On the methodological concept of foreign language education

The foreign paradigm of education is considered from the standpoint of the cognitive-linguocultural approach in the article. It is specified that modern achievements of foreign language education are connected with the substantiation of the conceptualization of the world by man, the understanding of the language and its role in cognitive processes. It is found out that phenomena of categorization of the cognitive-linguistic and cultural methodology of foreign language education, which allow to use scientific results in a complex scientific object - thinking-language-communication. The theoretical and practical essence of modern cognitive- linguoculturological methodology of foreign language education is substantiated, which serves as a conceptual platform for the training of teaching staff. This is one of the modern theories of training specialists, which is based on the cognitive-conceptual complex study of language-culture-personality. Approach to the problems of education from the standpoint of modern linguistic science is indicated, taking into account the relationship of language and man to reality through the functioning of language karting of the world of ethnic groups, that allows students to form intercultural communication. In this regard, the article examines the theoretical origins of foreign language education, analyzes the main works of teachers, psychologists and linguists who formed this scientific branch. It is specified that in the training of specialists of a foreign language specialty it is important to teach students to use the inventory of language tools (in the form of statements and discourses) in order to implement the didactic tasks for carrying out the intercultural communication in various situations.

The modern stage, which has a huge impact on the system of teaching foreign languages is characterized by globalization and informatization.

In the given conditions, the requirements facing the system of foreign language education are changing, while along with innovative conceptual approaches to identifying subject content and setting educational objectives, the new methodological positions raise questions about the use and purposefull introduction of the latest information and communication technologies for FL teaching.

Informatization of foreign language education is the result of truly revolutionary changes:

  • – in the society, when the emergence of a new social state on the ground of transition from traditional industrialism to the development of the «service economy» has required the creation of a new «intellectual technology» of teaching, including foreign language teaching;
  • – in foreign-language education, when the concept of «language personality» and its derivatives are declared as the result of foreign-language education based on familiarization through a foreign language, not only with the language system of inophonic linguistic culture, but also with the conceptual picture of the world, where native speakers form their national character and national mentality of . The Internet communication is claimed to be the place of intersection of many cultures possessing the following progressive potentials: provides and accumulatesthe experience of cooperation with representatives of different cultures, the experience of living in the cultural and social space, and also contributes to the preparation of students for communicating with people with different worldviews and various social statuses;
  • – in pedagogy, when appeared the teaching of the American psychologist Karl Rogers, which at the center of educational process puts a learner, with his diverse needs and interests, according to which the study of nature and the definition of structure of language personality should be conducted using the prevailing competence approach in the field of methodology.

The informatization presupposes intercultural communication not as direct contacts of representatives of different linguistic cultural communities, but rather as mediated and constantly updated electronic educational resources.

Under the influence of these factors, the requirements to intercultural-communicative competence in the informatization conditions, the purpose-oriented category of foreign-language education, change in a certain way. Formation of intercultural and communicative competence in the conditions of informatization of foreign language education requires the creation of a system of foreign language education that would rely onmodern methodological approaches to the educational system (V.P. Bespalko [1], A.A. Verbitsky [2], B.S. Gershunsky [3], V.V. Davydov [4], V.I. Zagvyazinsky [5], A.V. Hutorskoy [6], etc.), modern cognitive- linguistic and cultural methodology (S.S.Kunanbaeva [7]), the theory of informatization.

Theoretical prerequisites for the development of a system of foreign language education in the conditions of informatization were addressed in the works of E.G. Azimov, A.N. Bagrova, E.I. Dmitrieva, D. Klymentyev, M. Levy.

Many researchers understand informatization as an objective process, which has prepared a «methodo- logical platform» for the emergence of new technical, informational, printed, audiovisual tools, with their inherent new techniques that become an integral component of the educational process.

In order to build a truly effective system of foreign language education in the context of informatization, it is necessary to determine the priorities in the system of foreign language education. Therefore, the purpose of this section is to analyze the status and trends of foreign-language education at the present stage.

A complex of tasks is set before the modern foreign language education due to the search for new ways of forming the personality of a modern specialist, able to freely navigate in a globalizing information society, understanding its values and meanings, embodying them in a personal existential position. In this regard, foreign language education faces a concrete task: the development of the axiological attitudes of the individual through its enrichment with the universal and national-specific values of one's own and other cultures; strengthening of humanitarian aspect, the general cultural content of education, associated with the extent of understanding the phenomena of human life, a polyphonic worldview and suggesting the harmony of knowledge, feelings, and creative actions.

Similar changes in the strategic direction of foreign-language education, the increased demand for knowledge of foreign languages, and, correspondingly, the increased socially significant status of foreign- language education, have led to changes that occur both in the educational policy and in the methodological system.

The educational policy in the field of foreign-language education is aimed at:

– the developing potential of a foreign language (I.L. Bim, I.A. Zimnyaya, G.A. Kitaygorodskaya,

  1. I. Passov, E.S. Polat, G.V. Rogova and many others ) ;
  • – the communicative-oriented foreign language teaching (I.L. Bim, A.A. Verbitsky, V.P. Kuzovlev, R.P. Millrood, I.R. Maksimova and many others);
  • – the studies of theoretical models of communicative competence;
  • – the intensification of foreign language teaching process;
  • – the harmonization of the levels of foreign language acquisition with European requirements;
  • – the development of educational and methodological materialsfor teaching foreign languages.

Methodological basis of such researches are:

  • – pedagogical psychology (D. Dewey, D. Rogers, J. Brown, P.Ya. Halperin;
  • – designing of pedagogical systems (N.A. Alekseev, E.N. Gusinsky).

The comparative-inventory analysis of the development of methodological science and its methodology, draws a conclusion about the evolutionary path of the theory and practice of methods of foreign language teaching and that the development of the methodology for co-learning of a foreign language and culture is realized in accordance with the main trends in the evolution of methodological approaches to foreign language teaching [3].

Following a British methodologist E. Anthony, the approach to foreign language teaching is usually defined as the realization of «a set of correlative assumptions dealing with the nature of language teaching and learning».

In Russian linguistic literature, this concept is also treated as a teaching strategy, in contrast to the method (sometimes identified as an approach in a foreign methodology) it represents a tactical model of teaching process [5].

At the same time, one has to agree with I.A. Zimnyaya that the concept of «approach to teaching» is broader and more significant: it is a worldview category that reflects social attitudes of subjects of teaching as bearers of public consciousness, as well as global and systemic organization and self-organization that includes all its components.

In particular, because of the multidimensionality of the concept, there are many descriptions of the most diverse typologies of approaches to foreign language teaching in the modern methodological literature.

In the mainstream of this research, the term «approach» is understood as «astrategy, a general direction in foreign language teaching» [7].

In this sense it is legitimate to use it both for determining the general scientific direction, such as, for example: action-oriented, anthropological, culturological, etc., and in identifying such strategies for teaching foreign languages as «communicative-oriented», «inductive-conscious», «integrative» and other approaches.

Depending on the specific socio-economic conditions and dominant pedagogical ideas, different approaches to solving the problems of teaching foreign languages existed at various stages in the development of the methodology for teaching foreign languages. Supporters of each approach emphasized the advantages of some and proved the inconsistency of others, being in constant search of ways to increase the effectiveness of the process of foreign language teaching.

The variety of approaches to foreign language teaching requires the observance of one of the existing approach classifications, among which the following can be named:

  • – typology of M.N. Vyatyutnev (grammatical, direct, behavioral, reading, collective, communicative- individualized), built with the account of a large number of linguistic and psychological factors;
  • – classification of I.L. Bim (complex, differentiated, individual), described in terms of didactics [6];
  • – typology of T.I. Kapitonova and A.N. Shchukin, which is based on the criterion of consciousness or intuition of the process of foreign language acquisition or a combination of them (intuitive, conscious, communicative-activity).

In our work, we adhere to the classification, which is based on the criterion of co-studying of language and culture.

The introduction of the cultural component in foreign languageteaching is due, above all, to the continuity of the concepts of language and culture. Learning a foreign language can not be limited to its sign system, since any language contains information about the culture, history, realia and traditions of native speakers of the language.

Among the reasons that served as the basis for the introduction of the cultural component in foreign language teaching according to psychologists can be named the characteristics of a person's mental activity, in particular, such a phenomenon as the threshold of mentality, meaning the designation of a conditional line, after which an adequate reaction becomes possible / impossible, while the term «mentality» is understood as the inner readiness of a person for certain mental and physical actions, i.e. there are three interdependent components, forming a peculiar triangle: relationships - knowledge - behavior. According to R.P. Millrud, study of the threshold of mentality enables understanding of national characterpeculiaritues, foreseeing possible misunderstandings, preventing complications in relationships, etc.

According to the classification, which is based on the criterion of co-studying of language and culture, we will consider such approaches as:

  • – communicative-ethnographic approach;
  • – socio-cultural approach;
  • – linguaculturological approach;
  • – communicative-culturological approach.

Communicative-ethnographic approach was developed in modern foreign methodology of teaching foreign languages. Its supporters (M. Byram, V. Esarte-Sarries, G. Zarate, C. Morgan, Cl. Kramsh, P. Doy) argue that «language teaching has always and inevitably meant and means teaching of language and culture». In their opinion, the communicative-ethnographic approach provides a deeper and more thorough penetration into the world of native speakers and their culture, allows learning the language from broader, anthropological and ethnographic positions.

According to the researchers, the advantages of the communicative-ethnographic approach are that, firstly, the phenomenon of culture itself is multidimensional, since it includes cultural phenomena that are considered not only in the present state (synchrony) but also in development (diachrony), as well as the phenomena of philosophy, art, literature, realia of everyday life and their manifestation in various subcultures. Secondly, the researchers note that, if the main trend of the last century in the interaction of cultures was the desire to create a universal planetary culture, now we are talking about the pluralism of cultures, the real diversity of cultural and historical systems and the dialogicprinciples of their interaction. Thirdly, exactly during the process of intercultural interaction the features and national peculiarities of these cultures are actualized.

In the process of teaching a foreign language, according to M. Bayram, special attention should be given to «preparing learners for the unforeseen, instead of training the predictable». The function of the teacher in such conditions is to select the necessary data from related sciences for using it as a teaching material, and the learner acts as an «ethnographer», a researcher of the culture and life of the country of the studied FL.

Independent study of a «different» culture by a learner, together with the teacher and other students, interpreting it, allows him to «speak about his culture, evaluate it, perceive it and understand it from the point of view of an outside observer».

An intensively developing socio-cultural approach concretizes and supplements the above-mentioned approach. As a theoretical trend in the theory and methodology of foreign language teaching, the sociocultural approach has been developing intensively since the beginning of the 1990s in Russia and in Western Europe in the framework of the European project «Learning and teaching foreign languages for European citizenship» («A Common European Framework of Reference for Language Teaching and Learning»).

This approach arose in connection with the need to make significant changes in the purpose and content of study of languages and cultures. Such an approach, according to the developers (E.I. Passov et al.) allowed us to move away from the simplified factual approach to mastering the components of spiritual and material culture. E.I. Passov believes that this is due to the fact that the assimilation of disparate (albeit numerous and interesting) cultural facts does not necessarily provide penetration into another culture.

As noted in methodological literature, sociocultural approach allows to form and then dynamically develop polyfunctional sociocultural competence, which helps an individual to orient in different types of cultures and civilizations and correlated with these communication standards, to adequately interpret the phenomena and culture facts (including verbal culture), and to use these guidelines for selecting communication strategies in dealing with personally and professionally meaningful tasks and problems in different types of modern intercultural communication (E.I.Passov).

The content of teaching foreign languages within the framework of the described approach includes an introduction to:

  • – value systems that dominate in the co-studied societies (in social, professional, age, ethnic and other groups);
  • – historical memory of the co-studied societies as a whole and the communities that they comprise;
  • – political, economic, scientific, artistic, and religious cultures, and their reflection in the styles of life of different social classes, ethnic groups and other societies;
  • – traditional and new material culture, industrial and economic potential of the country as a part of the value system;
  • – socio-cultural features of speech etiquette of oral and written communication, the technique of participation in it;
  • – socio-cultural characteristics and speech behavior of national-specific forms of communication as a characteristic feature of the style of life in the country of the studied foreign language;
  • – methods of grammatical and lexical variation of foreign speech in the framework of formal and informal communication;
  • – value-orientational connections of the co-studied countries with a value-orientation core of regional- continental culture (for example, European culture);
  • – public life and culture of the country of the studied foreign language as a member of the world community;
  • – awareness of oneself as a carrier of certain socio-cultural views, as a citizen of one's country, a member of the world community.

In the interpretation of the Council of Europe on foreign language education, the main thing in interpreting the sociocultural aims and the content of foreign language education is the focus on the personality of the learner, to the national cultural background of his native environment and to the role that his experience and ideas, formed in his native culture, play in the process of comprehending the foreign culture.

The most important factors in this respect are: socio-political context of life in the home country; historical, cultural, socio-economic, aesthetic and ethical standards of the native for the learner sociocultural environment; features of the process of socialization in his home country through interpersonal communication, mass media, religion; individual factors, such as the age of the learner, the degree of his awareness in the culture of the countries and peoples being studied, his interests and the need for mastering foreign languages.

According to European normative documents, the discussion of such problems as individual features of perception of a foreign-language reality by the learner, his thoughts about it, his linguistic experience in situations of perception and interaction, the ability to adequately resolve the situations of disruption of the communication process, i.e. processes of metacommunication - all this is characteristic for the organization of foreign language teaching in accordance with learner-centered socio-cultural approach.

The methodological dominant of the sociocultural approach ,according to the researchers, incorporates problem sociocultural assignments that are applied in respect of their educational and methodological acceptability and have a learner-centered nature and are aimed at the development of a foreign language communicative competence and a common culture of communication and cognition.

As for the linguistic-cultural approach, it combines elements of regional studies with linguistic elements, that is, it forms a communicative, linguistic-cultural and cultural competence (M.A. Ariyan, M.K. Borisenko, I.N. Zoteeva, K.V. Krichevskaya, G.D. Tomakhin and others). The founders of this approach E.M. Vereshchagin and V.G. Kostomarov have substantiated the idea of the need for simultaneous study of the national culture of people and their language. Addressing the problem of co-studying the language and culture, according to the proponents of this approach, allows us to combine elements of regional studies with linguistic phenomena, which act not only as a means of communication, but also as a way of acquaintance of learners with a new reality for them. The subject of linguistic investigations was the study of the language in order to reveal the national and cultural specifics in it. In the framework of the described approach, the lexical composition of the language was recognized by the researchersas the main source of linguistic and cultural information. Therefore, the main attention of researchers was paid to the national and cultural semantics of words, to the study of equivalent and nonequivalent lexical concepts, to the background and terminological vocabulary, phraseological units and aphorisms, in which, according to linguistic experts, national-specific information is «hidden». A special place in foreign-language education was given to specific linguistic-regional texts, questions of their selection and enhancement of linguistic-cultural studies of its various types (pragmatic and projective).

Language and regional researchers made a great contribution by detailing one of the leading instructional principles in the modern context – the interrelation of foreign and native languages of learners, and its role in encouraging the positive transition of some abilities and skills, as well as in prevention of language interference which makes learning difficult.

Summarizing the above mentioned on the modern cultural approaches to foreign languageteaching, the following conclusions can be drawn. In the modern methodology of foreign language teaching, there are various methodological concepts which put forward co-studying of language and cultureas priority provisions. These include linguistic-cultural, communicative-ethnographic and sociocultural approaches. Differences between them are observed in the interpretations of the original assumption. Thus, the linguistic-cultural approach focuses on the study of the products of the national culture (which are manifested mainly in vocabulary), the communicative-ethnographic approach focuses on the national and ethnic aspects of communicative behavior of communicants, while the sociocultural focuses on cultural phenomena manifested at the national, ethnic and social levels.

Culturological approaches allow us to move from universal methodological concepts to differentiated ones, in which the interests of students are placed at the center of the learning process, and the main aim of education is the formation of culturological and communicative competence. However, from the point of view of the realization of the culturological component in foreign language teaching, in the opinion of many researchers (M.G. Atstovatsatryan , G.V. Elizarova, T.K. Sattarov), one of the most optimal approaches is a communicative approach, as it takes into account the specific needs of students and provides real communication skills.

As it was mentioned above, the approaches, as a rule, reflect one or more components of the modern methodology of foreign language education with an obligatory conceptual reflection of this methodology in a single «methodological system» of foreign languages teaching or the concept of foreign language education. This concept is currently recognized by the theory of intercultural communication of S.S. Kunanbayeva [7].

According to this theory, the instrument of intercultural interaction is the language as the expresser and mediator of the national and cultural identity of peoples in the interaction and communication of various linguistic societies. All this led to consideration of intercultural communication as a new scientific and educational objective sphere. The basic category of intercultural communication is linguoculture, synthesizing «language-culture-personality» into an organic whole. According to S.S.Kunanbayeva, only such an interdisciplinary construct «language - culture - personality» «reflects the material and spiritual identity of linguistic groups allowing the subject of intercultural communication to effectively interact in the global living space, using the language and culture of communication partners as the basis of mutual understanding and cooperation, while remaining a national-ethnic self-identified personalitywhoreflects the national-cultural mentality of its own nation, the generic bearer of this culture and language, because ontogenically the structure of the personality was formed in the process of self-realization of individual in his own linguistic culture».

The category of linguistic culture is defined by the author as the methodological basis of the theory of foreign language education. This is the category that makes it possible to provide knowledge and study of specific laws of interaction of «language - culture - personality» in their integrated refraction. This postulate was derived on the basis of the conclusion made by the author that an objective manifestation of the socialization of the individual is his inclusion, mental reflection and mastery of such organic unity as the language and culture of a certain ethnos that has a basic and fixed form of thinking based on native linguoculture.

As for the choice of the basic science for the foreign language education, there are also controversies in scientific and educational literature.

According to one group of researchers, the scientific and educational field of foreign language education is linguodidactics.

In the early 1980s of the last century G.I. Bogin, who was one of the first to build a linguodidactic model of the linguistic personality, assigning it the place of the central category of linguodidactics as a science, believed that linguodidactics examines the laws of mastering the language.

A.B. Bushev, calling linguodidactics the theory and practice of teaching foreign languages, which studies the general laws of teaching languages, emphasized the developing character of the language personality of the learner.

This idea had many supporters. For example, O.L. Kamenskaya revealed that «the theory of language personality is not a fixed constant concept. It can be diversified both vertically (by allocating new levels) and horizontally (due to the detailing of existing levels)

All this confirms the position of N.D. Gal'skova, who believes that linguodidactics as a science is designed to comprehend and describe the linguistic cognitive structure of the language personality, to justify the conditions and laws of its development, as well as its specifics as the object of learning / teaching, and the interaction of all subjects of this process.

A.S. Markosyan understands linguodidacticsas the principles of describing the language for teaching purposes. She believes that linguodidactics is the theory of constructing models describing the studied language, and intended for use in the learning process.

R.K. Minyar-Beloruchevа not only recognizes the right of linguodidactics as an independent science, but also gives a priority to the use of the term «linguodidactics», instead of «methodology» in developing the theory and practice of teaching foreign languages in the modern conditions.

The central to this raw is the definition given by I.I. Khaleeva, who believes that linguodidactics acts as a methodological aspect of the theory of FL teaching in relation to the various desired results of this process. Linguodidactics makes it possible to reveal the objective laws, according to which a model of foreign language teaching should be built, at the center of which is a linguistic personality .

However, in S.S. Kunanbayeva's monograph is proved the inexpediency of differentiation between scientific areas of linguodidactics and private methodologies, because judging by the sciences on which it is based (private linguistics, contrastive linguistics), it can be stated that we are referring not to general methodology of teaching foreign languages, but to private methodologies.

Even in case of adopting according to the concept of «language education»: mastering native and nonnative languagesasthe object of research, linguodidactics goes beyond the methodological science and becomes a theory that studies the mechanisms and laws of mastering languages, the development of the linguistic and communicative ability of a person to any language, but taken collectively as an object of psychological sciences.

According to S.S. Kunanbayeva, «linguodidactics» can claim scientific independence as a scientific domain when it comes to natural or near to natural conditions for mastering the language, as a theoretical and methodological foundation for new educational sphere introduced by researchers - «language education», designed to study the specifics and laws of the formation of verbal-linguistic ability in ontogenesis while mastering one's native language or in the conditions of multilingualism and multi-ethnicity of states for ensuring theoretical and technological data for the formation of a multilingual and multicultural personality [7; 162].

I.I. Khaleeva shares the opinion that the differenciation of approches based on the specificity of objects is eligible. She highlights:

1) linguoecological education for the solution of educational and linguistic problems of poly-linguistic- ethnocultural states;

2) intercultural education for the realization of the aims of intercultural communication in the context of global interaction of countries and the need for foreign languages to ensure international cooperation.

Thus, S.S. Kunanbaeva believes that linguodidactics can become a scientific field that studies the entire set of problems of «language education» with the spheres outlined above, concentrating on the specifics and mechanisms of the formation of verbal and cogitative ability and language mastering in ontogenesis and phylogenesis, both in the conditions of the natural linguistic culture and in the conditions of an artificially created environment, simulated and controlled process of studying/learning language [7; 162].

The author proposes the following for the recognition of linguodidactics as an independent scientific field providing a theoretical-didactic platform for the whole set of problems of «language education»:

  • – firstly, to make more clear definion of the object of the scientific attention of «linguodidactics»;
  • – secondly, to delineate this object from the objects of psycholinguistics, methodology of teaching foreign languages, and general theory of teaching languages;
  • – thirdly, to determine its own subject-object area, to clarify its own conceptual-categorical composition as an obligatory requirement to the status of independence of any science, designed to investigate the general mechanisms of the formation of the verbal-linguistic and communicative ability of the person providing the platform, as well as for the theory of mastering languages, predicting the possibility and for the didactic refraction of psychology and psycholinguistics data for all variants of language education.

Following the author, we adhere to the opinion that the «foreign language education» can be singled out as an independent sphere of education aimed at studying and researching a complex object (foreign language - foreign culture - personality of the subject of intercultural communication) in the interaction of languages and cultures. This object is based on the structure of the «language personality», formed on the basis of mastering one's own language and knowledge of one's own culture. Consequently, it is advisable to consider the scientific field that studies the problems of foreign language education as a methodology of teaching foreign languages or «foreign language education» as two subsystems: the general methodology of foreign-language education and the private methodology of foreign-language education teaching a particular foreign language [8; 275].

Examples of the private methodology of foreign language education are the works on the theory and practice of «language for special purposes» - «English for philologists», «English for historians», «English for economists», and etc. The great advantage of this research group in the light of the highlighted problem is the clear professional orientation of the proposed methodologies. «Language for special purposes» is understood as a special system of linguistic means, united thematically in the corresponding narrowly specialized sphere of human activity.

There are also a number of works devoted to the methodologies of teaching foreign language to specialists in various fields

The general methodology of teaching foreign languages inits turn, adequately reflects the modern subject-object structure of methodological science, which considers not any foreign language in isolation, but a complex object - «language - culture - personality». This interdisciplinary construct is not a discrete object, but represents an integral object of such an independent and specific sphere of education as a foreign language education [9; 125].

Such a reconsideration of the theory and practice of teaching foreign languages has predetermined the renewal of targets in foreign language teaching. The updated targets are manifested in a new final result: the formation of intercultural competence and the ability of an individual (the subject of intercultural communication) to intercultural communication. Managing the formation of the subject of intercultural communication in the educational process is realized on the basis of the primary linguistic personality or language personality formed on the basis of native linguistic culture; the latter, in this case, recognizes oneself as a subject of native linguoculture, mentally possessing a holistic linguocultural concept of one's own linguoculture [10; 87].

The linguistic personality became the object of attention in the theory and methodology of teaching foreign languages in connection with the change in the paradigm and ideology of linguistic research. Linguistics has always had a language as an object of study, which is also a subject of teaching in foreign language classes. The methodology has used and uses the basic linguistic concepts and laws; and above all, the data of comparative linguistics, as they determine the specificity of the object of teaching. The more learnercentered modern linguistics demanded a revision of the methodological foundations of teaching foreign languages.

Addressing the problem of the language personality is based on the theory of anthropocentrism in hlumanitarian knowledge in general and the anthropological approach in linguistics in particular, which considers the concept of «language personality» as the fundamental one [11; 74].

The main idea of the anthropological approach in linguistics is based on understandinghuman through the knowledge of language. At the same time, the linguistic personality is viewed not as part of a multifaceted understanding, but as a type of a fully represented, integral personality, containing psychological, social, ethical, and other components, but refracted through its language, its discourse the following most common definitions of the term «language personality» in linguistics, can be cited:

  • – the linguistic personality is a person expressed in language (texts) and through language, reconstructed in its basic features on the basis of linguistic means;
  • – the linguistic personality is a combination of abilities and characteristics of a person that determine the creation and perception of speech products (texts), which differ by a) the degree of structural and linguistic complexity, b) the depth and accuracy of reflection of reality, c) a specific target orientation .

Taking into account trends in linguistics, the methodology of teaching foreign languages also takes into account the achievements of psychology and connects the teaching process with the formation and development of the individual. Therefore, the methodological aspect of the development of the concept of language personality is correlated with the development of the concept of «personality» as a whole. Thus, F.I. Buslaev builds the methodological principles of his work «On the teaching of the domestic language» on the ideas of the inseparable unity of the native language with the personality of a student: «Mother tongue is so intertwined with any personality that teaching it means to develop the student's spiritual abilities».

 

References

  1. Bespalko, V.P. (1989). Slahaemye pedahohicheskoi tehnolohii [The terms of pedagogical technology]. Moscow: Pedahohika [in Russian].
  2. Verbitsky, A. A. (1991). Aktivnoe obuchenie v vysshei shkole [Active learning in higher education]. М oscow: Vysshaia shkola [in Russian].
  3. Gershunsky, B.S. (1971). K voprosu o sushchnosti zakonov pedahohiki [On the essence of the laws of pedagogy]. Sovetskaia pedahohika – The Soviet pedononics, 130 [in Russian].
  4. Davydov, V. V. (1996). Teoriia razvivaiushcheho obucheniia [The theory of developmental learning]. Rossiiskaia akademiia obrazovaniia, Psikholohicheskii institut, Mezhdunarodnaia assotsiatsiia «Razvivaiushchee obuchenie» – Russian Academy of Education, Psychological Institute, International Association «Developmental Training», 220 [in Russian].
  5. Zagvyazinsky, V.I. (2001). Teoriia obucheniia. Sovremennaia interpretatsiia [Learning theory. Modern interpretation]. Мoscow [in Russian].
  6. Hutorskoy, A.V. (2014). Metodolohiia pedahohiki: chelovekosoobraznyi podkhod. Rezultaty issledovaniia [Methodology of pedagogy: Human approach. Results of the study]. Moscow: Eidos; Izdatelstvo Instituta obrazovaniia cheloveka [in Russian].
  7. Kunanbayeva, S.S. (2005). Sovremennoe inoiazychnoe obrazovanie [Modern foreign language education]. Almaty: Edelveis [in Russian].
  8. Kunanbayeva, S.S. (2016). Educational Internationalisation as a Major Strategy of the Kazakhstani System of Education. International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562, Vol. 11, 11, 272–277.
  9. Kunanbayeva, S.S. Educational Paradigm: Implementation of the Competence-Based Approach to the Higher School System pp. 123-134|Article Number: ijese.2016.942. jese.net/arsiv. Retrieved from http://www.ijese.net/arsiv
  10. Kulgildinova, T.A., Zhumabekova, G.B., Golovchun, A.A., & Eginisova, A. (2016). Theory and practice professional competence formation of learners. Collective monograph. — «East West» Association for Advances Studies and Higher. Education GmbH. Vienna.
  11. Chaklikova, A.T. (2017). Informatization of foreign language education. Almaty: The House of Press.
Year: 2018
City: Karaganda
Category: Pedagogy