, social life as a whole, are characterized by the unity of the activities of educators and pupils. Situations are created in order to combine the means of teaching and education into unified educational complexes that stimulate the versatile activities of modern man. Such situations make it possible to regulate the child’s life activity in all its integrity, versatility and literacy, and thereby create conditions for the formation of the student’s personality as a subject of various types of activities and his life activity in general.

The situation of educational activity should contain: social factors that initiate the emergence of various spiritual needs and the formation of motives for socially useful and personally significant creative activity, requiring continuous reflection; the possibility and necessity of carrying out various types of such activities that require creativity, a continuous search for new tasks, means, actions, volitional acts of subjects of activity, communication, an active life position, integrity, cognition in defending one’s views, selfless risk, excess activity, readiness not only to follow towards the intended goal, but also to construct new, more interesting and productive goals and meanings already in the process of activity. Organizing the situation of educational activities was an established practice of the Soviet school. Such situations were most fully represented by Timur's movements.

The activity approach focuses on sensitive periods of schoolchildren’s development as periods during which they are most “sensitive” to language acquisition, mastering methods of communication and activity, objective and mental actions. This orientation necessitates a continuous search for appropriate content of training and education, both substantive and identical, symbolic in nature, as well as appropriate methods of teaching and education.

With an activity-based approach to learning, the following components of knowledge acquisition are distinguished.

a) perception of information;

b) analysis of the information received (identification of characteristic features, comparison, awareness, transformation of knowledge, transformation of information);

c) memorization (creating an image);

d) self-esteem.

The activity approach to education takes into account the nature and laws of changing types of leading activity in the formation of a child’s personality as the basis for the periodization of child development. The approach in its theoretical and practical foundations takes into account scientifically substantiated provisions that all psychological new formations are determined by the leading activity carried out by the child and the need to change this activity.

The activity-based approach to education is implemented in line with the key idea of ​​modern pedagogy about the need to transform the student from primarily an object of the educational process primarily into a subject. Education is understood as “ascent to subjectivity.” E.V. sees the essence of modern pedagogical activity in the increasing subjective properties of the child. Bondarevskaya. She also considers subjective properties as the core of human culture.

Bibliography

1. Abramova G.S. “Practical Psychology” 6th ed., revised. and additional - M.: Academic Project, 2006.

2. Vygotsky L.S. "Psychology" M.: EKSMO-Press, 2004.

3. Druzhinin V.N. “Psychology” St. Petersburg: Peter, 2001.

4. Nemov R.S. Book 1. “Psychology”: Textbook. for students higher ped. textbook establishments: - M.: 2003

5. Nesterova O.V. “Pedagogical psychology in diagrams, tables and supporting notes” M.: Iris-press, 2006.

6. “Workshop on general, experimental and applied psychology” Ed. Krylova A.A., Manicheva S.A. 2nd ed., add. and processed - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2007.

7. “Psychology” Ed. Dubrovina I.V., Danilova E.E., Prikhozhan A.M. 2nd ed., erased. - M.: Academy, 2003.

8. Radugin A.A. “Psychology and Pedagogy” 2nd ed., rev. and additional - M.: Center, 2002.

9. Stepanov E.N., Luzina L.M. To the teacher about modern approaches and concepts of education. Moscow, 2002

10. Stolyarenko A.M. “Psychology and Pedagogy” M.: Unity-Dana, 2006.

“Workshop on general, experimental and applied psychology” Ed. Krylova A.A., Manicheva S.A. 2nd ed., add. and processed - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2007. Page 118

Radugin A.A. “Psychology and Pedagogy” 2nd ed., rev. and additional - M.: Center, 2002. Page 84

Nesterova O.V. “Pedagogical psychology in diagrams, tables and supporting notes” M.: Iris-press, 2006. Page 104

Nemov R.S. Book 1. “Psychology”: Textbook. for students higher ped. textbook establishments: - M.: 2003 Page 103

An active approach to the study of the psyche- a methodological concept of domestic psychology, which considers psychology as a science about the generation and functioning of the psyche in the process of active interaction of individuals with the environment.

The main postulate of this concept: the psyche is formed and manifests itself in activity. All other principles of psychology are based on this postulate: development, historicism, activity, objectivity, interiorization, the unity of the structure of external and internal activity, systemic analysis of the psyche, the dependence of mental reflection on the place of the object in the structure of activity.

Based on this concept, a theory of leading activity in the mental development of an individual, a theory of the structural organization of activity have been developed: activity - - operation, shift of motive to goal, shift of conditions of activity to goal, means and conditions of activity, psychology and psychophysiology of regulation of activity; conceptual and psychological concepts of the meaning and meaning of actions, a hierarchy of personal motives have been formed. The concept of the activity approach is widely and fruitfully used in all applied branches of domestic psychology (, etc.).

Fundamentals of the active approach in psychology

Rubinstein and Leontiev developed the theory in parallel and independently of each other. At the same time, they relied on the works and philosophical theory of K. Marx, so their works have a lot in common.

The basic thesis of the theory is formulated as follows: It is not consciousness that determines activity, but activity that determines consciousness.

On the basis of this position in the 30s, the basic principle was formed: “unity of consciousness and activity.” The psyche and consciousness are formed in activity and manifest themselves in activity. Activity and consciousness are not two different sides of the inverted aspects; they form an organic unity (but not identity). Activity is not a set of reflex reactions to an external stimulus, since it is regulated by consciousness. Consciousness is considered as a reality that is not given to the subject directly for his introspection. Consciousness can be known only through a system of subjective relations, including through the activity of the subject, during which the subject develops. Leontyev clarifies Rubinstein’s position: “Consciousness does not simply appear as a separate reality, consciousness is built in and inextricably linked with it.”

Activity theory- a system of methodological and theoretical principles for the study of mental phenomena. The main subject of research is the activity that mediates all mental processes. This approach began to take shape in domestic psychology in the 20s. XX century In the 1930s two interpretations of the activity approach in psychology were proposed - S.L. Rubinstein (1889–1960), who formulated the principle of the unity of consciousness and activity, and

Russian psychology has put forward a fundamentally new approach to the study of the human psyche, based on the category of objective activity.

Unfortunately, the question of the priority and significance of the contribution of certain psychologists to this problem is still being debated. Most often, the names of M. Basov, L. Vygotsky, S. Rubinstein, A. Leontiev are associated with the development of the activity approach in Russian psychology. Here are two statements by famous psychologists that reflect the contradiction. “In 1930, L. S. Vygotsky undoubtedly came to the creation of a theory of activity.” “At all stages of his creative path and with all his achievements in the field of psychological science, Vygotsky was far from the activity approach (although he used the word “activity” quite often, but not as a concept and term in the above meaning (psychological. - Let.) )". Apparently, special research is needed on this issue, based on methods of discourse analysis, which have not yet found worthy application in domestic psychology. The current moment allows us only to emphasize the obvious fact that in the works of S. Rubinstein and A. Leontiev, the activity approach received its clear methodological and methodological outlines.

In the early 30s of the last century, S. Rubinstein formulated the methodological principle of the unity of consciousness and activity, which later received the name “activity approach” in psychology. In the most general form, it can be formulated as follows: the human psyche is formed and manifested in his practical activity and, therefore, is subject to research precisely in the process of activity. By studying the psychological aspects of human activity, we study his personality psychology. In this case, what is to be studied, as S. Rubinstein put it, is not the psyche and activity, but the psyche in activity.

The activity approach was further developed by A. Leontiev. His general psychological concept of activity emphasizes that human life is a set, or rather, a system of successive activities. At the psychological level, activity is a unit of life included in the system of relations of a given society. The evolutionary process of mental development is the development of the objective content of activity. The objective world became more and more involved in activity, expanding the sphere of human knowledge. Knowledge, in turn, increasingly changed his objective world.

According to A. Leontiev, in the macrostructure of the general flow of any subject activity, two blocks closely interconnected by level interaction can be distinguished:
- operational (separate, special activity - actions - operations - psychophysiological functions);
- motivational (motive - goal - condition).

At the highest level of this functional interaction, a separate (special) activity is mediated (that is, expressed “through”) a motive, that is, it is stimulated and directed by a motive. At the average level, action is subordinated to a conscious goal (by analogy with the “individual activity-motive” relationship). At the lower level, an operation is defined by how it is carried out.

So, within the framework of the activity approach, psychology is considered as the science of the generation, functioning and structure of the mental reflection of objective reality in the processes of human activity. The starting points of this approach are as follows.

The real life of a person is the alternation in time of various types of his activities.

The psyche and activity are closely related to each other. The psyche cannot be considered in isolation from activity, and activity in isolation from the psyche.

The decisive role in the origin of consciousness and the development of the human psyche belongs to labor activity. In other words, it is not consciousness that determines the being (activity) of a person, but being (activity) that determines consciousness.

It is in activity that human mental phenomena manifest themselves. An individual can be known only in the process of his activity.

Activity to a significant extent determines the motives and values ​​of the individual, that is, his general orientation.

Through activity, not only the human psyche as a whole can be studied, but also individual mental processes. Indeed, any conscious mental process corresponds to some kind of goal and its own structure. For example, the purposeful process of detecting a low-intensity signal includes the actions of discrimination, comparison, and recognition.

Definition 1

The activity approach (or, in other words, activity theory) is the approach developed by Soviet psychologists A. N. Leontyev and S. L. Rubinstein based on the cultural-historical approach of L. S. Vygotsky in the 30s of the 20th century.

It should be noted that the approach was developed by scientists in parallel and independently of each other, however, due to the commonality of the theories on which they relied (Vygotsky’s approach and the philosophical theory of Marx), many similarities can be traced in their theories.

Rubinstein's approach

The main thesis of the activity approach: activity determines consciousness (and not vice versa). The theory is a system of methodological and theoretical principles on the basis of which the authors propose to consider the psyche and, in particular, consciousness. Activity acts as a subject of research and, according to this theory, mediates all basic mental processes.

Based on this thesis, Rubinstein put forward the principle of “unity of consciousness and activity,” according to which consciousness and the psyche as a whole are formed in the process of activity and are manifested in human activity. Activity in this context acts not as a set of specific reactions to external stimuli, but as a system regulated by consciousness. Consciousness, in turn, is described by him not as a kind of subjective reality for knowing oneself, but as something that can be known only through a relationship to objective reality, including through activity. Thus, activity and consciousness are formed and developed in organic unity and are not identical to each other. Consciousness is both a prerequisite and condition for any action (motive, direction), and the result of this action, expressed in skills, habits, abilities, etc.

Rubinstein's approach is also called the subject-activity approach, since the author considers it exclusively in the context of the relationship between activity and subject:

“The subject in his actions is not only revealed and manifested; it is created and determined in them. What he does defines what he is; the direction of his activity can determine and shape him.”

Leontiev's approach

A.N. Leontiev, in turn, was engaged in developing the structural features of external and internal activities and their relationship. His principle was developed jointly with other representatives of the Kharkov psychological school.

According to Rubinstein, activity is a certain set of actions aimed at achieving goals set by consciousness. Leontyev expands and clarifies this understanding:

“Consciousness does not simply “manifest and form” in activity as a separate reality - it is “built-in” into activity and is inseparable from it.”

As a result of the study of activity in inextricable connection with consciousness, it was possible to identify the following properties of activity:

1. Property of the subject of psychological research (the ability to cognize activity as an independent phenomenon that reveals the inner world of a person).
2. Explanatory property (in the process of studying activity, mental content is learned as its result).

The inseparability of the study of activity and personality (subject) is also due to the fact that activity as such is not a simple reaction, but manifests a certain attitude to reality, which automatically includes the personal characteristics of a person in the problem of studying activity.

Leontiev’s merit can also be considered in the fact that he raised the question of the development of the psyche in phylogenesis, trying to explain the origin of the psyche in the animal world. To do this, he expanded his principle of the unity of consciousness and activity to a more general principle - the principle of the unity of activity and psyche in its various forms. In this regard, he divided activity into three structural units, each of which is associated with certain conditions of consciousness:

• Activity-Action-Operation
• Motive – Purpose – Conditions

That is, activity consists of actions, and those in turn consist of operations. The driving force of activity is motive, action is goal, and operations depend on the conditions under which they are performed. At the same time, activity as a complex structure is, as a rule, multimotivated, that is, it can be motivated by several motives.

Note 1

The components of an activity (actions and operations) are dynamic and transform into each other. In other words, what is an action today can develop into an independent activity tomorrow. For example, if a student reads a book to prepare for exams, then this is an action to achieve the goal. However, if he gets carried away and continues to read “for himself,” then this action will develop into activity. Leontiev calls this phenomenon “shift of motive to goal.”

Activities

Analyzing the work of Leontiev and Rubinstein on activity theory, we can classify it according to several criteria

1. By direction:

   • to objects of the external world;
   • on another person;
   • on yourself.

2. By subject of activity:

   • Gaming;
   • Educational;
   • Labor and other

Subsequently, D.B. Elkonin introduced the concept of “leading activity” - activity provoked by the most significant motive in a given period of life or for a given individual.