in Ukrainian, English, Russian, Polish To the 75-th anniversary of
Nychkalo Nelya Hryhorivna,
Doctor of Sciences in Pedagogy, Full Professor, Academician-Secretary of the Department of Professional Education and Adult Education of the National Academy of Pedagogical Sciences of Ukraine
Kyiv – Khmelnitsky
Comarative Professional Pedagogy (2014), Volume 4, Issue 3: Scientific Journal [Chief. ed. N. М. Bidyuk]. Kyiv–Khmelnytskyi : KhNU. – 202 р.
Published under the agreement with De Gruyter Open
Registered as a professional medium in Ukraine in “Pedagogical Sciences” field
(Order № 54 as of 25.01.2013 of the Ministry of Education of Ukraine)
National Academy of Pedagogical Sciences of Ukraine
Institute of Pedagogical and Adult Education
Khmelnytskyi National University
Center of Comparative Professional Pedagogy
Kremen V.G. – Dr. Sc. in Philosophy, Full Member of NASc and NAPS of Ukraine, President of NAPS of Ukraine
Zyazyun I. A. – Dr. Sc. in Philosophy, Full Member of NAPS of Ukraine, Director of the Institute of Pedagogical and Adult Education of NAPS of Ukraine
Matviyenko O. V. – Dr. Sc. in Pedagogy, Full Prof., Kyiv National Linguistic University
Nychkalo N.G. – Dr. Sc. in Pedagogy, Full Prof., Full Member of NAPS of Ukraine, Academician Secretary of the Department of Professional Education and Adult Education of NAPS of Ukraine
Skyba М. Ye. – Dr. Sc. in technology, Full Prof., Corresponding Member of NAPS of Ukraine, Rector of Khmelnytskyi National University
Khomych L. O. – Dr. Sc. in Pedagogy, Full Prof., the Institute of Pedagogical and Adult Education of NAPS of Ukraine
Bidyuk N. M. – Dr. Sc. in Pedagogy, Full Prof., Khmelnytskyi National University
Avshenyuk N. M. – PhD in Pedagogy, Senior Staff Scientist, the Institute of Pedagogical and Adult Education of NAPS of Ukraine
Sadovets O. V. – PhD in Pedagogy, Associate Professor, Khmelnytskyi National University
Sharan R. V. – PhD in Pedagogy, Associate Professor, Khmelnytskyi National University
Editorial Board Members Ivanova S. V. – Dr. Sc. in Philosophy, Full Prof., Director of FSScO «Institute of theory and history of pedagogy of Russian Academy of Sciensces», I class State Counselor of the Russian Federation
Shlyosek F. – Dr. habil., Full Prof., Director of the Institute of Pedagogy of the Maria Grzegorzewska Academy of Special Education, foreign member of NAPS of Ukraine, Head of scientific society «Poland–Ukraine»
Bereka V. Ye. – Dr. Sc. in Pedagogy, Full Prof., Khmelnytskyi National University
Desiatov T. M. – Dr. Sc. in Pedagogy, Full Prof., B. Khmelnytskyi Cherkassy National University
Zhukovskyi V. M. – Dr. Sc. in Pedagogy, Full Prof., National University “Ostrozka Academy”
Kozybovska I. V. – Dr. Sc. in Pedagogy, Full Prof., Uzhgorod National University
Leshchenko M. P. – Dr. Sc. in Pedagogy, Full Prof., the Institute of information technologies and education means of NAPS of Ukraine
Lukyanova L. B. – Dr. Sc. in Pedagogy, Full Prof., the Institute of Pedagogical and Adult Education of NAPS of Ukraine
Ohiyenko O. I. – Dr. Sc. in Pedagogy, Full Prof., the Institute of Pedagogical and Adult Education
of NAPS of Ukraine
Petruk N. K. – Dr. Sc. in Philosophy, Full Prof., Khmelnytskyi National University
Pukhovska L. P. – Dr. Sc. in Pedagogy, Full Prof., the University of Education Management of NAPS of Ukraine
Semenoh O. M. – Dr. Sc. in Pedagogy, Full Prof., the Institute of Pedagogical and Adult Education of NAPS of Ukraine
Torchynskyi M. M. – Dr. Sc. in Philology, Full Prof., Khmelnytskyi National University
Certificate of the State registration of a published mass medium КВ series № 17801-6651Р as of 29.03.2011 Recommended for print by the decision of the Scientific Board of Khmelnytskyi National University
В УКРАЇНІ (ІСТОРИКО-ПЕДАГОГІЧНИЙ ЕКСКУРС) 170 Артем Сушенцев
професійнЕ вдосконалення виробничого персоналу:
доСВІД США175 Марина Михайлюк
ОРГАНІЗАЦІЙНО-ПЕДАГОГІЧНІ ЗАСАДИ ПРОФЕСІЙНОЇ ПІДГОТОВКИ майбутніх ІНЖЕНЕРІВ У ГАЛУЗІ НАНОЕЛЕКТРОНІКИ
В УНІВЕРСИТЕТАХ ВЕЛИКОЇ БРИТАНІЇ 182
ВІТАННЯ ЮВІЛЯРУ 189
ПРАВИЛА ОФОРМЛЕННЯ І ПОДАННЯ РУКОПИСІВ 194
Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences, Full Professor,
Full Member of NAPS of Ukraine,
Academician Secretary of the Department
of Professional Education and Adult Education
of NAPS of Ukraine, NELLYA NYCHKALO
National Academy of Pedagogical Sciences of Ukraine
Address: 9 M. Berlynskoho Str., Kyiv, 04060, Ukraine
THE “MAN-LABOUR” SYSTEM AS THE BASIS FOR INTERDISCIPLINARITY
OF PEDAGOGICAL SCIENCE “The labour of hands brought a man to his current position in nature ...
This spiritual world is built on
The experience and material achievements of working hands”. Tadeush Vatslav Novatskiy
We consider the philosophical and pedagogical aspects of “man-labour” system and justify its interdisciplinarity. On the basis of results of scientific researches the need for an objective systematization and specialization in pedagogy is emphasized. Four areas of education sciences systematization, proposed by Z. Vyatrovsky are analyzed. Particular attention is paid to the problems of the dialectical relationship of labour pedagogy, labour psychology and vocational pedagogy in globalization and integration processes. In this context prognostic significance of research aimed at dynamic development of “man-labour” system in the information and technology community is revealed.
Among many systems known from ancient times to the present day, the “man-man” system is the most life-giving, well-known, prognostic, dynamic and effective. At various times as well as different stages a good few of systems were born, strengthened, developed and finally disappeared (died). Some of them revived, or were born again for the second or even for the third time; they functioned again, enriching man, his family and continuing the traditions of his nation, his homeland.
Quite different reasons underlay at the heart of these changes, first of all such as universal, spiritual, moral, social economic and cultural, environmental, administrative and many others. They can not be immediately counted and comprehended. They yet reflected each historic epoch and its features.
“The “man-labour” system as the main river and source of life became more and more full-flowing over time, creating new systems and subsystems, affecting the development of man’s mind, his inner world, and certainly the outlook as “system of views on the objective world and man’s place in it, his attitude to reality, to himself, and main life positions of people, their beliefs, ideals principles of perception and activities, value orientation, caused by these ideas” (Shapar, 2005). As is well-known, the outlook is formed in the process and as a result of generalization of natural, scientific, social, historical, philosophical, technical knowledge, as well as due to the effect of the immediate living conditions. It is transmitted from generation to generation with people’s experience, their ethnical traditions and experience of creative work.
THE AIM OF THE STUDY
The article reviews philosophical and pedagogical aspects of “man-labour” system and its interdisciplinarity.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND RESEARCH METHODS
In the context of the philosophical approaches we can turn to the conclusions grounded by an outstanding Ukrainian philosopher V. Shynkaruk. “At all stages of the history mankind created summarizing views of the world and man, its vital activity, put forward the ideals and shaped the vision of the future that was a guiding line in its life. Continuous development of production, culture, human needs, expansion of the latest spheres of nature involved in human activities, the improvement of both activity and man have been actualizing the learning of objective laws of the development and transformation of the world, the formulation of the basic principles of the scientific approach to the world and man, formation of ideology as a system of generalized views of the world, the historical destiny of man and mankind” (Shynkaruk, 2012, 167). The key idea of the thoughts is that labour created and keeps creating both the very man and human civilization.
Category of labour inspired by thousands of beams as they were inspired by man is connected with all the areas of human life and society, the development of education, science and culture. If we put the system “man-labour” in the center of this extremely important issue as its core, we are offered a wide range of organic relations between many scientific fields. Due to this fact we can comprehend the complexity and interdependence of relations among which we find issues of labor rights with philosophy, sociology, psychology, pedagogy, economics, physiology, ergonomics, culture etc. Under such conditions the formation of interconnected scientific processes peculiar to a particular epoch acquires its regularity.
That is why this particular system has always had great attraction: it is studied, designed, modelled and prognosticated by representatives of various branches of scientific knowledge such as philosophers and sociologists, economists and demographers, educators and psychologists, artists and culturist, doctors and managers. It has always been the driving force of the spiritual, moral, ethical, cultural and ultimately social and economic development of every nation and each state.
In these complex processes science plays the crucial role as a distinct sphere of human activity. According to S. Krymskiy this axiom is aimed at “the production and knowledge systematization of life patterns by means of theoretical reasoning and empirical testing and validation of cognitive outcomes to reveal their objective content (validity, reliability, intersubjectivity)” (Encyclopedic Dictionary of Philosophy, 2002, 410–411).
As noted by V. Kremen and V. Ilyin, one can reveal the transmission of means and methods of knowledge from one sphere to another in both interdisciplinary and disciplinary interactions. In each of these situations, the transfer of methods implies the identification of subject area’s identities that are being investigated. The difference between interdisciplinary and disciplinary research lies in the scope of synthesis and bases that direct transfer of methods. Distant and exclusively specific subject areas seem to connect with each other within interdisciplinary researches.
As a result in the modern science and culture philosophers distinguish several synergy parallel layers of its being located to the extent of increase of abstraction level: subdisciplinary is everyday consciousness of routine activities; disciplinary is processes of individual creativity and the development of disciplinary knowledge and research objects; interdisciplinary is processes of interdisciplinary communication and transfer of knowledge in dialogues of disciplines including pedagogy and education, during decision-making; transdisciplinary is processes of self-organization and operation of large interdisciplinary projects, interdisciplinary communication languages, origins of interdisciplinary invariants, collective intelligence, network thinking; overdisciplinary is the creative process, the formation of philosophy, the development of science and culture. Communicative practices in each of these layers have special traditions of use that are completely scientific and methodologically developed at the disciplinary level (Kremen, Ilyin, 2012, 27–28).
Taking into consideration the methodological importance of pedagogical sciences systematization, we appeal to the results of foreign scientific researches. Thus, a prominent Polish scholar S. Vyatrovskiy justifying the specialization in pedagogy, provides historical and philosophical analysis of the science’s development in the twentieth century. He refers to the works of Polish, German (D. Lenzen) and Czech scholars (J. Pruha). Professor offers author systematization of pedagogical sciences, covering four areas such as fundamental teaching; basic educational disciplines, determined by the way of human development; pedagogical disciplines that meet major directions of human activities; subsidiary and borderline disciplines (Wiatrowski, 2004, 40–44).
It should be mentioned that such systematization of pedagogical sciences was the result of long-term systematic scientific analysis, which had been carried out by the scholar for several decades. Q. Vyatrovskiy suggests that the “pedagogy atomization” will continue to grow, although it is often said that any division is impractical. However, analyzing different approaches, he singles out the following important trends: increase of social demands on pedagogical knowledge in various areas of life and work; prolonged development of pedagogical knowledge in both theoretical and utilitarian (practical) fields and also specialization in modern sciences. Consequently, it is difficult to imagine the possibility of solving today's problems, especially human ones, without the use of special scientific knowledge and methods. The scholar proves that without specialization the development of modern science is hardly possible.
Theoretically grounded principles concerning the integration and specialization in pedagogical sciences in the conditions of globalization process are acquiring the utmost importance. Particular attention should be paid to scientific problems, analysis of the genesis and modern categories of specialization and integration. There is an undeniable interdependence of these concepts, which, at first glance, give the impression of being contradictory and even potentially mutually exclusive. Under these conditions appeal to topical problems of modern education and combination of the efforts of different sectors’ representatives of scientific knowledge for the purpose of theoretical and methodological research take first priority.