(2019)
(2019)
(2019)
(2019)
(2019)
(2019)
(2019)
(2019)
(2019)
(2018)
(2018)
(2018)
(2018)
(2018)
(2018)
(2018)
(2018)
(2018)
(2018)
(2017)
(2017)
(2017)
(2017)
(2017)
(2017)
(2017)
(2017)
(2017)
(2017)
(2016)
(2016)
Special Issue - (2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2016)
(2015)
(2015)
Special Issue - (2015)
(2015)
(2015)
(2015)
(2012)
(2012)
(2012)
Special Issue - (2012)
pp. 12235-12244 | Article Number: ijese.2016.891
Published Online: December 06, 2016
Abstract
In this article we will discuss how the holding of a special and dedicated work helped to change the levels of formation of the major components of cognitive activity. Cognitive activity with the content aspect is a system of perceptual, mnemonic and intellectual activity and from the form - as an individual, joint, or pseudo-individual pseudo joint activity. We selected a set of methods and techniques of experimental research which has allowed to trace the dynamics of transformation of the "external" aspects of the learning process in the "inner" side of the learning process. Thus, the hypothesis of the necessary conditions that foster students’ cognitive activity, which are the processes of transformation of co-dialogic students’ cognitive activity in individual and dialogic students’ cognitive activity was confirmed.
Keywords: Cognitive activity, formation, cognitive functions, co-dialogic students, cognitive activity, Individual and dialogic students, cognitive activity
References
Barnes, K., Marateo, R. & Ferris, S.P. (2007). Teaching and Learning with the Net Generation. Innovate Journal of Online Education, 3(4). Direct access: http://www.innovateonline.info/pdf/vol3_issue4/Teaching_and_Learning_with_the_Net_Generation.pdf
Bennett, S., Maton, K. & Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 775–786.
Carlson, S. (2005). The Net Generation goes to college. The Chronicle of Higher Education, Section: Information Technology, 52(7). Direct access http://www.msmc.la.edu/include/learning_res-ources/todays_learner/The_Net_Generation.pdf
Carnivale, D. & Young, J.R. (2006). The challenges and benefits of requiring students to buy laptops. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Direct access http://chronicle.com/article/The-ChallengesBenefits/2829/
Chizh, N.V., Slyshkin, G.G., Zheltukhina, M.R., Privalova, I.V. & Kravchenko, O.A. (2016). Concept “Medical Museum” as a Sociocultural Phenomenon. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 11(17), 10529-10538.
Claxton, G. (2007). Expanding young people’s capacity to learn. British Journal of Educational Studies, 55(2), 1-20.
Cothran, D.J., & Ennis, C.D. (2000). Building bridges to student engagement: Communicating respect and care for students in urban high schools. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 33(4), 106-117.
Dunleavy, J. & Milton, P. (2009). What did you do in school today? Exploring the concept of Student Engagement and its implications for Teaching and Learning in Canada. Toronto: Canadian Education Association (CEA), 1-22.
Gilbert, J. (2007). Catching the Knowledge Wave: Redefining knowledge for the post-industrial age. Education Canada, 47(3), 4-8.
Harris, L.R. (2008). A Phenomenographic Investigation of Teacher Conceptions of Student Engagement in Learning. The Australian Educational Researcher, 5(1), 57-79.
Hay, L.E. (2000). Educating the Net Generation. The Social Administrator, 57(54), 6-10.
Kopotjuk, I.G. (1989) Razvitie tvorcheskoj pedagogicheskoj dejatel'nosti studentov. Omsk: Vostok.
Lerner, I.Ja. (1981). Didakticheskie osnovy metodov obuchenija. Moscow: Pedagogika.
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2008). New Millennium Learners. Initial findings on the effects of digital technologies on school-age learners. OECD/CERI International Conference “Learning in the 21st Century: Research, Innovation and Policy,” May 15-16 2008. Paris: Center for Educational Research and Innovation.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6.
Prensky, M. (2005). Engage me or enrage me. EDUCASE Review, 40(5), 61–64.
Project Tomorrow (2010). Unleashing the Future: Educators “Speak Up” about the use of Emerging Technologies for Learning. Speak Up 2009 National Findings. Teachers, Aspiring Teachers & Administrators, May 2010. Direct access: www.tomorrow.org/speakup/
Robinson, K. (2009). The Element: how finding your passion changes everything. Toronto: Penguin Group
Skatkin, M.N. (1986). Metodologija i metodika pedagogicheskih issledovanij. Moscow: Izd-vo «Feniks».
Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up digital: the rise of the Net generation. New York: McGraw Hill.
Willms, J.D. & Flanagan, P. (2007). Canadian Students: Tell them from me. Education Canada. The Education Association, 47(3), 46-50.
Willms, J.D. (2003). Student Engagement at School: A Sense of Belonging and Participation. Results from PISA 2000. Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Direct access: http://www.unb.ca/crisp/pdf/0306.pdf
Willms, J.D., Friesen, S. & Milton, P. (2009). What did you do in school today? Transforming classrooms through social, academic and intellectual engagement. Toronto: Canadian Education Association.
Yaroslavova, E.N. (1991) Jekzistencial'naja i gumanisticheskaja psihologija. Moscow: Nauka
Young, J.R. (2006). The fight for classroom attention: Professor vs. laptop. The Chronicles of Higher Education. Direct access: http://chronicle.com/article/The-Fight-for-Classroom/19431
Zheltukhina, M.R., Zinkovskaya, A.V., Katermina, V.V. & Shershneva, N.B. (2016). Dialogue as a Constıtuent Resource for Dramatıc Dıscourse: Language, Person And Culture. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 11(15), 7408-7420.