Analysis of research by leading Russian methodologists in the field of social science and history. The use of electronic educational resources in history lessons: methodologists answer the teachers' questions Methodologists in history

Introduction

The structure of history education includes a complex of theoretical, educational, methodological, personnel and material and technical means aimed at transferring knowledge about the past. Historical education in the most concentrated form reflects the political system and ideology of Russian society, the structure of state power and the nature of the political regime in different historical periods.

The study of these problems is possible only on the basis of an interdisciplinary approach. Methods and techniques of historical anthropology and microsocial approaches are important for the development of the history of history education.

Undoubtedly, special methods of cognition of the past are also important: historical-genetic, historical-comparative and historical-system.

By education, we mean a purposeful process of upbringing and training in the interests of a person, society, and the state, accompanied by a statement that a citizen (student) has achieved educational levels (educational qualifications) established by the state and certified by an appropriate document.

There are certain traditions and achievements in the study of the history of education in Russia. However, this complex of problems has not yet turned into an independent branch of historical knowledge that would use the entire modern arsenal of means and methods of historical research and education.

The profound changes in various spheres of the life of Russian society that have taken place over the last decade of the 20th century have caused significant changes in school history education. In modern conditions of modernization of education in our country, the issues of the use and quality of methods of teaching history are constantly in the field of vision of the government of the Russian Federation and the Ministry of Education, and are actively discussed in society. Similar transformative processes in the field of school history education, including those associated with the creation of new methods of teaching history, as well as the formation of a procedure for state examination and the dissemination of methodological manuals on history, took place in Russia in the late 19th - early 20th centuries, which indicates the similarity historical situation.

This issue was the subject of scientific searches for domestic didactics, methodologists, historians of different generations.

The analysis of the historical, pedagogical and methodological literature has shown that the experience of preparation and methodological equipment of textbooks based on the methodology of Russian history, which operated in Russia at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, did not receive comprehensive coverage in the pre-revolutionary years, in the Soviet and post-Soviet periods. In this setting, this important pedagogical problem was not specially investigated. Attention of didactics, methodologists and historians (V.V. Kraevsky, I.Ya. Lerner, D.D. Zuev, A.I. Strazhev, N.V. Andreevskaya, V.N. Vernadsky, M.A. P. Bushchik, F. P. Korovkin, Sh.I. Ganelin, VS Sitnik, A. N. Shakhanov, M. T. Studenikin, T. V. Safonova and others) attracted only some of its aspects. Do not fill this gap, for all their scientific significance, and Ph.D. theses (O.V. Volobuev, V.P. Zolotarev, A.N. Fuks, I.V. Babich, E.S. Skvortsova, M.G. Belofost , V.A.Ischenko, A. Chechetkin), considering some aspects of the activities of the Ministry of Public Education, the classification of textbooks, the historical and methodological positions of the authors, their contribution to the preparation of educational literature and the development of methods.

So, the social significance of the methods of teaching history in teaching and upbringing of the younger generations, the lack of special studies of this problem, the importance of studying the past experience of introducing new teaching methods with different ideological orientations in order to use them creatively in modern conditions of modernization of history education in the Russian Federation our opinion, the relevance of the chosen topic. When choosing it, we took into account the works presented in Russian historiography, relied on them, defining the general design of the study and specific areas of work.

Purpose of the study: to consider the methodology of teaching history at the beginning of the 20th century and to identify trends in the application of these methods in the modern Russian school.

Research objectives:

· analyze and summarize the historical, pedagogical and methodological literature on the chosen topic;

· to reveal the level of its elaboration in the national historiography;

· to determine the socio-political, scientific-historical and psychological-pedagogical factors that influenced the process of creation, the typology of methods of teaching history;

· to study the contribution of historians, methodologists and teachers of pre-revolutionary Russia in teaching;

· consider the use of methods of teaching history in the domestic Russian school.

The object of our research is the methods of teaching history in the Russian school at the beginning of the XX century.

The subject of this research is the study of the introduction of new methods of teaching history by methodologists of the early XX century.

The structure of the work: introduction, two chapters, conclusion and bibliography.

In the course of the study, the following methods were used: analysis, synthesis, generalization, concretization of conclusions and comparison.

Chapter I. The state and development of issues of school history education at the turn of the XIX beginning of the XX centuries.

Russian historical and methodological thought of the late 19th - early 20th centuries. on the goals and objectives of school history education

In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. the intensified modernization processes in Russia also affected the sphere of education, which developed during this period with an unprecedented speed and strength. The main factors of this development were the sharply increased needs of the country for education, public activities in the field of education, the development of progressive pedagogical thought.

The policy of the Ministry of Public Education in the field of teaching history, which retained its adherence to the conservative tradition, aroused constant criticism not only from representatives of the liberal and democratic trend in the historical and methodological thought of Russia, but also from the official guard camp.

At the turn of the century, a wide range of professors and teachers, who expressed the interests of various socio-political strata, joined in the development of issues of school history education.

The historian and teacher I.I. Bellarminov. The study of history, in his opinion, does very little to help the development of students. "Most of the time in history lessons is spent in the stories of the teacher himself, while the students are passive." Complaints were caused by "lack of clarity, monotony of methodological methods of teaching history, lack of formation of the conceptual apparatus, neglect of the tasks of our time."

Professor N. I. Kareev believed that the main reason for the unsatisfactory state of teaching history is the dominance of the classical gymnasium, where history is given a secondary place and which is characterized by "poor preparedness of teachers and a lack of good textbooks."

A.D. Nadezhdin noted on the pages of the journal "Vestnik Vestnik" that since in historical science "scientific principles have long triumphed, which are based on the study of a process, and not a biography or a separate fact, so that more in line with the basic needs of the time. "

The leading teachers of Russia accused the modern school of inconsistency with the tasks facing society, of ignoring the civic feelings of students, in the absence of a creative approach in teaching; pointed to an urgent need to change history programs and teaching methods. The success of reforming the system of school history education was placed by them in direct dependence on the determination of the goals and priorities of educational policy, which predetermined the special attention of broad strata of professors and teachers to this problem.

If the Ministry of Public Education saw the main goal of school history education in “imprinting important historical facts in the memory of students,” the leading teachers of Russia believed that students “need to be given not just factual information, but it is necessary to present the development of countries in the form of a natural evolutionary process. ".

The historical section of the Moscow Society for the Dissemination of Technical Knowledge, which worked on the teaching of history in secondary school (1890), noted that teaching history should consist in “understanding by students of the process of historical development and knowledge of its most important points and results, and should not be overlooked from the kind of characteristics of eras, individual nationalities and individuals. "

In the course of what took place on the pages of pedagogical publications at the beginning of the twentieth century. Discussions between prominent historians and educators revealed different approaches in their understanding of the goals of teaching history. Professor A.I. Yarotsky saw them in the fact that students learn to systematize and generalize facts. He spoke out against the introduction of university history courses in schools, even simplified and schematized, as this would lead, in his opinion, to a "distortion of science." Professor IM Kataev agreed with the expressed opinion about the overload of students' memory with unnecessary facts, while the school "must develop their thinking." He viewed the historical process as "a whole network of separate processes, the content of which is by no means exhausted by the activities of individuals." However, IM Kataev, unlike AI Yarotsky, believed that the school needed a systematic course in history. "The fact that he does not exhaust all historical material does not make him unscientific." The foundations of science were distorted, in his opinion, when facts and phenomena were selected one-sidedly. "The school course takes the data established by science and modifies them in a form accessible to students."

Professor A.P. Pavlov believed that the school history course should develop students' understanding of "social life and contemporary reality."

The primary school methodologist E.A. Zvyagintsev saw the main tasks of the historical course in “teaching students to understand the reality around them, to understand the phenomena of human culture and community, to understand their origin from the past and thereby prepare for them the opportunity to become conscious and active participants in public life ”. Hence the main goal of the history course is "to make it easier for students to understand the present in the light of the past."

Professor N. I. Kareev saw the goal of history education in the development of students' "historical attitude to life, which should be expressed in understanding the process of historical development and knowledge of its most important moments and results, and the characteristics of the characteristics of epochs, individual nationalities and personalities "History, in his opinion, and in school teaching should be considered" not a collection of biographies and stories about individual events, but as a picture of social and cultural processes. "

Particular attention was paid to the educational orientation of the history course, and the goal of teaching history was seen in preparing students for "fulfilling their civic duties." In a circular from the Ministry of Public Education dated July 13, 1913, it was stated that “teachers should always remember that school teaches and educates future Russian citizens who, in studying the past destinies of Russia, should gain the necessary knowledge and moral strength for conscientious and faithful service to the Great Fatherland.

In connection with the development in 1915 - 1916. Commission under the leadership of Count P.I. Ignatiev of new programs in history, on the pages of pedagogical publications again there was a discussion on the above problem.

Methodist Y. Kulzhinsky emphasized that "history should also serve national interests as a moral subject," the main goal of teaching history at the senior level is "to evoke in students a historical attitude to life, to develop a historical understanding in them."

A survey among history teachers, conducted in 1911 by the Historical Commission of the Society for the Dissemination of Technical Knowledge, gives an idea of ​​how the teachers saw the goals of teaching the subject. Most of the responses recognized the importance of the history course in high school on its own. It should be, in the opinion of teachers, self-sufficient and not have the goal of preparing students for admission to higher educational institutions. The questionnaires show the desire to bring the teaching of history closer to the demands of modern life, indicate the educational and upbringing tasks of history courses ( public and political upbringing).

The results of the discussion at the beginning of the century on the goals of teaching history in schools were summed up by the editor of the yearbook "Questions of Teaching History in Secondary and Primary Schools" IM Kataev, who noted that the main goal of teaching history is to understand the present. The historical course, in his opinion, should include materials covering all the main aspects of the historical process.

Thus, at the turn of the century, several approaches to understanding the goals and objectives of historical education were outlined in Russian historical and methodological thought. In accordance with one of them, the main goal of school history courses is the assimilation of a certain amount of historical facts by students, their mechanical memorization, in accordance with another, students should get an idea of ​​the laws of the historical process, but at the same time it is necessary to take into account the peculiarities of the development of the era, the role historical figures. There was an opinion that the school should shape the historical thinking of students, their understanding of the connection between past events and the present, prepare them for active participation in public life. The special role of teaching history in the formation of the civic qualities of the student's personality was noted. History courses at school were supposed to fulfill educational and educational functions.

2. The development of school history education, the use of active methods of teaching history at the end of the XIX - beginning. XX century

The beginning of the XX century in the world was marked by a sharp growth of industry, economy, social and global processes acquired a certain dynamism. Many European powers entered a new stage of their development, and the Russian Empire was no exception.

By this time in Russia there was a significant growth of the intelligentsia, the emergence of new branches of science, more and more often it was possible to read in one or another newspaper about scientific developments in the field of mathematics, linguistics, chemistry, including in the field of historical science.

During this period, there are thoughts that history as a science has long been divided into professorial and school. The art of teaching history should be formalized into a separate science, first of all, the pedagogical cycle, which would be based not on theoretical knowledge, but on practical skills. "One is a learned historian, the other is a historically educated person"

The teachers of this period saw a variety of methods of conducting a history lesson, some tried to put forward the thesis that discussion and conversation are the basis for the birth of an educated, spiritually educated person. Others adhered to the system of summarizing and reporting, laying in this method the principle of independence, the ability to highlight the main thing. Still others believed that only work with a source can give true knowledge of the subject, and hence the ability to competently teach the material. All these ideas were imbued with the spirit of the new time, the growth of the level of education and, above all, the birth of the idea that the teaching system should not be reduced to an elementary retelling and memorization of the text, as was popular among the methodists of the 19th century.

By this time, the very concept of methodology appears and spreads in a wide context. "Methodology is a pedagogical discipline aimed at clarifying the educational significance of history and finding, describing and evaluating methods that lead to a better formulation of history as an academic subject."

One of the leading methodologists of that time - S.V. Farfarovsky proposed a laboratory method for teaching history. While still a young, novice teacher, he traveled abroad to France, Belgium and Germany, upon arrival from abroad to Russia, he began to develop a laboratory method for teaching history, which was based on the knowledge gained from a trip to Europe. The essence of the method he proposes is the direct study of the source by the students, and, based on the analysis of the document, the answer to a number of questions on the topics covered. In the course of such classes, students develop an interest in material, for example, scribes, they are drawn into antiquity. The class is divided into several groups, each of which has its own knowledge laboratory. For example: "each group calculated the results for one country or district for different years, then they themselves deduce the facts of the decline of the economy within the boundaries of Muscovite Rus from a collective comparison of a number of descriptions of individual farms for different years." At the same time, he attaches particular importance to the grouping of material in such a way that it is most accessible.

S. Farfarovsky saw the significance of the laboratory method in several elements: interest in history awakens, assimilation of factual material is facilitated, and, above all, this method is designed for the psychology of age. lies in the fact that students begin to understand that all the conclusions of the textbook and the teacher are justified.

B.A. Vlohopulov published in 1914 a textbook entitled “Methods of History. “Course for the 8th grade of female gymnasiums”, which emphasizes one of the most important elements in teaching history, that is the homework of the teacher. General training at the university turns out to be insufficient for teaching history, and even more so practical techniques for many young teachers remain unknown. In the basis of his methodology, he puts the concentric principle, first of all, proceeding from the fact that only when choosing a material one has to take into account what may most likely be of interest to students: while boys are more interested in the history of the war, the details of battles, girls seem to be more entertaining descriptions cultural life of the era, domestic life, etc. He also formulates the subjective - concentric method, mainly referring to the degree of development of the student. At the same time, dividing the entire course of history into two stages. In the first of them, events are considered in the form of separate, easily understandable and specific phenomena, in the second, students try to use the information already acquired to create a single general picture and replenish them with a number of new facts. Thus, the material is assimilated the best and is a colorful canvas of knowledge.

Another important point in teaching, he emphasizes the competent arrangement of the material and here formulates the following methods. One of the first is the method of arrangement - chronologically - progressive, as a result of which all facts go in the order in which they were in reality.

The second method is chronologically - regressive, in which events fall from the nearest to the farthest, as a result of its application in practice, one can be based on an opinion based on a better understanding of the knowledge nearest in time.

By the third method, he understands the material grouping system, i.e. "All facts are connected in such a way that if there were no one, there would be no others." Thus, the idea of ​​a single connection of facts or events in time is traced.

In the last two of his methods: biographical and cultural B.A. Vlohopulov reflects the idea of ​​the high significance of the individual in history and the cultural successes that human civilization has generated. The unification of these two principles was based on the direct connection between the personality, as a continuation of man and civilization, of which it is a part.

Unfortunately, school practice shows that most of the time in the classroom pupils are in the position of listening to the teacher's story or reading the text of the school textbook. As a result, they develop a lack of confidence in their abilities, the process of historical development proceeds less efficiently, and they assimilate historical knowledge worse.

Methodists of the pre-revolutionary school also pointed to this. So, N.P. Pokotilo believed that students can acquire knowledge by listening to a lecture and learning a textbook, but he asked the question: “Is teaching history worth anything? After all, no matter how well the teacher expounds his subject, no matter how well the students prepare, they will all repeat what the teacher gave them, nothing of their own will be. But in order to achieve such a result, is it worth working for so many years! "

The pre-revolutionary methodists considered it necessary to eliminate the "learning of the textbook"; in their opinion, it should retain only the character of a reference book. In the same way, it is necessary to eliminate the presentation by the teacher of the material that is usually placed in the textbook.

Professor M.M. Stasyulevich. In 1863, he proposed a method that later became known as "real", based on an independent, active study of historical documents. For this purpose, he published a special anthology on the history of the Middle Ages. He is deeply convinced that "whoever has read Tacitus, Eingard, Froissard, he knows history, is more historically educated than the one who has mastered a whole historical guide."

Subsequently, the "real method" of studying history split into several directions, one of which was the "laboratory method". Initially, it was contrasted with the formal method, which required students to memorize and reproduce the teacher's speech and the text of the textbook. The development of the laboratory method is usually associated with the names of S.V. Farforovsky and N.A. Rozhkova. They believed that it is possible to overcome the dogmatism of traditional teaching if the entire cognitive activity of students is brought closer to scientific research methods, because "there can be no reliable and lasting study of history without independent study of primary sources from a critical and real perspective."

Following the same path as the scientists, the students will be introduced to the research laboratory. This thought prompted S.V. Farforovsky to call his method "laboratory". In addition, he believed that "the very fact that students are reading an old document arouses their very lively and extremely intense interest." In 1913, he prepared a two-volume anthology "Sources of Russian History", on the basis of which it was supposed to organize the learning process. The anthology contained many different sources: scribal books, excerpts from chronicles, legal acts, diplomatic documents, all kinds of letters, letters, etc. The author provided explanations for some documents: he explained the most complex concepts, gave recommendations for studying a particular document. S.V. Farforovsky and his followers believed that the leading role in the lesson should belong to the student, because “in the middle grades, a critical ability, the need for analysis, is already awakening in the minds of students. It is necessary to give these abilities healthy food, and not drown them with the dogmatism of the textbook, unfounded and apodictic statements. Experience shows that students then work more intensively than in ordinary lessons. At the same time, the work of the class is notable for its great liveliness, it arouses active attention more than boring, monotonous, inactive, dogmatic teaching, tiresome in its monotony and fruitless in its results. "

The task of the teacher, according to S.V. Farforovsky, is to help the student to do in a lightweight form the same work that the scientist does, to encourage him to repeat the whole train of thought leading to a predetermined position (since students should briefly familiarize themselves with the conclusions of scientists). However, students conduct all work with documents independently. The ideas of S.V. Farforovsky were picked up by many teachers - historians. Some of them made changes and additions.

Thus, A. Hartwig and N. Kryukov suggested using historical sources to make acquaintance with historical facts more complete, thereby revitalizing the teaching of history, and also to organize the work of students' historical thought. In their opinion, “the textbook alone does not paint a vivid picture of the past life, does not give (and cannot give) those specific and detailed descriptions of the phenomena that took place, those detailed characteristics that would give the student the opportunity to draw conclusions, conclusions and understand the general connection what was happening. Lacking the necessary facts to judge a particular topic, students perceive the ready-made formulas of the textbook only by memory, which is highly undesirable from the point of view of rational pedagogy. " A. Hartwig defined one of the main conditions for the correct, in his opinion, conduct of the teaching of history - the independence of the students' work. He wrote that "... our joint work will be much more productive if the students participate in this work" actively and, moreover, collectively. " The teacher, however, must "... teach students to independently use historical material, teach them to read books of historical content, teach them to understand at least some historical meaning of what is happening ...".

A. Hartwig suggested dividing the class into groups of 5-6 people and giving them sources and aids for reading, after which a conversation was organized in the lesson. At the same time, one of the students presented the main material on his question, and the rest supplemented it, discussed with him. A. Hartwig considered it sufficient if each of the students knew only a fourth of all questions, but deep enough.

Supporters of the laboratory method include V.Ya. Ulanova, K.V. Sivkova, S.P. Singalevich. In their opinion, the age characteristics of students in grades 5-6, together with the small number of hours devoted to studying history, make it difficult to effectively work with documents. But, on the other hand, they believed that laboratory classes should not be abandoned, especially in high school, since they give students an idea of ​​the methodology, acquaint them with the sources and methods of research. They have the opportunity to apply the skills of historical analysis to the facts and documents of our time.

One of the variants of the laboratory method - the documentation method - was proposed by Ya.S. Kulzhinsky. The study of documents, he believed, should be carried out according to the reader, but in conjunction with the textbook. This helps students relate their findings to the source. Kulzhinsky believed that it was necessary to provide the textbook with systematic documentation and add a reader to it. Method of documentation Ya.S. Kulzhinsky was received ambiguously. He was opposed by S.V. Farforovsky, who stated that in this case the most important thing in the laboratory method was lost - the students' independent search for truth, the development of their critical thinking.

In general, the pre-revolutionary school has accumulated significant experience in organizing the study of history on the basis of various sources, including historical documents. It is to him that the attention of modern history teachers and methodologists has recently been again drawn. Proposed and tested for the first time in Russia in the middle of the 19th century, this method has undergone significant changes to this day, but the main idea - the need to use historical sources in history lessons - remains unchanged.

Methodists of the late XIX early XX century and their methods Table №1

MethodistsMethodsS.V. FarfarovskiyLaboratorny B.A.Vlokhopulov Subjective - concentric; location - chronologically - regressive.MN Stasyulevich "Real" method (independent study of historical documents) A. Hartwig and N. Kryukov Using historical sources V.Ya.Ulanov, K.V. Sivkov and S.P.SingalevichLaboratory methodYa.S. KulzhinskyDocumentation Method

Chapter II. Comparative analysis of methods of teaching history at the beginning of the XX century. and modern techniques

Teachers of the early twentieth century. strove for a lesson structure that would stimulate independent cognitive activity of students, form their need for knowledge. Some saw this way in the study of visualization, others - in the work of students on reports and abstracts, and still others - in the use of historical sources. Some, however, generally preferred the labor method of teaching.

When teaching history to schoolchildren, they tried to create specific images. For this, maps and pictures, books for reading with illustrations were published. Excursion work and local history research became an organic part of the learning process. As already noted, attention was paid to developing students' ability to think and work independently.

At the beginning of the XX century. old forgotten teaching methods are introduced, new ones appear. Among them is a real, laboratory, method of dramatization. The real method is to work on the basis of historical sources. When introducing this method into practice, the systematic study of a history course and the use of a school textbook were ignored. It was supposed to be replaced with a short synopsis.

ON THE. Rozhkov and S.V. Farforovskiy proposed to introduce a laboratory teaching method, i.e. to bring all the cognitive activity of the student closer to the methods of researching historical science. In their opinion, this can be achieved if all education is built on the study of primary sources, following the same path as the researchers of science. Thus, the student will be introduced into the research laboratory. The search for activation of the ways of teaching also led to the improvement of the abstracting system developed by the methodologists B.A. Vlahopulov and N.P. Pokotilo.

All these methods were aimed at improving the learning process, and more specifically at the goals, the main directions in teaching history, methods and means of forming historical thinking in students in history lessons in a Russian school at the beginning of the 20th century.

Since 1917, school history education in Russia has undergone fundamental changes. Both the old teaching methodology and the old textbooks are recognized as unsuitable for teaching the younger generation.

Instead of civil history, it is proposed to study labor history and sociology. Proceeding from this, the implementation of revolutionary transformations in the field of history education begins. The first stage in the development of school history education begins in 1917 and continues until the early 30s. At this time, the old content of history education was eliminated, and history was replaced as an academic subject by a course in social studies. Within the framework of social science, there are only separate elements of a history course with an ideological selection of facts and their Marxist coverage.

The new school canceled exams, penalties, student scores and homework. The transfer of students from class to class and graduation from school were to be carried out according to the feedback of the pedagogical council on the performance of educational work. Instead of classes, it was recommended to introduce small groups - "brigades"; instead of lessons - laboratory "studio" classes.

Teaching methods are undergoing a radical revision. It is based on the "illustrative school of action", which appeared for the first time in Western countries and found application in our country. On the basis of this school, a "labor school of work" is being developed in the USSR. If in the bourgeois school there was a motto "from knowledge to action", then in the labor school everything became the other way around - "from action to knowledge." Concrete work encouraged students to enrich their knowledge and develop educational skills.

In 1920, an attempt was made to introduce an approximate history program. However, it was not adopted even in a complex form with the inclusion of law, political economy and sociology, information on the history of the class struggle and the development of the theory of scientific socialism. Since 1923, subject teaching was abolished and a brigade teaching method was introduced on the basis of complex programs that existed until 1931.

The situation with historical education changed in the 30s. A new stage begins, characterized by the restoration of history as an independent subject. The Central Committee of the CPSU (b) gives instructions to abandon the laboratory-brigade method. The main form of organization of educational work is determined by a lesson with a solid composition of students, with a strictly defined schedule of classes (Resolutions of the Central Committee of the CPSU (b) "On primary and secondary schools" of September 5, 1931 and "On curricula and regime in primary and secondary schools" dated August 5, 1932). It was proposed to restore a systematic course of history in school in order to equip schoolchildren with a solid knowledge of the basics of science. For the training of teachers, history faculties in universities were restored, departments of methodology appeared.

In 1939, updated history programs were released. They also operated in the 50s. The programs were, as it were, two parts - on general history (the ancient world, the Middle Ages, modern history) and on the history of the USSR. Sections of general history were studied from grades 5 to 9. The history of the USSR was presented twice: first in the form of an elementary course in the elementary grades, then in the upper grades of secondary school in the form of a systematic course.

When considering the principles and structure of history education in the Soviet school of the 50s. attention should be paid to the allocation of partial concentrates in teaching history. There is a fundamental difference in these centers with the centers for teaching history in Russian gymnasiums. Concentrations in the former school pursued the goal of deep, conscious knowledge of history, applied in three stages of education. Concentrations in the Soviet school were of a forced nature, associated with the ideologization of education.

In the late 50s. historical and methodological thought went along the line of strengthening ties with the psychological and pedagogical sciences. The methods of teaching and learning were improved, recommendations were given on how to present material, how to talk, how to use a map, a picture. But, as before, the question of what the student is doing in the lesson, how he learns history, was almost never raised.

In the 60s and 70s. the study of the methodology of teaching history by such scientists as A.A. Vagin, D.N. Nikiforov, P.S.Leibengrub, F.P.Korovkin, P.V. Gora, N.G.Dairi continues. The development of methods of teaching history proceeded from the development of teaching tools and techniques and the provision of methodological assistance to the teacher in finding effective ways of teaching students. The goal was to teach schoolchildren to independently acquire knowledge and navigate the growing flow of information. In didactics, the problems of enhancing the activity and independence of schoolchildren in the educational process, increasing the educational role of teaching, intensifying the lesson, introducing problematicity in teaching were developed.

In the 60-80s. the goal of developing students' activity and independence in history lessons is put forward in the first place. More and more attention is paid to the problem of enhancing the cognitive activity of students, the formation of their methods of work, skills, the question of developing education is being raised. So, A.A. Yanko-Trinitskaya, N.I. Zaporozhets study the mental operations of students; employees of the department of Moscow State Pedagogical University - the levels of cognitive activity, methods of work, skills and methods of cognitive activity, develop a structurally functional approach to the selection of content, methods and means of teaching. Specialists of the Institute of Content and Teaching Methods N.G.Dairi, I.Ya. Lerner raise questions about the problematic nature of teaching and the development of students' historical thinking and, in this regard, about the place and role of cognitive tasks. In the solution of these problems I.Ya. Lerner saw the most important way of development of independent creative thinking of students. Thus, in the 80s. the most important goal of the learning process is the development of the student's personality.

In accordance with the law of the Russian Federation "On Education" in the 90s. the introduction of compulsory (basic) nine-year education began. The school began to move from a linear to a concentric structure of education. The first concentrate consisted of a basic school (grades 5-9), the second - a complete secondary school (grades 10-11). In the first concentrator, they began to introduce the study of national and general history from antiquity to the present day on the basis of a civilizational approach. The educational strategy envisaged first the study of the history of Russia in the context of world history, and later the creation of a single course called "Russia and the World."

In the second concentrator, the courses “History of Russia from ancient times to the present day”, “Major milestones in the history of mankind”, “History of world civilizations” were introduced. For repetition and deepening at a higher theoretical level previously studied, it was supposed to study modular and integrated courses. At the present time, the need for the creation of historical and social science courses, built on a problem principle, is increasingly felt.

The idea of ​​concentrates is not new. In the XIX century. German Methodists proposed a system based on the so-called theory of "three stages". At the first stage, it was proposed to study biographical material, personify history. At the second stage, the history of individual peoples was studied on the basis of ethnographic and culturological material. At the third stage, the students already got acquainted with the whole story of the event.

In the early 60s. in our country, there was essentially a concentric system. At the first stage, it was supposed to study episodic stories only on the basis of the description of facts. At the second stage of training, an elementary course of history from antiquity to the present day was introduced with the disclosure of cause-and-effect relationships. In graduation classes, systematic courses were introduced, which were studied on the basis of sociological and philosophical generalizations.

The advantages of the concentric system are obvious: after basic school, young people received a holistic, albeit elementary, understanding of the historical process, the age characteristics of children were taken into account in the selection of material, all sections of history had almost the same amount of time to master. On the other hand, the linear system has advantages that are the disadvantages of a concentric one: the chronological sequence of courses, students get the most complete and complete idea of ​​the periods of history, savings in study time due to the absence of repetitions, maintaining a steady interest in the subject due to the novelty of the material.

In the 90s. They decided to abandon the programs traditional for Russia and introduce Gosstandart, according to the Western model, which determines the mandatory minimum of history education, quantitative criteria for assessing the quality of education. The interim Gosstandart sets out the basic requirements for the history education of students in secondary schools. The explanatory note defines the goals of teaching history at school, the object of studying history (the past of mankind) and the main system characteristics of the object (historical time, space, movement).

The standard contains a mandatory minimum for history, i.e. basic content. The knowledge included in this part should be generally accepted in terms of its educational value. The basic content of the story is recorded with such a degree of detail that would exclude or minimize the possibility of its arbitrary interpretation. The standard should take into account the capabilities of the mass school, but it should also leave the opportunity to create any programs based on it. The required minimum is the core that any student must learn.

At the same time, the standard also contains a basic component - the minimum of knowledge that a teacher should give. The base content is wider and deeper than the minimum assimilation level required. The standard also requires a minimum level of training. This section presents skills, and in full and in accordance with their sequence of development. The technology of verification works in the standard contains typical tasks for verification, criterion-oriented tests. In a modern school, the student gets more freedom of action in the learning process, his individual abilities, capabilities, needs and interests are more taken into account. The issue of choosing a school, a teacher, forms of education, textbooks and manuals, the pace and sequence of studying the historical content is gradually coming to the fore.

The implementation of programs of different levels of education, providing basic and in-depth knowledge, taking into account the development of the interests of students, including future professional ones, is being carried out. Increasingly, in teaching history, psychology is used, both pedagogical and historical, for the purpose of in-depth and meaningful knowledge of history.

The basis of modern methods, one way or another, dates back to pre-revolutionary pedagogy. Taking into account the individual psychological characteristics of students was the primary basis of methodological research, as Kareev emphasized. He repeatedly noted the importance of studying the personal qualities of each student in order to achieve the best result.

In order to more specifically represent the differences and similarities between pre-revolutionary and modern methods, let us turn to a comparative analysis using schemes.

At the first stage of practical work, we compared the goals of education in the Russian school of the late 19th - early 20th centuries with modern goals.

Scheme No. 1. LEARNING OBJECTIVES IN THE RUSSIAN SCHOOL OF THE XIX-BEGINNING OF THE XX CENTURY

Scheme No. 2. OBJECTIVES OF LEARNING HISTORY.

As we can see from diagram No. 1, the main goals in teaching history at the beginning of the 20th century are several: educational, upbringing, developing. Their components are a wide variety of learning elements, for example, for an educational goal: the formation of historical thinking, the ability to navigate one's abilities, to know the process of historical development. The educational goal is: education of patriotism, moral and civil, education in the spirit of faith, devotion to the fatherland, national unity. The developmental goal has one focus - this is the development of the student's personality, his mental abilities.

If we analyze scheme No. 2, then we can see that modern history education has five clear goals, which are established by the State Standard and due to them, the direction of teaching history is determined. First of all, these are: the basis of knowledge, understanding the events of phenomena, value orientations and beliefs, the experience of history, humanism and morality, interest in history and culture.

By comparing the data of the two schemes, we can trace the evolution of the goals of history teaching, a number of similarities and significant differences. Historical education in imperial Russia and modern education carry educational, upbringing and developmental goals. For example, at the beginning of the 20th century, the educational goal is pursued by knowledge of the process of historical development and its regularities; in modern times, this goal carries the concept of "Knowledge Base".

We also see significant differences in these two schemes. Modern education no longer carries in itself for educational purposes - faith, devotion to the throne and fatherland, but includes a number of new components such as: the experience of historical knowledge, humanism and morality. At the second stage of the research, we decided to analyze the methods of teaching history.

Scheme No. 3 METHODS AND MEANS OF TEACHING HISTORY AT THE BEGINNING OF THE XX CENTURY

Scheme No. 4 Methods and techniques of teaching in a modern school

After analyzing scheme No. 3, we can say about the following that the main methods of teaching history were: laboratory, labor, abstract, excursion, dramatization, illustrative. The main techniques were: the development of abstracts, posing questions to the text, explanatory reading and drawing up plans. All of these techniques have contributed to a wider coverage of the material, and better teaching.

From scheme No. 4 we see that the methods, techniques and means appear before us as an integral continuous link in training. Thus, the most relevant in our time are methods of oral, printed - verbal, visual and practical nature. The techniques are: development of a plot story, analytical, picture descriptions, analysis of documents, making a layout, analysis of illustrations. The means are: story, dialogue, conversation, reader, subject visualization and modeling.

Thus, it is possible to trace clear differences and similarities in approaches to learning through the prism of time. In a more transformed form, we are faced with the method of illustration, which in modern times is a graphic one, or a pictorial and analytical description used to serve as an illustrative method.

Comparing these schemes, we can conclude that the methods of the beginning of the 20th century are relevant today in the modern Russian school, but naturally in a more modified form, based on the tasks of the modern era.

Conclusion

This entire study was devoted to the definition of techniques and methods of teaching history in the Russian school of the early XX century. The relevance of this work lies in the fact that there are practically no works devoted to the study of issues related to the peculiarities of teaching history in the pre-revolutionary period. This is not correct, since every teacher must understand the peculiarities of the development of the methodology in one or another historical period, especially since domestic pedagogy has long traditions, the appeal to which makes it possible to more effectively organize the educational process.

Some educators believe that the experience gained at the beginning of the 20th century has no definite value, since the methods were not effective and had a lot of shortcomings, but the study showed that this was not the case. During this period, thanks to the most famous methodologists, new and improved methods appeared that were of great educational value, in addition, new methods and techniques for working with students were developed. Based on this, we can say that the beginning of the 20th century is an important stage in the development of domestic pedagogy and the weak interest of teachers in this period is unreasonable, since it was then that an active creative search for teachers began, which became a consequence of the educational policy pursued by the state.

The work consists of two parts: theoretical and practical. In the first part, the theme of the development of historical thought in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century and the methods proposed by the methodologists of the period under consideration were considered. The study of this issue made it possible to come to the conclusion that during this period a lot of work was carried out in this direction, the purpose of which was to increase the level of education and improve the quality of students' knowledge. This was due to the fact that the state needed more highly educated people who could think independently and make important decisions. In addition, the country could not afford to lag behind other powers in scientific and technological progress, for which it was also necessary to raise the level of education in the country.

The result of the transformation of the content of education was the transition to teaching history according to new programs, the active search by teachers for such forms, methods and techniques of conducting classes that ensured the active work of students in the lesson, contributed to the development of their independent thinking, the development of an understanding of the laws of the history of the development of society.

The study of the peculiarities of teaching history in the Russian school made it possible to consider more specifically how history was taught in the period under study, and to come to the conclusion that various forms, methods and techniques of teaching history were widely used in school practice of this period, in particular, this form was widespread. conducting the lesson as a seminar, the teachers widely used the research method and the problematic method of presenting the material. Documentary material was actively involved in the lessons. All this contributed to an increase in the effectiveness of the lessons of history.

The practical part of the work made it possible to analyze the possibility and peculiarity of the application of forms, methods and techniques of teaching history at the beginning of the 20th century today and to confirm the hypothesis put forward at the beginning of the study that the experience gained during this period still has a certain value today. As mentioned earlier, all pedagogy is based on continuity and, of course, the experience of teachers is of great importance to us, as it carries rich material that contributes to the development of methods of teaching history. But for more effective work in modern conditions, the accumulated experience must be rethought and transformed, taking into account the new requirements for the level of knowledge and skills of graduates. All of the above methods and forms of conducting training sessions are quite widespread in the period under review and are used by teachers today, but in a slightly modified form.

The comparative analysis of the schemes of goals and methods of teaching history has shown that today it is possible to draw a parallel between modern methods and the methods of pre-revolutionary Russia. For example, in the pre-revolutionary period, despite the fact that one of the main tasks of teaching history was declared to be the development of independent thinking of students, preference was given to a greater extent to methods and techniques aimed at reproducing ready-made knowledge or systematizing and generalizing facts, as evidenced by the methodologists themselves. in their works. Today the situation has changed somewhat. Proceeding from the fact that modern society requires graduates to be able to critically analyze historical information, to establish cause-and-effect relationships between phenomena, the ability to participate in discussions on historical issues, to formulate their own position on the issues discussed. In the classroom, the main attention is paid to the development, first of all, of independent thinking. Nevertheless, despite small differences in teaching history, traditional forms and methods are still used, and it can be concluded that the experience accumulated by teachers in the early twentieth century. has a certain value today for history teachers and can be applied in a modern school subject to adjustments, since over time, some of the requirements have lost their relevance.

List of used literature

Buschik L.P. Essay on the development of school history education in the USSR. - M., 1961.

Vlahopulov B. Methods of history. 8th grade course for girls' gymnasiums. - Kiev. 1914

Hartwig A. and Kryukov, N. Reader for classroom studies on Russian history in higher primary schools and lower grades of secondary educational institutions. - M., 1917.

Gartwig A.F. On the issue of teaching history in secondary educational institutions. - M. 1891.

Ivanov K.A. Essays on the methodology of history. - SPb. 1915

Kareev N. About school teaching of history. - Petrograd. 1917.

Methodology for teaching history in high school: A guide for teachers / Otv. ed. F.P. Korovkin. - M., 1978.

History teaching methodology in secondary school. - M., 1986.

Nadezhdin A.D. Essays on the history of secondary schools in Russia in the second half of the 19th century. - L., 1954.

N. Pokotilo A Practical Guide for a Beginning History Teacher. - SPb. 1912

Singalevich S.P. About new manuals on the methodology of history. - Kazan. 1913.

Singalevich S.P. Secondary and university history teaching: (page from history methodology). - Kazan. 1914.

Farfarovskiy S. Laboratory method of teaching history. - Warsaw.

Similar works to - Methods of teaching history in the Russian school at the beginning of the twentieth century

UMK line S. V. Kolpakov, V. A. Vedyushkin. General History (5-9)

UMK line R. Sh. Ganelin. History of Russia (6-10)

General history

Russian history

The use of electronic educational resources in history lessons: methodologists answer teachers' questions

How difficult is it to handle e-learning resources?

It's not difficult at all. All EFU and EOR of the digital educational platform LECTA have a simple, intuitive interface and a convenient navigation system: by using the electronic table of contents you can easily find the necessary chapter for the lesson, and with the help of the "Search" command you can find all references to a particular concept or person.

What illustrative materials are there in modern ERM on history?

The materials are very diverse. First of all, these are multimedia presentations dedicated to a particular event or person. Often they contain not only visual, but also audio material: short story, description, comments on slides. Then, these are excerpts from historical films that a modern student, most likely, will not see anywhere else - "Battleship Potemkin", "Kutuzov", "Alexander Nevsky" and others. Finally, part of the ESM is a variety of illustrations - maps, diagrams, photographs, which can be enlarged and displayed on an interactive whiteboard during the lesson.

An excerpt from the 1943 film "Kutuzov". A textbook on the history of Russia for grade 9, authors L.M. Lyashenko, O. V. Volobuev, E.V. Simonov.

Training video dedicated to the Battle of the Ice. Study guide for grade 6, authors V.G. Vovin, P.A. Baranov and others.

The textbook, prepared in accordance with the historical and cultural standard, covers the period of Russian history from the 16th to the end of the 17th century. The content of the textbook is aimed at developing the cognitive interests of students. The methodology of the textbook is based on the system-activity approach, which contributes to the formation of skills to independently work with information and use it in practice. Electronic form of the textbook (EFU) History of Russia. XVI - end of the XVII century. Grade 7 is included in the educational-methodical set (TMC) on the subject History of Russia Grade 7 Andreev I. L. Fedorov I. Amosova I. V. History of Russia. XVI - end of the XVII century. Grade 7 meets the requirements of the Federal State Educational Standard. EFU is recommended by the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation.

Can I use my own illustrative materials in the lessons, which are not in the ESM?

Sure you can! For this, it is most convenient to use the digital service "Cool Work" of the LECTA platform. It is a bank of lessons and lesson plans. Each lesson already has goals, objectives, keywords and other reference data, and a multimedia presentation template has been prepared for each lesson, which you can independently edit, supplement, and then save and put aside in your portfolio.

What do assignments for independent work, compiled with the use of ESM look like?

Electronic educational publications actively use the test form of assignments: children like it, with its help you can quickly find your gaps in knowledge and see the correct answer. Electronic textbooks LECTA differ in that they present different interactive, game forms of assignments.

The textbook, which is part of the Algorithm of Success educational and methodological kits system, tells in an accessible and entertaining form about the main events of the history of Russia, from the Stone Age to the era of the formation of a single state in the 16th century, gives vivid characteristics of outstanding personalities and events of that era , contains the necessary information about economic activity and social relations. Much attention is paid to issues of culture, everyday life and spiritual life of people. The book is richly and colorfully illustrated, supplied with maps, diagrams and other visual materials. The study guide promotes in-depth study of the subject. The methodological apparatus, which includes multilevel tasks at the end of paragraphs, final questions, adapted excerpts from sources and historical writings, allows the use of an activity approach to develop the system of skills necessary for the successful mastering of the school history course.

Let's consider some examples of ERM tasks. Interactive assignment on the topic “The Decembrist Uprising. Southern and Northern Society ". Textbook “History of Russia. XIX - early XX century "for grade 9, authors L.M. Lyashenko, O. V. Volobuev, E.V. Simonov. It is required to establish a correspondence between the persons, the main elements of the program and the names of the companies. The student can complete the task any number of times, memorizing his correct answers and finding mistakes.

In a similar form, an assignment is presented on the topic of continuous collectivization in grade 11 (textbook "Russia in the world" for grade 11, authors - OV Volobuev, VA Klokov, MV Ponomarev).

In the same textbook, the test on the topic "Culture of the Silver Age" is illustrated with portraits of poets, artists and writers.

Interactive tasks are very diverse in form - for example, in some cases, students are asked to restore a fragment of the text by inserting the necessary dates, names and facts in the blanks. For example, this is how the test on the construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway looks like in the electronic textbook "Russia in the World" for grade 11, the authors are O.V. Volobuev, V.A. Klokov, M.V. Ponomarev. In the same window, the student can solve the problem, get feedback on seeing his mistakes, and correct them.

In the textbooks for all classes there are timeline tasks - that is, the ability to arrange historical events in the correct chronological order. Assignment from the textbook on the history of Russia for grade 6, authors V.G. Vovin, P.A. Baranov, S.V. Alexandrova, I.M. Lebedev.

May I find out how the students completed the test items in the e-textbook?

Tasks at EFU are given to students solely for self-examination, so the teacher does not have access to the results. Test assignments in EOR are made in a playful way, so that students themselves want to pass them. In this way, we form in them a useful habit of testing ourselves on our own initiative. In this case, it is important that the teacher does not see the student's mistakes - this creates a psychologically comfortable situation when the student can perform tasks over and over again until he achieves an excellent result.

John Wesley - Founder of Methodism

Methodism(Methodist Church) - Protestant church, mainly in the USA, Great Britain. It arose in the 18th century, separating from the Anglican Church, demanding consistent, methodological observance of religious precepts. Methodists preach religious humility, patience.

As a current within Anglicanism, Methodism emerged in the 1720s in Oxford, but it did not immediately become a separate denomination. The founder of Methodism was John Wesley (-).

Belief and liturgical practice

Methodist doctrines are summarized in 25 statements, which are an abridged version (by John Wesley) of 39 articles of the Anglican Creed. Methodists believe in a Triune God and see the Bible as the ultimate authority in matters of faith and practice. They acknowledge the reality of sin, but also the possibility of forgiveness and atonement. Wesley rejected the Calvinist doctrine of predestination, and the Methodists, following him, believe that all people can be saved, and they are able to know about the fact of their salvation. The Methodists are also convinced that man — through faith, repentance, and holiness — can grow in grace, striving for Christian perfection; this lifelong process Wesley called sanctification.

Methodists recognize the ordinances of baptism and the Lord's Supper, or Holy Communion (Eucharist). Babies are usually baptized, but baptism may be delayed until adulthood. Baptism is performed by pouring or immersion, but sprinkling is generally accepted. Baptized children are not counted in church statistics as full members of the church. At the celebration of the Eucharist, communion is preceded by a common confession in the form of an established prayer. The Communioner usually kneels before the railing of the altar and receives bread and wine in commemoration of Christ's death and sacrifice. Methodists have ceremonies, or rituals, marriages and funerals, church entry, but they are not considered sacraments; there are rituals for events such as approval for missionary work. The order of worship is recommended (but not prescribed) by the Liturgical Book adopted at the general conference. The prayers and litanies of this book are optional; these are recommendations rather than obligatory forms of worship.

Organization

The main organizational unit of Methodist churches is an annual conference that brings together individual congregations within a specific geographic region (for example, a state or half of a state). In the United States, annual conferences are organized into a territorial conference that elects and appoints bishops and church board members. In other countries, these functions are assumed by central conferences, which can perform additional functions, as well as determine the degree of their autonomy. The highest legislative authority for Methodists is the General Conference, the authority that oversees all matters of doctrine and worldly activity, and which oversees the government of the churches. The highest authority in the field of ecclesiastical law is the Judicial Council.

Methodism, like many Protestant denominations, preaches the priesthood of all believers, but teaches that some of them are called and ordained for spiritual duties - for preaching the Gospel, performing the sacraments, spiritual guidance to Christ. These clergymen, appointed to serve the Church, do not constitute a special class, but only preachers and instructors. By dignity, all are essentially equal to each other, by divine right they have the same official powers and differ from other believers only in their position or official duties, and not in the rights and gifts of grace bestowed upon them from above. The Methodists retained the degree of bishop, although it lacks mystical understanding. Wesley was aware of the need to preserve the blessed priesthood, he insisted on receiving ordained sacramental priests from the Church of England, and when this was firmly refused, Wesley himself ordained one of his followers as a "superintendent" with the rights of a bishop. This is where the Methodist priesthood began.

The ministers of our Church are divided into two categories: deacons and elders. The names came to us from the Apostolic Church. The Greek word for "deaconos" is translated as "minister" or "pastor", this word has the same meaning in the Methodist Church and refers to such persons who, after a certain period of service and after completing an appropriate course of science, are ordained by the bishops. The deacon has the right to bless marriages, perform the Sacrament of Baptism and help during the Sacrament of Holy Communion. Eldership is the highest in the church ... District elders, or superintendents, are persons charged with overseeing the work of the Church in a particular district. The bishop appoints some of the ministers of the Church to these positions, and they attend churches in the assigned districts, replace the bishop in administrative matters, and assist in appointing pastors to wards. District elders constitute the bishop's "office".

Laymen play an important role in church leadership, and are represented almost in equal numbers with the priesthood in virtually every body, committee, and conference. After some preparation, the laity are allowed to preach, conduct divine services, and perform the sacraments. Women can be elected to any ministry, including becoming priests. Anyone who has reached the "age of decision", professes Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, and obeys the church order, can become a member of the Methodist church. Vows made to other churches (through a letter of conversion to Methodism) are also recognized as eligible. The church legislation clearly stipulates the possibility of persons of all races and nationalities entering the church.

Story

Methodism dates back to the 18th century. as a movement of renewal within the Church of England. Its origins are the brothers John (1703-1791) and Charles (1707-1788) Wesley, who led a small group of students at the University of Oxford. The group emphasized the importance of personal piety and service to others; the first was expressed in prayer and Bible study, the second in works of mercy, such as visiting prisoners in prisons, working among the poor. This activity was carried out by the members of the group in accordance with a strict daily schedule, which led to the emergence of the ironic nickname "Methodist". If the students themselves, united in 1729, called themselves the "club of saints", then the detractors called them "biblical moth". In 1738, John Wesley, ordained a priest of the Church of England, returned from America after a short missionary trip in a depressed mood. In London, he fell under the influence of the German pietists - the Moravian brothers. After listening to Luther's preface to the Epistle to the Romans on May 24 of the same year, he felt that his "heart was warming up wonderfully," and it seemed to him that his mental problems were resolved.

Wesley set about evangelizing England. Soon his performances began to draw thousands of crowds, but then Wesley did not yet think that the Methodist movement would become an independent church. The "societies" he organized were conceived not as a replacement for the organizational structures of the Church of England, but as a supplement to them. It was largely for these reasons that Wesley established lay preaching and devised a system of districts within which itinerant priests could bring the word of God to the farthest corners of England and Ireland. The first lay Methodist preacher was T. Maxfield (c. 1720-1785). In 1744, Wesley called his preachers to the first annual conference. After the Anglican bishops refused to ordain the Methodist followers, Wesley began to ordain his own preachers. And yet, despite his radical actions, J. Wesley never left the Church of England. Only after his death in 1791 did the Methodists begin to organize an independent church.

Methodist divine services began to be held in the colonies not earlier than 1766. The first to organize the corresponding societies were lay preachers R. Strawbridge (d. 1781) in Maryland and F. Ambery (c. 1730-1775) in New York. At the end of the Revolutionary War, the shortage of Anglican priests in the New World caused the Methodists to need their own preachers. In 1769, Wesley sent there R. Boardman (1738–1782) and J. Pilmour (1739–1825), whom he ordained, and also T. Cooke as superintendent of American "societies." Later that year, the church of St. George in Philadelphia, and the first Methodist congregation in America gathered there. By appointing Coke superintendent of the "flock of Christ" in America, Wesley, unwittingly, created the necessary conditions for the emergence of an independent church there. The break occurred in 1784 at the Christmas conference in Baltimore, when the organizational formation of the Methodist Episcopal Church took place. Sent to the colony in 1771 F. Asbury (1745-1816) and became the first superintendent and bishop ordained in America. Methodist missions sent itinerant priests to accompany the settlers on the frontier as they advanced westward into the interior of the country; Asbury himself traveled around the territory for more than 40 years on horseback and in a postal carriage.

In 1812, there were 190,000 American Methodists. By 1844 their number had increased to 1,170,000, and by 1899, according to church statistics, it had exceeded 4 million. But in the 19th century. The Methodist Episcopal Church experienced a period of internal turmoil. Northern African American groups withdrew from their communities to protest discrimination and formed independent congregations. They founded the African Methodist Episcopal Church in Philadelphia in 1816, and the African Methodist Episcopal Church in Zion in 1822 in New York. In 1828, Canadian Methodists emerged as a separate church. Dissatisfaction with the church leadership led to the emergence of the Methodist Protestant Church (1830), which united 26 thousand believers. In 1843, a group of abolitionists founded the Wesley Methodist Church. Soon thereafter, a violent debate over slavery led to a renewed division of the Methodist Episcopal Church; this problem caused a tragic schism in the church, and later in the whole country. General Conference in New York, which lasted 36 days, voted in favor of a “partition plan,” according to which the Methodist Episcopal Church now included northern and western conferences; the Southern Methodist Episcopal Church arose in the southern states. At the same time, the territories on which the churches operated were often overlapped. In 1860, the Free Methodist Church was organized, a conservative organization that advocated a stricter adherence to the teachings of Wesley.

Although the first search for mutual understanding by both sides began shortly after the surrender of the southern army on April 9, 1865 at Appomattox, reconciliation between the Methodist Episcopal Church and the Southern Methodist Episcopal Church did not take place until 1939, at a conference in Kansas City, Missouri. The Methodist Protestant Church has also joined the union; the result was the Methodist Church. During the 1960s, negotiations were actively pursued for an alliance with the Evangelical United Fraternal Church, which grew out of the Methodist revivalist movement (revival movement) among German-speaking settlers in the northern colonies; she became extremely close to the Methodist Church in matters of doctrine and organization. On April 23, 1968, these churches merged to form the United Methodist Church.

United Methodist Church. It is the largest Methodist association in the United States (10.3 million members in approximately 39,600 congregations, approximately 35,000 clergymen). It is subdivided into 5 territorial conferences, which are convened every four years, and 92 annual conferences. Methodist educational institutions include high schools and colleges. The United Methodist Church maintains hospitals, orphanages, homes for the elderly and pregnant women; missionary work has covered more than 50 countries. The oldest and largest religious publishing house in the world, the Methodist Publishing House, publishes about 55 periodicals.

The African Methodist Episcopal Church is the second largest Methodist group in the United States (approx. 1.2 million members). Issues 4 periodicals, including the Christian Recorder. In addition to carrying out an extensive program of evangelism within the country, the church conducts extensive missionary work in Africa and the West Indies.

Among other 11 independent Methodist associations in the United States - the African Methodist Episcopal Church of Zion (about 940,000 members, about 4,500 congregations); Christian Methodist Episcopal Church, spun off from the Colored Methodist Episcopal Church in 1870 (c. 500,000 members); conservative association Free Methodist Church of North America (c. 65,000 members).

Methodists have always actively collaborated with other churches, and Methodist J. Mott is considered one of the founders of the ecumenical movement. Practically every council of churches in a city or state has Methodist congregations. United Methodist Church is a member of the National Council of Churches, World Council of Churches, World Methodist Council (formerly called the Ecumenical Methodist Council). The Methodists sent official observers to the Second Vatican Council of the Roman Catholic Church. Negotiations with other denominations on issues of mutual cooperation are conducted by the Standing Commission on Ecumenical Affairs. The total number of Methodists at the end of the 20th century is 40 million.

Interview to "Oblastnaya Gazeta" by Viktor Pavlovich Smirnov, Adviser to the Governor of the Sverdlovsk Region for Relations with Religious Organizations

Ten years have passed since the day when the historical event - the 1000th anniversary of the baptism of Russia - was widely celebrated. Since 1988, it has been customary to count the time of the beginning of the revival of religious life in the country. What changes have occurred over the years in the religious sphere of the Middle Urals? Can we talk today about complete freedom of religion? What is the religious palette of the Sverdlovsk region today? - The beginning of the activity of such religious associations is associated with the appearance in our region of all kinds of missionaries and foreign religious Preachers. In 1990, an American pastor of a Methodist church arrived in Sverdlovsk as a tourist, visited the university, and met there an employee of the Znanie branch, Lydia Istomina. She was fluent in English, which undoubtedly contributed to her further successful contacts with a foreign preacher. From him she also learned about the New Religion, although at that time she herself could not call herself a believer. I remember how with this preacher she visited the Baptist community that functions in our Yekaterinburg at Sorting, and then she was very surprised that there were no icons on the walls in the Baptist prayer house (such was her then idea of ​​Evangelical Christians-Baptists). A few months later, on the initiative of this American preacher, a new religious organization of Methodists was registered in Yekaterinburg, headed by Lydia Istomina. Gradually, the organization was replenished at the expense of USU students, young school teachers, young people who speak English. And Istomina herself received the ordination of pastor from the American United Methodist Church in September 1991.

Notes (edit)

Links

• Ministry "Rainbow" Moscow Methodist United Church

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru

Introduction

Relevance of the research topic. The profound changes in various spheres of the life of Russian society that have taken place over the last decade of the twentieth century have caused significant changes in school history education, in the preparation of educational literature. Instead of the monopoly of one textbook for a separate course, parallel educational books have been published, differing in a variety of methodological principles and approaches. In modern conditions of modernization of education in our country, the preparation and quality of school history textbooks are constantly in the field of vision of the government of the Russian Federation and the Ministry of Public Education, and are actively discussed in society. This is due to the role of the textbook - the material carrier of not only the content, but also the methodological system of education, the means of organizing the educational process, in the upbringing of a citizen and a patriot of his Fatherland. Similar transformative processes in the field of school history education, including those associated with the creation and methodological construction of history textbooks, as well as the formation of the state examination procedure and the distribution of history textbooks, took place in Russia in the late 19th - early 20th centuries, which indicates the similarity of the historical situation.

So, the social significance of the school history textbook in teaching and upbringing of the younger generations, the lack of special studies of this problem, the importance of studying the past experience in the creation and functioning of parallel author's textbooks with various ideological orientations in order to use it creatively in modern conditions of modernization of history education in the Russian Federation , in our opinion, the relevance of the chosen topic.

The aim of the course work is to study the leading methodologists of Russia.

Coursework objectives:

1. To study the history of methodological work in the field of social science and history;

2. To highlight outstanding methodologists;

3. Describe the main works and achievements.

Object of study. Methodists.

Subject of study. Leading methodologists of Russia in the field of social science and history.

Research methods:

theoretical analysis of historical, pedagogical and methodological literature;

integrated use of sources;

Generalization and systematization of the data obtained.

This topic is very complex and extensive. I tried to elucidate it more fully, but it has not been sufficiently studied and considered in the literature. The novelty of the work lies in the original approach to the specification of other researchers.

Work structure. The work consists of an introduction, a main part and a conclusion, as well as a list of used literature.

1. Leading methodologists of the pre-revolutionary period

1.1 Formation of methodological activity

The origin of historical and methodological science is attributed to the 15th century. These are the first shoots. This origin is seen in the appearance of the first collections containing historical information. These collections were called ABCs. They belong to the 15th - 17th centuries. These are the most general works, which contained the alphabet, counting and brief information of a general nature.

The first textbook on history is Synopsis - Review. The author of the book is Innokenty Gizel. It appeared in Kiev in 1674. He himself was the abbot of the monastery, belonged to the clergy. The Synopsis contained descriptions of military actions on the part of Russian princes and tsars, listed the names of princes and tsars, as well as Ukrainian hetmans. It was a fascinating reference book on history. Therefore, it cannot be called a textbook. He was needed for the day.

But the Synopsis can be viewed as a printed source of information on Russian history. It is believed that the teaching of history first began in two private educational institutions: the Moscow Gymnasium of Pastor Gluck, opened in 1705; The school, which operated in St. Petersburg, was opened in 1721.

In the Moscow gymnasium, children of boyars, service people, and merchant people studied at will. They paid money for education.

Feofan Prokopovich's school had a more liberal composition, people of all ranks studied history, but also for money.

Although the first private schools opened in the 17th century, history was not taught there.

Since 1726, the state teaching of history appeared. It took place at the academic gymnasium at the Academic University in St. Petersburg. It was created in 1724, in 1725 it began to function by decree, according to which a three-member system was created: the Academy of Sciences, the Academic University, subordinate to the Academy of Sciences, and the gymnasium at the university.

The academic grammar school consisted of preparatory German and Latin schools. In a German school, 3 years of study, in a Latin 2 years. Students entered the 5th grade, studied for 5 years, and finished their studies in the 1st grade. Those. from grade 5 to grade 1. History was studied from grade 3.

In the 3rd grade of ancient history, 3 hours a week were allotted, they studied from the Creation of the world and ended with the reign of the Christian emperor Constantine.

In the 1st grade, history was studied 2 hours a week, the study was brought up to the 1740s of the 18th century.

There was no Russian history as a separate discipline. They studied world history, and within its framework they studied Russian history a little.

In 1747, special disciplines appeared at the Academic Gymnasium - lessons in chronology and heraldry.

It must be borne in mind that there was no systematic history course, there was no classroom teaching. Each teacher taught 3-4 subjects. The quality is worse from this. In addition, teaching was conducted in foreign languages.

In parallel with the teaching of history in schools, educational literature was developing. The first textbooks were translated, and they were on world history. In 1747, the first translation of a textbook on general history into Russian was published. It was called "An Introduction to General History." The story was presented according to the medieval scheme of monarchies: Assyro-Babylonian period, Persian, Macedonian, Greek period, Roman period. The presentation began from the creation of the world, the rulers were listed and everything that was done by them. About wars. All this was flavored with a large number of anecdotes so that it would not be boring to read. There were a large number of myths that were passed off as real facts.

In the 18th century, there were a considerable number of private schools. There, chronology, numismatics, heraldry, genealogy, geography were studied in separate subjects. But the teaching was very primitive. Teaching was based on a question-and-answer form. The teaching material had to be memorized. The teacher spoke clearly from the textbook. The students had to write it down word for word, and in the next lesson they retell it word for word.

In the 1760s of the 18th century, history was taught to theological educational institutions, in commercial and art schools, i.e. the number of educational institutions where history was taught expanded.

In general, teaching history in schools was closely linked with the development of historical science, with the emergence of new research on history, fundamental works.

History was not in the first place in the plans of educational institutions, but served as an addition to the philological course. In the first place were languages, philology, and in addition to it - history. History was taught for cooling and relaxation. Historical knowledge was viewed as a storehouse of material from which one must draw examples and models of virtue or vice.

Only on the advice of Tatishchev, who stood at the origins of Russian historical science, history as a subject was first introduced in schools as an independent academic subject, separate from philology. The starting point was the composition of Tatishchev himself "History of Russia from the most ancient times." This book was used by many contemporaries, including Lomonosov. It served as a starting point for the presentation of historical knowledge.

From the second half of the 18th century, Russian history gradually began to take hold in schools; it gradually began to separate from the general.

The first school textbook on Russian history is considered to be the work of Lomonosov "A Brief Chronicler with a Genealogy", 1760. This Chronicler was a brief overview of Russian history from Rurik to Peter I. The periodization of history was contained, the most important events and dates were listed. The presentation of historical material was brought up to the time of the reign of Catherine II.

In 1769, a new textbook "The Image of Russian History" appeared by August Ludwig Schletser. It was 2 small books for foreigners.

In the last quarter of the 18th century, the amount of educational literature begins to grow. This was due to the reform of school education carried out by Catherine II. New books have appeared. In public schools, the most widespread was the book "On the Positions of Man and Citizen." But it was more of a social science textbook. Author Yankovich-Demilievo. It was believed that Catherine II had a hand in its compilation. The textbook contained explanations of the concepts of soul, mind, will, love for the fatherland, and conjugal union.

Under Catherine II, an important reform was carried out in 1768. Public schools were created in all provinces. They introduced a classroom teaching system. The use of blackboard and chalk in the classroom was introduced.

At the insistence of Catherine II, a special commission was formed that drew up a plan for composing Russian history for the public schools. Those. needed methodological foundations for teaching history in new educational institutions. The purpose of the methodology: to describe any important incident or business in such a way that it serves either as an encouragement or as a precaution for people of present and future times. Those. is no longer a cooling off, but a benefit.

Yankovich's textbook "World History, Published for the Public Schools of the Russian Empire" was published. St. Petersburg, 1787.

This book, in addition to historical material, contained recommendations on how to teach the lesson. It was suggested to read the material piece by piece, and the teacher had to explain what he had read. Show on the map places of events, hikes, resettlement of peoples. Ask students questions and review briefly what they learned in the previous lesson. Jankovic offered to present the material in his own words, but in a certain connection and based on wall maps (land maps). At first, these maps were geographical, and at the end of the 18th century, historical ones also appeared.

1783 year. Creation in St. Petersburg of the Teachers' Seminary for the training of teachers of public schools. For the first time, history teaching methodology was included in the number of subjects taught. This indicates a certain importance, recognized by the government, of the methodology of teaching history, about an increased interest in history.

Jankovic continued to work on the publication of educational literature. On his initiative, a historical wall map of the Russian Empire was published in 1793.

New history books were translated. In 1787, a World History for the Education of Youth was translated and published by Shrekk. The book was intended for the Public Schools, it turned out to be more interesting than Jankovic's World History.

In 1799, instead of the obsolete Chronicler Lomonosov, a "Brief Russian History" appeared, composed for use in public schools. Written by Timofey Teriak. This tutorial included 3 historical maps as an attachment. An extensive and detailed course on Russian history, but with a dry presentation of the material.

In the 1770s of the 18th century, Russian history was separated from general history, although general history was considered in schools as the main one. Patriotic history was usually taught in the last grade, and served as the completion of world history.

The technique left much to be desired. The lessons were based on the principle of memorizing the material and repeating it in the next lesson.

As a separate academic subject, history was included in the curriculum of the Public Schools. There were no written homework assignments. The lesson took place in the form of explanatory reading from a textbook. There were almost no explanations from the teacher. Just reading the tutorial.

XIX century. History education in school usually pushed scientific historical knowledge. Veteran historians, their views served as a starting point for changing the teaching of history in schools.

Karamzin believed that the knowledge of the present begins with the past. Karamzin was an official historiographer. Therefore, in his presentation, history was presented as the result of the activities of monarchs, rulers, outstanding personalities. Within the framework of this monarchical concept, Karamzin believed that history should serve as the instruction and morality of the younger generation, in the spirit of admiration for the throne. It migrated to the textbooks of the 1st half of the 19th century, to the textbooks of Kaidanov and Smaragdov. In their textbooks, the deeds and destinies of great people became the subject of history study. All events were explained by the psychology of prominent personalities, commanders and sovereigns.

History teaching method. In the first half of the 19th century, works on the method appeared. In 1840-45, works on the methodology of teaching history by A. Yazvinsky appeared. He suggested writing down the most important facts on sheets of paper of different colors. The students had to draw these sheets into 100 cells. Each cell meant a year, 100 cells meant a century. The game form of the lesson.

Rhythmic-generalizing technique. It was developed by Gottlieb von Schubert, director of the German school. The facts of history were rhymed and chanted like songs and memorized.

Grouping method. Lieberman. Various material was grouped by topic and a discussion took place.

In the middle of the 19th century, the most common was the teacher's brief commentary on the text of the textbook, there was no disclosure of internal connections between facts, there was no documentary material, and no means of visualization were used.

The October Revolution of 1917 and the subsequent restructuring of all social relations determined the main directions of the global reform of the education system in Russia. The legislative basis for this reform was the decree of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of December 16, 1918, which approved the "Regulations on the Unified Labor School of the RSFSR" and "The Basic Principles of the Unified Labor School of the RSFSR".

The goal of the first educational reform in Soviet Russia was proclaimed the upbringing of a person of a new era. The priority of the new school was the principle of work.

1.2 Works of pre-revolutionary methodists

In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. the intensified modernization processes in Russia also affected the sphere of education, which developed during this period with an unprecedented speed and strength. The main factors of this development were the sharply increased needs of the country for education, public activities in the field of education, the development of progressive pedagogical thought.

The policy of the Ministry of Public Education in the field of teaching history, which retained its adherence to the conservative tradition, aroused constant criticism not only from representatives of the liberal and democratic trend in the historical and methodological thought of Russia, but also from the official guard camp.

At the turn of the century, a wide range of professors and teachers, who expressed the interests of various socio-political strata, joined in the development of issues of school history education.

The historian and teacher I.I. Bellarminov. The study of history, in his opinion, does very little to help the development of students. "Most of the time in history lessons is spent in the stories of the teacher himself, while the students are passive." Complaints were caused by "lack of clarity, monotony of methodological methods of teaching history, lack of formation of the conceptual apparatus, neglect of the tasks of our time."

Professor N.I. Kareev believed that the main reason for the unsatisfactory state of teaching history is the dominance of the classical gymnasium, where history is given a secondary place and which is characterized by "poor preparation of teachers and a lack of good textbooks."

HELL. Nadezhdin noted on the pages of the journal "Vestnik Vobrazheniya" that since in historical science "scientific principles have long triumphed, which are based on the study of a process, and not a biography or a separate fact, so it is necessary to put the matter of education in such a way that it better meets the basic needs time ".

The leading teachers of Russia accused the modern school of inconsistency with the tasks facing society, of ignoring the civic feelings of students, in the absence of a creative approach in teaching; pointed to an urgent need to change history programs and teaching methods. The success of reforming the system of school history education was placed by them in direct dependence on the determination of the goals and priorities of educational policy, which predetermined the special attention of broad strata of professors and teachers to this problem.

If the Ministry of Public Education saw the main goal of school history education in “imprinting important historical facts in the memory of students,” the leading teachers of Russia believed that students “need to be given not just factual information, but it is necessary to present the development of countries in the form of a natural evolutionary process. ".

The historical section of the Moscow Society for the Dissemination of Technical Knowledge, which worked on the teaching of history in secondary school (1890), noted that teaching history should consist in “understanding by students of the process of historical development and knowledge of its most important points and results, and should not be overlooked from the kind of characteristics of eras, individual nationalities and individuals. "

In the course of what took place on the pages of pedagogical publications at the beginning of the twentieth century. Discussions between prominent historians and educators revealed different approaches in their understanding of the goals of teaching history. Professor A.I. Yarotsky saw them in the fact that students learned to systematize and generalize facts. He spoke out against the introduction of university history courses in schools, even simplified and schematized, as this would lead, in his opinion, to a "distortion of science." Professor I.M. Kataev agreed with the expressed opinion about the overload of students' memory with unnecessary facts, while the school "must develop their thinking." He viewed the historical process as "a whole network of separate processes, the content of which is by no means exhausted by the activities of individuals." However, I.M. Kataev, unlike A.I. Yarotsky believed that the school needed a systematic course in history. "The fact that he does not exhaust all historical material does not make him unscientific." The foundations of science were distorted, in his opinion, when facts and phenomena were selected one-sidedly. "The school course takes the data established by science and modifies them in a form accessible to students."

Professor A.P. Pavlov believed that the school history course should develop students' understanding of "social life and contemporary reality."

Primary school methodologist E.A. Zvyagintsev saw the main tasks of the history course in "teaching students to understand the reality around them, to understand the phenomena of human culture and community, to understand their origin from the past and thereby prepare for them the opportunity to become conscious and active participants in social life in the future." Hence the main goal of the history course is "to make it easier for students to understand the present in the light of the past."

Professor N.I. Kareev saw the goal of history education in the development of students' "historical attitude to life, which should be expressed in understanding the process of historical development and knowledge of its most important moments and results, and characteristics of the characteristics of eras, individual nationalities and individuals should not be overlooked." in his opinion, and in school teaching should be considered "not a collection of biographies and stories about individual events, but as a picture of social and cultural processes."

Particular attention was paid to the educational orientation of the history course, and the goal of teaching history was seen in preparing students for "fulfilling their civic duties." In a circular from the Ministry of Public Education dated July 13, 1913, it was stated that “teachers should always remember that school teaches and educates future Russian citizens who, in studying the past destinies of Russia, should gain the necessary knowledge and moral strength for conscientious and faithful service to the Great Fatherland.

In connection with the development in 1915 - 1916. commission under the leadership of Count P.I. Ignatiev of new programs in history, on the pages of pedagogical publications again there was a discussion on the above problem.

Methodist Y. Kulzhinsky emphasized that "history should also serve national interests as a moral subject," the main goal of teaching history at the senior level is "to evoke in students a historical attitude to life, to develop a historical understanding in them."

A survey among history teachers, conducted in 1911 by the Historical Commission of the Society for the Dissemination of Technical Knowledge, gives an idea of ​​how the teachers saw the goals of teaching the subject. Most of the responses recognized the importance of the history course in high school on its own. It should be, in the opinion of teachers, self-sufficient and not have the goal of preparing students for admission to higher educational institutions. The questionnaires show the desire to bring the teaching of history closer to the demands of modern life, indicate the educational and educational tasks of history courses ("social" and "political" education).

IM Kataev, who noted that the main goal of teaching history is to understand the present. The historical course, in his opinion, should include materials covering all the main aspects of the historical process.

Thus, at the turn of the century, several approaches to understanding the goals and objectives of historical education were outlined in Russian historical and methodological thought. In accordance with one of them, the main goal of school history courses is the assimilation of a certain amount of historical facts by students, their mechanical memorization, in accordance with another, students should get an idea of ​​the laws of the historical process, but at the same time it is necessary to take into account the peculiarities of the development of the era, the role historical figures. There was an opinion that the school should shape the historical thinking of students, their understanding of the connection between past events and the present, prepare them for active participation in public life. The special role of teaching history in the formation of the civic qualities of the student's personality was noted. History courses at school were supposed to fulfill educational and educational functions.

It is necessary to draw up a table of the development of the method of teaching history until 1917.

Table 1. Methods of teaching history before 1917

Table 2. Educational-methodical literature of the beginning of the twentieth century.

The foregoing allows us to draw the following conclusions:

the solution of theoretical questions of the methodological construction of the school history textbook became one of the central topics in the works of historians-methodologists of the late 19th - early 20th centuries, however, we can only talk about the folding of elements of the theory of the school textbook; an integral theory has not yet been created at this period;

textbooks published at the turn of the century for a systematic history course, depending on which method of teaching they corresponded in their functional capabilities, were divided into two groups: traditional and non-traditional; When analyzing the methodological structure of the textbook, historians-methodologists focused on the disclosure of informational, systematizing and transformational functions in it.

2. Activity of Methodists of the XX century

2.1 Features of the views of Methodists

The beginning of the XX century in the world was marked by a sharp growth of industry, economy, social and global processes acquired a certain dynamism. Many European powers entered a new stage of their development, and the Russian Empire was no exception.

By this time in Russia there was a significant growth of the intelligentsia, the emergence of new branches of science, more and more often it was possible to read in one or another newspaper about scientific developments in the field of mathematics, linguistics, chemistry, including in the field of historical science.

During this period, there are thoughts that history as a science has long been divided into professorial and school. The art of teaching history should be formalized into a separate science, first of all, the pedagogical cycle, which would be based not on theoretical knowledge, but on practical skills. "One is a learned historian, the other is a historically educated person."

The teachers of this period saw a variety of methods of conducting a history lesson, some tried to put forward the thesis that discussion and conversation are the basis for the birth of an educated, spiritually educated person. Others adhered to the system of summarizing and reporting, laying in this method the principle of independence, the ability to highlight the main thing. Still others believed that only work with a source can give true knowledge of the subject, and hence the ability to competently teach the material. All these ideas were imbued with the spirit of the new time, the growth of the level of education and, above all, the birth of the idea that the teaching system should not be reduced to an elementary retelling and memorization of the text, as was popular among the methodists of the 19th century.

By this time, the very concept of methodology appears and spreads in a wide context. "Methodology is a pedagogical discipline aimed at clarifying the educational significance of history and finding, describing and evaluating methods that lead to a better formulation of history as an academic subject."

One of the leading methodologists of that time - S.V. Farfarovsky proposed a laboratory method for teaching history. While still a young, novice teacher, he traveled abroad to France, Belgium and Germany, upon arrival from abroad to Russia, he began to develop a laboratory method for teaching history, which was based on the knowledge gained from a trip to Europe. The essence of the method he proposes is the direct study of the source by the students, and, based on the analysis of the document, the answer to a number of questions on the topics covered. In the course of such classes, students develop an interest in material, for example, scribes, they are drawn into antiquity. The class is divided into several groups, each of which has its own knowledge laboratory. For example: "each group calculated the results for one country or district for different years, then they themselves deduce the facts of the decline of the economy within the boundaries of Muscovite Rus from a collective comparison of a number of descriptions of individual farms for different years." At the same time, he attaches particular importance to the grouping of material in such a way that it is most accessible.

S. Farfarovsky saw the significance of the laboratory method in several elements: interest in history awakens, assimilation of factual material is facilitated and, above all, this method is designed for the psychology of age, it lies in the fact that students begin to understand that all the conclusions of the textbook and the teacher are justified.

B.A. Vlohopulov published in 1914 a textbook entitled “Methods of History. “Course for the 8th grade of female gymnasiums”, which emphasizes one of the most important elements in teaching history, it is the homework of the teacher. General training at the university turns out to be insufficient for teaching history, and even more so practical techniques for many young teachers remain unknown. In the basis of his methodology, he puts the concentric principle, first of all, proceeding from the fact that only when choosing a material one has to take into account what may most likely be of interest to students: while boys are more interested in the history of the war, the details of battles, girls seem to be more entertaining descriptions cultural life of the era, domestic life, etc. He also formulates the subjective - concentric method, mainly referring to the degree of development of the student. At the same time, dividing the entire course of history into two stages. In the first of them, events are considered in the form of separate, easily understandable and specific phenomena, in the second, students try to use the information already acquired to create a single general picture and replenish them with a number of new facts. Thus, the material is assimilated the best and is a colorful canvas of knowledge.

Another important point in teaching, he emphasizes the competent arrangement of the material and here formulates the following methods. One of the first is the method of arrangement - chronologically - progressive, as a result of which all facts go in the order in which they were in reality.

The second method is chronologically - regressive, in which events fall from the nearest to the farthest, as a result of its application in practice, one can be based on an opinion based on a better understanding of the knowledge nearest in time.

By the third method, he understands the material grouping system, i.e. "All facts are connected in such a way that if there were no one, there would be no others." Thus, the idea of ​​a single connection of facts or events in time is traced.

In the last two of his methods: biographical and cultural B.A. Vlohopulov reflects the idea of ​​the high significance of the individual in history and the cultural successes that human civilization has generated. The unification of these two principles was based on the direct connection between the personality, as a continuation of man and civilization, of which it is a part.

Unfortunately, school practice shows that most of the time in the classroom pupils are in the position of listening to the teacher's story or reading the text of the school textbook. As a result, they develop a lack of confidence in their abilities, the process of historical development proceeds less efficiently, and they assimilate historical knowledge worse.

Methodists of the pre-revolutionary school also pointed to this. So, N.P. Pokotilo believed that students can acquire knowledge by listening to a lecture and learning a textbook, but he asked the question: “Is teaching history worth anything? After all, no matter how well the teacher expounds his subject, no matter how well the students prepare, they will all repeat what the teacher gave them, nothing of their own will be. But in order to achieve such a result, is it worth working for so many years! "

The pre-revolutionary methodists considered it necessary to eliminate the "learning of the textbook"; in their opinion, it should retain only the character of a reference book. In the same way, it is necessary to eliminate the presentation by the teacher of the material that is usually placed in the textbook.

Professor M.M. Stasyulevich. In 1863, he proposed a method that later became known as "real", based on an independent, active study of historical documents. For this purpose, he published a special anthology on the history of the Middle Ages. He is deeply convinced that "whoever has read Tacitus, Eingard, Froissard, he knows history, is more historically educated than the one who has mastered a whole historical guide."

Subsequently, the "real method" of studying history split into several directions, one of which was the "laboratory method". Initially, it was contrasted with the formal method, which required students to memorize and reproduce the teacher's speech and the text of the textbook. The development of the laboratory method is usually associated with the names of S.V. Farforovsky and N.A. Rozhkova. They believed that it is possible to overcome the dogmatism of traditional teaching if the entire cognitive activity of students is brought closer to scientific research methods, because "there can be no reliable and lasting study of history without independent study of primary sources from a critical and real perspective."

Following the same path as the scientists, the students will be introduced to the research laboratory. This thought prompted S.V. Farforovsky to call his method "laboratory". In addition, he believed that "the very fact that students are reading an old document arouses their very lively and extremely intense interest." In 1913, he prepared a two-volume anthology "Sources of Russian History", on the basis of which it was supposed to organize the learning process. The anthology contained many different sources: scribal books, excerpts from chronicles, legal acts, diplomatic documents, all kinds of letters, letters, etc. The author provided explanations for some documents: he explained the most complex concepts, gave recommendations for studying a particular document. S.V. Farforovsky and his followers believed that the leading role in the lesson should belong to the student, because “in the middle grades, a critical ability, the need for analysis, is already awakening in the minds of students. It is necessary to give these abilities healthy food, and not drown them with the dogmatism of the textbook, unfounded and apodictic statements. Experience shows that students then work more intensively than in ordinary lessons. At the same time, the work of the class is notable for its great liveliness, it arouses active attention more than boring, monotonous, inactive, dogmatic teaching, tiresome in its monotony and fruitless in its results. "

The task of the teacher, according to S.V. Farforovsky, is to help the student to do in a lightweight form the same work that the scientist does, to encourage him to repeat the whole train of thought leading to a predetermined position (since students should briefly familiarize themselves with the conclusions of scientists). However, students conduct all work with documents independently. The ideas of S.V. Farforovsky were picked up by many teachers - historians. Some of them made changes and additions.

Thus, A. Hartwig and N. Kryukov suggested using historical sources to make acquaintance with historical facts more complete, thereby revitalizing the teaching of history, and also to organize the work of students' historical thought. In their opinion, “the textbook alone does not paint a vivid picture of the past life, does not give (and cannot give) those specific and detailed descriptions of the phenomena that took place, those detailed characteristics that would give the student the opportunity to draw conclusions, conclusions and understand the general connection what was happening. Lacking the necessary facts to judge a particular topic, students perceive the ready-made formulas of the textbook only by memory, which is highly undesirable from the point of view of rational pedagogy. " A. Hartwig defined one of the main conditions for the correct, in his opinion, conduct of the teaching of history - the independence of the students' work. He wrote that "... our joint work will be much more productive if the students participate in this work" actively and, moreover, collectively. " The teacher, however, must "... teach students to independently use historical material, teach them to read books of historical content, teach them to understand at least some historical meaning of what is happening ...".

A. Hartwig suggested dividing the class into groups of 5-6 people and giving them sources and aids for reading, after which a conversation was organized in the lesson. At the same time, one of the students presented the main material on his question, and the rest supplemented it, discussed with him. A. Hartwig considered it sufficient if each of the students knew only a fourth of all questions, but deep enough.

Supporters of the laboratory method include V.Ya. Ulanova, K.V. Sivkova, S.P. Singalevich. In their opinion, the age characteristics of students in grades 5-6, together with the small number of hours devoted to studying history, make it difficult to effectively work with documents. But, on the other hand, they believed that laboratory classes should not be abandoned, especially in high school, since they give students an idea of ​​the methodology, acquaint them with the sources and methods of research. They have the opportunity to apply the skills of historical analysis to the facts and documents of our time.

One of the variants of the laboratory method - the documentation method - was proposed by Ya.S. Kulzhinsky. The study of documents, he believed, should be carried out according to the reader, but in conjunction with the textbook. This helps students relate their findings to the source. Kulzhinsky believed that it was necessary to provide the textbook with systematic documentation and add a reader to it. Method of documentation Ya.S. Kulzhinsky was received ambiguously. He was opposed by S.V. Farforovsky, who stated that in this case the most important thing in the laboratory method was lost - the students' independent search for truth, the development of their critical thinking.

In general, the pre-revolutionary school has accumulated significant experience in organizing the study of history on the basis of various sources, including historical documents. It is to him that the attention of modern history teachers and methodologists has recently been again drawn. Proposed and tested for the first time in Russia in the middle of the 19th century, this method has undergone significant changes to this day, but the main idea - the need to use historical sources in history lessons - remains unchanged.

Table 3. Methodists of the late 19th early 20th century and their methods

Teachers of the early twentieth century. strove for a lesson structure that would stimulate independent cognitive activity of students, form their need for knowledge. Some saw this way in the study of visualization, others - in the work of students on reports and abstracts, and still others - in the use of historical sources. Some, however, generally preferred the labor method of teaching.

When teaching history to schoolchildren, they tried to create specific images. For this, maps and pictures, books for reading with illustrations were published. Excursion work and local history research became an organic part of the learning process. As already noted, attention was paid to developing students' ability to think and work independently.

At the beginning of the XX century. old forgotten teaching methods are introduced, new ones appear. Among them is a real, laboratory, method of dramatization. The real method is to work on the basis of historical sources. When introducing this method into practice, the systematic study of a history course and the use of a school textbook were ignored. It was supposed to be replaced with a short synopsis.

ON THE. Rozhkov and S.V. Farforovskiy proposed to introduce a laboratory teaching method, i.e. to bring all the cognitive activity of the student closer to the methods of researching historical science. In their opinion, this can be achieved if all education is built on the study of primary sources, following the same path as the researchers of science. Thus, the student will be introduced into the research laboratory. The search for activation of the ways of teaching also led to the improvement of the abstracting system developed by the methodologists B.A. Vlahopulov and N.P. Pokotilo.

All these methods were aimed at improving the learning process, and more specifically at the goals, the main directions in teaching history, methods and means of forming historical thinking in students in history lessons in a Russian school at the beginning of the 20th century.

Since 1917, school history education in Russia has undergone fundamental changes. Both the old teaching methodology and the old textbooks are recognized as unsuitable for teaching the younger generation.

The first stage in the development of Soviet school history education - 1917-1930s. - was marked by the elimination of history as an academic subject and the replacement by the course of social studies. The teaching methodology is based on the “illustrative school of action” and the “labor school of work”.

Instead of civil history, it is proposed to study labor history and sociology. Proceeding from this, the implementation of revolutionary transformations in the field of history education begins. The first stage in the development of school history education begins in 1917 and continues until the early 1930s. At this time, the old content of history education was eliminated, and history was replaced as an academic subject by a course in social studies. Within the framework of social science, there are only separate elements of a history course with an ideological selection of facts and their Marxist coverage.

The new school canceled exams, penalties, student scores and homework. The transfer of students from class to class and graduation from school were to be carried out according to the feedback of the pedagogical council on the performance of educational work. Instead of classes, it was recommended to introduce small groups - "brigades"; instead of lessons - laboratory "studio" classes.

Teaching methods are undergoing a radical revision. It is based on the "illustrative school of action", which appeared for the first time in Western countries and found application in our country. On the basis of this school, a "labor school of work" is being developed in the USSR. If in the bourgeois school there was a motto "from knowledge to action", then in the labor school everything became the other way around - "from action to knowledge." Concrete work encouraged students to enrich their knowledge and develop educational skills.

In 1920, an attempt was made to introduce an approximate history program. However, it was not adopted even in a complex form with the inclusion of law, political economy and sociology, information on the history of the class struggle and the development of the theory of scientific socialism. Since 1923, subject teaching was abolished and a brigade teaching method was introduced on the basis of complex programs that existed until 1931.

In the 30s. history is restored as an academic subject, the main form of organization of educational work is determined by the lesson (Resolution of the Central Committee of the CPSU (b) "On primary and secondary schools" of September 5, 1931 and "On curricula and the regime of primary and secondary schools" of August 5, 1932 .).

The situation with historical education changed in the 30s. A new stage begins, characterized by the restoration of history as an independent subject. The Central Committee of the CPSU (b) gives instructions to abandon the laboratory-brigade method. The main form of organization of educational work is determined by a lesson with a solid composition of students, with a strictly defined schedule of classes (Resolutions of the Central Committee of the CPSU (b) "On primary and secondary schools" of September 5, 1931 and "On curricula and regime in primary and secondary schools" dated August 5, 1932). It was proposed to restore a systematic course of history in school in order to equip schoolchildren with a solid knowledge of the basics of science. For the training of teachers, history faculties in universities were restored, departments of methodology appeared.

In 1939, updated history programs were released. They also operated in the 50s. The programs were, as it were, two parts - on general history (the ancient world, the Middle Ages, modern history) and on the history of the USSR. Sections of general history were studied from grades 5 to 9. The history of the USSR was presented twice: first in the form of an elementary course in the elementary grades, then in the upper grades of secondary school in the form of a systematic course.

In the Soviet school 30-50-ies. a linear (since 1934) and partially concentric (since 1959) principle and structure of historical education are also introduced.

When considering the principles and structure of history education in the Soviet school of the 50s. attention should be paid to the allocation of partial concentrates in teaching history. There is a fundamental difference in these centers with the centers for teaching history in Russian gymnasiums. Concentrations in the former school pursued the goal of deep, conscious knowledge of history, applied in three stages of education. Concentrations in the Soviet school were of a forced nature, associated with the ideologization of education.

In the late 50s. historical and methodological thought went along the line of strengthening ties with the psychological and pedagogical sciences. The methods of teaching and learning were improved, recommendations were given on how to present material, how to talk, how to use a map, a picture. But, as before, the question of what the student is doing in the lesson, how he learns history, was almost never raised.

In the 60s and 70s. the study of the methods of teaching history by such scientists as A.A. Vagin, D.N. Nikiforov, P.S. Leibengrub, F.P. Korovkin, P.V. Mountain, N.G. Dairi. The development of methods of teaching history proceeded from the development of teaching tools and techniques and the provision of methodological assistance to the teacher in finding effective ways of teaching students. The goal was to teach schoolchildren to independently acquire knowledge and navigate the growing flow of information. In didactics, the problems of enhancing the activity and independence of schoolchildren in the educational process, increasing the educational role of teaching, intensifying the lesson, introducing problematicity in teaching were developed. In the 60-80s. the goal of developing students' activity and independence in history lessons is put forward in the first place. More and more attention is paid to the problem of enhancing the cognitive activity of students, the formation of their methods of work, skills, the question of developing education is being raised. So, A.A. Yanko-Trinitskaya, N.I. Zaporozhets study the mental operations of students; employees of the department of Moscow State Pedagogical University - the levels of cognitive activity, methods of work, skills and methods of cognitive activity, develop a structurally functional approach to the selection of content, methods and means of teaching. Experts from the Institute of Content and Teaching Methods N.G. Dairi, I. Ya. Lerner raise questions about the problematic nature of teaching and the development of students' historical thinking and, in this regard, about the place and role of cognitive tasks. In solving these problems, I.Ya. Lerner saw the most important path for the development of independent creative thinking of students. Thus, in the 80s. the most important goal of the learning process is the development of the student's personality. The development of methodological problems continues in the 50-70s. During this period, the methods and techniques of teaching and learning were improved: recommendations were made on the use of visualization in presenting the material, the goal was to teach students to independently acquire knowledge, problems were developed to enhance the activation of the independent activity of schoolchildren in the educational process, etc. (60-70s).

2.2 Methodists of the late XX - early XXI centuries.

In accordance with the law of the Russian Federation "On Education" in the 90s. the introduction of compulsory (basic) nine-year education began. The school began to move from a linear to a concentric structure of education. The first concentrate consisted of a basic school (grades 5-9), the second - a complete secondary school (grades 10-11). In the first concentrator, they began to introduce the study of national and general history from antiquity to the present day on the basis of a civilizational approach. The educational strategy envisaged first the study of the history of Russia in the context of world history, and later the creation of a single course called "Russia and the World."

In the second concentrator, the courses “History of Russia from ancient times to the present day”, “Major milestones in the history of mankind”, “History of world civilizations” were introduced. For repetition and deepening at a higher theoretical level previously studied, it was supposed to study modular and integrated courses. At the present time, the need for the creation of historical and social science courses, built on a problem principle, is increasingly felt.

The idea of ​​concentrates is not new. In the XIX century. German Methodists proposed a system based on the so-called theory of "three stages". At the first stage, it was proposed to study biographical material, personify history. At the second stage, the history of individual peoples was studied on the basis of ethnographic and culturological material. At the third stage, the students already got acquainted with the whole story of the event.

In the early 60s. in our country, there was essentially a concentric system. At the first stage, it was supposed to study episodic stories only on the basis of the description of facts. At the second stage of training, an elementary course of history from antiquity to the present day was introduced with the disclosure of cause-and-effect relationships. In graduation classes, systematic courses were introduced, which were studied on the basis of sociological and philosophical generalizations.

The advantages of the concentric system are obvious: after basic school, young people received a holistic, albeit elementary, understanding of the historical process, the age characteristics of children were taken into account in the selection of material, all sections of history had almost the same amount of time to master. On the other hand, the linear system has advantages that are the disadvantages of a concentric one: the chronological sequence of courses, students get the most complete and complete idea of ​​the periods of history, savings in study time due to the absence of repetitions, maintaining a steady interest in the subject due to the novelty of the material.

In the 90s. They decided to abandon the programs traditional for Russia and introduce Gosstandart, according to the Western model, which determines the mandatory minimum of history education, quantitative criteria for assessing the quality of education. The interim Gosstandart sets out the basic requirements for the history education of students in secondary schools. The explanatory note defines the goals of teaching history at school, the object of studying history (the past of mankind) and the main system characteristics of the object (historical time, space, movement).

Similar documents

Characteristics of methods of teaching history at the beginning of the XX century. Trends in the application of these methods in the modern Russian school. Study of the contribution of historians, methodologists and teachers of pre-revolutionary Russia to teaching. The goals of school history education.

term paper added 04/16/2012


Differentiated learning concepts, classification of its forms. Review of the main methods of differentiated education in general education schools. Development of a methodology for the application of differentiated teaching in the lesson of history and social studies in the 9th grade.

term paper added 01/14/2015


Theory of Teaching the History of the Ancient World. Objectives of the course. Requirements for teaching history in sixth grade and types of lessons. Modern approaches in teaching the history of the Ancient World. Application of non-traditional forms of education in the history of the ancient world.

thesis, added 11/16/2008


Falsification of history as a nation-building phenomenon. The need to counteract attempts at falsification as a political task of the Russian state. The activities of teachers of history and social studies to counter attempts to substitute history.

thesis, added 06/05/2017


Stages of the formation of the concept of a modern system of teaching history courses in French schools. The current state of the general education system. Methods of teaching history in schools in France and the course of Russian history in modern school textbooks in France.

term paper added 11/11/2014


Russian and foreign experience in creating school history textbooks. Positive and negative aspects of the school history textbook, the possibility of using elements of this experience to improve Russian textbooks, their methodological apparatus.

thesis, added 07/10/2014


Forms, methods, techniques for the differentiated study of material, taking into account the individual differences of students in the lessons of history and social studies. The main goals of differentiation of training and its options. Application of tests compiled according to the principle of alternativeness.

term paper, added 06/25/2011


Description of the methodology of teaching history: subject, tasks, components, methods of scientific research. Patterns of teaching history in order to improve the efficiency and quality of knowledge. Study of pedagogical methods in the process of school history teaching.

abstract, added 01/19/2010


Characteristics of the structure, principles, features of the construction of educational and methodological literature, visual and other means of teaching history. The role of a school textbook in the pedagogical process, requirements for its planning, analysis of the block-thematic principle.

term paper, added 01/18/2010


Forms, methods, techniques used by a social studies teacher to prevent child neglect and delinquency. Possible ways to solve the problems of optimizing the work of a social science teacher in the prevention of neglect and delinquency.

The beginning of the XX century in the world was marked by a sharp growth of industry, economy, social and global processes acquired a certain dynamism. Many European powers entered a new stage of their development, and the Russian Empire was no exception.

By this time in Russia there was a significant growth of the intelligentsia, the emergence of new branches of science, more and more often it was possible to read in one or another newspaper about scientific developments in the field of mathematics, linguistics, chemistry, including in the field of historical science.

During this period, there are thoughts that history as a science has long been divided into professorial and school. The art of teaching history should be formalized into a separate science, first of all, the pedagogical cycle, which would be based not on theoretical knowledge, but on practical skills. "One is a learned historian, the other is a historically educated person."

The teachers of this period saw a variety of methods of conducting a history lesson, some tried to put forward the thesis that discussion and conversation are the basis for the birth of an educated, spiritually educated person. Others adhered to the system of summarizing and reporting, laying in this method the principle of independence, the ability to highlight the main thing. Still others believed that only work with a source can give true knowledge of the subject, and hence the ability to competently teach the material. All these ideas were imbued with the spirit of the new time, the growth of the level of education and, above all, the birth of the idea that the teaching system should not be reduced to an elementary retelling and memorization of the text, as was popular among the methodists of the 19th century.

By this time, the very concept of methodology appears and spreads in a wide context. "Methodology is a pedagogical discipline aimed at clarifying the educational significance of history and finding, describing and evaluating methods that lead to a better formulation of history as an academic subject."

One of the leading methodologists of that time - S.V. Farfarovsky proposed a laboratory method for teaching history. While still a young, novice teacher, he traveled abroad to France, Belgium and Germany, upon arrival from abroad to Russia, he began to develop a laboratory method for teaching history, which was based on the knowledge gained from a trip to Europe. The essence of the method he proposes is the direct study of the source by the students, and, based on the analysis of the document, the answer to a number of questions on the topics covered. In the course of such classes, students develop an interest in material, for example, scribes, they are drawn into antiquity. The class is divided into several groups, each of which has its own knowledge laboratory. For example: "each group calculated the results for one country or district for different years, then they themselves deduce the facts of the decline of the economy within the boundaries of Muscovite Rus from a collective comparison of a number of descriptions of individual farms for different years." At the same time, he attaches particular importance to the grouping of material in such a way that it is most accessible.

S. Farfarovsky saw the significance of the laboratory method in several elements: interest in history awakens, assimilation of factual material is facilitated and, above all, this method is designed for the psychology of age, it lies in the fact that students begin to understand that all the conclusions of the textbook and the teacher are justified.

B.A. Vlohopulov published in 1914 a textbook entitled “Methods of History. “Course for the 8th grade of female gymnasiums”, which emphasizes one of the most important elements in teaching history, it is the homework of the teacher. General training at the university turns out to be insufficient for teaching history, and even more so practical techniques for many young teachers remain unknown. In the basis of his methodology, he puts the concentric principle, first of all, proceeding from the fact that only when choosing a material one has to take into account what may most likely be of interest to students: while boys are more interested in the history of the war, the details of battles, girls seem to be more entertaining descriptions cultural life of the era, domestic life, etc. He also formulates the subjective - concentric method, mainly referring to the degree of development of the student. At the same time, dividing the entire course of history into two stages. In the first of them, events are considered in the form of separate, easily understandable and specific phenomena, in the second, students try to use the information already acquired to create a single general picture and replenish them with a number of new facts. Thus, the material is assimilated the best and is a colorful canvas of knowledge.

Another important point in teaching, he emphasizes the competent arrangement of the material and here formulates the following methods. One of the first is the method of arrangement - chronologically - progressive, as a result of which all facts go in the order in which they were in reality.

The second method is chronologically - regressive, in which events fall from the nearest to the farthest, as a result of its application in practice, one can be based on an opinion based on a better understanding of the knowledge nearest in time.

By the third method, he understands the material grouping system, i.e. "All facts are connected in such a way that if there were no one, there would be no others." Thus, the idea of ​​a single connection of facts or events in time is traced.

In the last two of his methods: biographical and cultural B.A. Vlohopulov reflects the idea of ​​the high significance of the individual in history and the cultural successes that human civilization has generated. The unification of these two principles was based on the direct connection between the personality, as a continuation of man and civilization, of which it is a part.

Unfortunately, school practice shows that most of the time in the classroom pupils are in the position of listening to the teacher's story or reading the text of the school textbook. As a result, they develop a lack of confidence in their abilities, the process of historical development proceeds less efficiently, and they assimilate historical knowledge worse.

Methodists of the pre-revolutionary school also pointed to this. So, N.P. Pokotilo believed that students can acquire knowledge by listening to a lecture and learning a textbook, but he asked the question: “Is teaching history worth anything? After all, no matter how well the teacher expounds his subject, no matter how well the students prepare, they will all repeat what the teacher gave them, nothing of their own will be. But in order to achieve such a result, is it worth working for so many years! "

The pre-revolutionary methodists considered it necessary to eliminate the "learning of the textbook"; in their opinion, it should retain only the character of a reference book. In the same way, it is necessary to eliminate the presentation by the teacher of the material that is usually placed in the textbook.

Professor M.M. Stasyulevich. In 1863, he proposed a method that later became known as "real", based on an independent, active study of historical documents. For this purpose, he published a special anthology on the history of the Middle Ages. He is deeply convinced that "whoever has read Tacitus, Eingard, Froissard, he knows history, is more historically educated than the one who has mastered a whole historical guide."

Subsequently, the "real method" of studying history split into several directions, one of which was the "laboratory method". Initially, it was contrasted with the formal method, which required students to memorize and reproduce the teacher's speech and the text of the textbook. The development of the laboratory method is usually associated with the names of S.V. Farforovsky and N.A. Rozhkova. They believed that it is possible to overcome the dogmatism of traditional teaching if the entire cognitive activity of students is brought closer to scientific research methods, because "there can be no reliable and lasting study of history without independent study of primary sources from a critical and real perspective."

Following the same path as the scientists, the students will be introduced to the research laboratory. This thought prompted S.V. Farforovsky to call his method "laboratory". In addition, he believed that "the very fact that students are reading an old document arouses their very lively and extremely intense interest." In 1913, he prepared a two-volume anthology "Sources of Russian History", on the basis of which it was supposed to organize the learning process. The anthology contained many different sources: scribal books, excerpts from chronicles, legal acts, diplomatic documents, all kinds of letters, letters, etc. The author provided explanations for some documents: he explained the most complex concepts, gave recommendations for studying a particular document. S.V. Farforovsky and his followers believed that the leading role in the lesson should belong to the student, because “in the middle grades, a critical ability, the need for analysis, is already awakening in the minds of students. It is necessary to give these abilities healthy food, and not drown them with the dogmatism of the textbook, unfounded and apodictic statements. Experience shows that students then work more intensively than in ordinary lessons. At the same time, the work of the class is notable for its great liveliness, it arouses active attention more than boring, monotonous, inactive, dogmatic teaching, tiresome in its monotony and fruitless in its results. "

The task of the teacher, according to S.V. Farforovsky, is to help the student to do in a lightweight form the same work that the scientist does, to encourage him to repeat the whole train of thought leading to a predetermined position (since students should briefly familiarize themselves with the conclusions of scientists). However, students conduct all work with documents independently. The ideas of S.V. Farforovsky were picked up by many teachers - historians. Some of them made changes and additions.

Thus, A. Hartwig and N. Kryukov suggested using historical sources to make acquaintance with historical facts more complete, thereby revitalizing the teaching of history, and also to organize the work of students' historical thought. In their opinion, “the textbook alone does not paint a vivid picture of the past life, does not give (and cannot give) those specific and detailed descriptions of the phenomena that took place, those detailed characteristics that would give the student the opportunity to draw conclusions, conclusions and understand the general connection what was happening. Lacking the necessary facts to judge a particular topic, students perceive the ready-made formulas of the textbook only by memory, which is highly undesirable from the point of view of rational pedagogy. " A. Hartwig defined one of the main conditions for the correct, in his opinion, conduct of the teaching of history - the independence of the students' work. He wrote that "... our joint work will be much more productive if the students participate in this work" actively and, moreover, collectively. " The teacher, however, must "... teach students to independently use historical material, teach them to read books of historical content, teach them to understand at least some historical meaning of what is happening ...".

A. Hartwig suggested dividing the class into groups of 5-6 people and giving them sources and aids for reading, after which a conversation was organized in the lesson. At the same time, one of the students presented the main material on his question, and the rest supplemented it, discussed with him. A. Hartwig considered it sufficient if each of the students knew only a fourth of all questions, but deep enough.

Supporters of the laboratory method include V.Ya. Ulanova, K.V. Sivkova, S.P. Singalevich. In their opinion, the age characteristics of students in grades 5-6, together with the small number of hours devoted to studying history, make it difficult to effectively work with documents. But, on the other hand, they believed that laboratory classes should not be abandoned, especially in high school, since they give students an idea of ​​the methodology, acquaint them with the sources and methods of research. They have the opportunity to apply the skills of historical analysis to the facts and documents of our time.

One of the variants of the laboratory method - the documentation method - was proposed by Ya.S. Kulzhinsky. The study of documents, he believed, should be carried out according to the reader, but in conjunction with the textbook. This helps students relate their findings to the source. Kulzhinsky believed that it was necessary to provide the textbook with systematic documentation and add a reader to it. Method of documentation Ya.S. Kulzhinsky was received ambiguously. He was opposed by S.V. Farforovsky, who stated that in this case the most important thing in the laboratory method was lost - the students' independent search for truth, the development of their critical thinking.

In general, the pre-revolutionary school has accumulated significant experience in organizing the study of history on the basis of various sources, including historical documents. It is to him that the attention of modern history teachers and methodologists has recently been again drawn. Proposed and tested for the first time in Russia in the middle of the 19th century, this method has undergone significant changes to this day, but the main idea - the need to use historical sources in history lessons - remains unchanged.

Table 3. Methodists of the late 19th early 20th century and their methods

Teachers of the early twentieth century. strove for a lesson structure that would stimulate independent cognitive activity of students, form their need for knowledge. Some saw this way in the study of visualization, others - in the work of students on reports and abstracts, and still others - in the use of historical sources. Some, however, generally preferred the labor method of teaching.

When teaching history to schoolchildren, they tried to create specific images. For this, maps and pictures, books for reading with illustrations were published. Excursion work and local history research became an organic part of the learning process. As already noted, attention was paid to developing students' ability to think and work independently.

At the beginning of the XX century. old forgotten teaching methods are introduced, new ones appear. Among them is a real, laboratory, method of dramatization. The real method is to work on the basis of historical sources. When introducing this method into practice, the systematic study of a history course and the use of a school textbook were ignored. It was supposed to be replaced with a short synopsis.

ON THE. Rozhkov and S.V. Farforovskiy proposed to introduce a laboratory teaching method, i.e. to bring all the cognitive activity of the student closer to the methods of researching historical science. In their opinion, this can be achieved if all education is built on the study of primary sources, following the same path as the researchers of science. Thus, the student will be introduced into the research laboratory. The search for activation of the ways of teaching also led to the improvement of the abstracting system developed by the methodologists B.A. Vlahopulov and N.P. Pokotilo.

All these methods were aimed at improving the learning process, and more specifically at the goals, the main directions in teaching history, methods and means of forming historical thinking in students in history lessons in a Russian school at the beginning of the 20th century.

Since 1917, school history education in Russia has undergone fundamental changes. Both the old teaching methodology and the old textbooks are recognized as unsuitable for teaching the younger generation.

The first stage in the development of Soviet school history education - 1917-1930s. - was marked by the elimination of history as an academic subject and the replacement by the course of social studies. The teaching methodology is based on the “illustrative school of action” and the “labor school of work”.

Instead of civil history, it is proposed to study labor history and sociology. Proceeding from this, the implementation of revolutionary transformations in the field of history education begins. The first stage in the development of school history education begins in 1917 and continues until the early 1930s. At this time, the old content of history education was eliminated, and history was replaced as an academic subject by a course in social studies. Within the framework of social science, there are only separate elements of a history course with an ideological selection of facts and their Marxist coverage.

The new school canceled exams, penalties, student scores and homework. The transfer of students from class to class and graduation from school were to be carried out according to the feedback of the pedagogical council on the performance of educational work. Instead of classes, it was recommended to introduce small groups - "brigades"; instead of lessons - laboratory "studio" classes.

Teaching methods are undergoing a radical revision. It is based on the "illustrative school of action", which appeared for the first time in Western countries and found application in our country. On the basis of this school, a "labor school of work" is being developed in the USSR. If in the bourgeois school there was a motto "from knowledge to action", then in the labor school everything became the other way around - "from action to knowledge." Concrete work encouraged students to enrich their knowledge and develop educational skills.

In 1920, an attempt was made to introduce an approximate history program. However, it was not adopted even in a complex form with the inclusion of law, political economy and sociology, information on the history of the class struggle and the development of the theory of scientific socialism. Since 1923, subject teaching was abolished and a brigade teaching method was introduced on the basis of complex programs that existed until 1931.

In the 30s. history is restored as an academic subject, the main form of organization of educational work is determined by the lesson (Resolution of the Central Committee of the CPSU (b) "On primary and secondary schools" of September 5, 1931 and "On curricula and the regime of primary and secondary schools" of August 5, 1932 .).

The situation with historical education changed in the 30s. A new stage begins, characterized by the restoration of history as an independent subject. The Central Committee of the CPSU (b) gives instructions to abandon the laboratory-brigade method. The main form of organization of educational work is determined by a lesson with a solid composition of students, with a strictly defined schedule of classes (Resolutions of the Central Committee of the CPSU (b) "On primary and secondary schools" of September 5, 1931 and "On curricula and regime in primary and secondary schools" dated August 5, 1932). It was proposed to restore a systematic course of history in school in order to equip schoolchildren with a solid knowledge of the basics of science. For the training of teachers, history faculties in universities were restored, departments of methodology appeared.

In 1939, updated history programs were released. They also operated in the 50s. The programs were, as it were, two parts - on general history (the ancient world, the Middle Ages, modern history) and on the history of the USSR. Sections of general history were studied from grades 5 to 9. The history of the USSR was presented twice: first in the form of an elementary course in the elementary grades, then in the upper grades of secondary school in the form of a systematic course.

In the Soviet school 30-50-ies. a linear (since 1934) and partially concentric (since 1959) principle and structure of historical education are also introduced.

When considering the principles and structure of history education in the Soviet school of the 50s. attention should be paid to the allocation of partial concentrates in teaching history. There is a fundamental difference in these centers with the centers for teaching history in Russian gymnasiums. Concentrations in the former school pursued the goal of deep, conscious knowledge of history, applied in three stages of education. Concentrations in the Soviet school were of a forced nature, associated with the ideologization of education.

In the late 50s. historical and methodological thought went along the line of strengthening ties with the psychological and pedagogical sciences. The methods of teaching and learning were improved, recommendations were given on how to present material, how to talk, how to use a map, a picture. But, as before, the question of what the student is doing in the lesson, how he learns history, was almost never raised.

In the 60s and 70s. the study of the methods of teaching history by such scientists as A.A. Vagin, D.N. Nikiforov, P.S. Leibengrub, F.P. Korovkin, P.V. Mountain, N.G. Dairi. The development of methods of teaching history proceeded from the development of teaching tools and techniques and the provision of methodological assistance to the teacher in finding effective ways of teaching students. The goal was to teach schoolchildren to independently acquire knowledge and navigate the growing flow of information. In didactics, the problems of enhancing the activity and independence of schoolchildren in the educational process, increasing the educational role of teaching, intensifying the lesson, introducing problematicity in teaching were developed. In the 60-80s. the goal of developing students' activity and independence in history lessons is put forward in the first place. More and more attention is paid to the problem of enhancing the cognitive activity of students, the formation of their methods of work, skills, the question of developing education is being raised. So, A.A. Yanko-Trinitskaya, N.I. Zaporozhets study the mental operations of students; employees of the department of Moscow State Pedagogical University - the levels of cognitive activity, methods of work, skills and methods of cognitive activity, develop a structurally functional approach to the selection of content, methods and means of teaching. Experts from the Institute of Content and Teaching Methods N.G. Dairi, I. Ya. Lerner raise questions about the problematic nature of teaching and the development of students' historical thinking and, in this regard, about the place and role of cognitive tasks. In solving these problems, I.Ya. Lerner saw the most important path for the development of independent creative thinking of students. Thus, in the 80s. the most important goal of the learning process is the development of the student's personality. The development of methodological problems continues in the 50-70s. During this period, the methods and techniques of teaching and learning were improved: recommendations were made on the use of visualization in presenting the material, the goal was to teach students to independently acquire knowledge, problems were developed to enhance the activation of the independent activity of schoolchildren in the educational process, etc. (60-70s).