We carry out all types of student work
Factors of group cohesion of the student group at different stages of education
Type of work: Coursework Subject: Psychologyoriginal work
Excerpt from work
Relevance. Groups play a role in human relationships. They influence our perceptions and attitudes, provide support in stressful situations, influence our actions and decisions.
The very first and one of the most important steps in the education of students is the formation of a cohesive group with developed socially significant goals, self-government bodies. It is the formed student group that has power and can become a source of transformation of modern reality.
In sociology, a group is defined as two or more individuals who interact with each other in such a way that each individual influences and is influenced by each other. The essential features that distinguish a group from a simple accumulation of people are: interaction, a certain duration of existence, the presence of a common goal or goals, the development of at least a rudimentary group structure, awareness of the individuals included in it themselves as “we” or their membership in the group.
The problem of group cohesion is based on the understanding of the group primarily as a system of interpersonal relationships that have an emotional basis. In addition, there is an approach to the study of cohesion, which is based on the idea that the main integrator of the group is the joint activity of its members. The “stratometric concept of group activity” integrates such factors as interpersonal relationships, value-oriented unity of the group and joint activities.
Object of study: group cohesion of a student group as a socio-psychological phenomenon.
Subject of research: the influence of interpersonal relations and the nature of the activity on the group cohesion of the student group.
Hypothesis: the factors of group cohesion among junior students are interpersonal relationships, and among senior students it is joint group activity.
To analyze the problem of group cohesion in the works of researchers;
Highlight the characteristics of the student group as a social community;
To study the influence of the nature of activity and interpersonal relations on the group cohesion of students of the 1st, 3rd and 5th year;
Research methods:
To achieve the goal of the study, solve the tasks and test the hypothesis put forward, we used a set of scientific methods that are adequate to the object and subject of the study:
theoretical analysis of general and special literature on the problem of research, empirical methods: Methodology for determining the degree of value-oriented unity of the group (Kondratiev M. Yu); Questionnaire of interpersonal relations (A.A. Rukavishnikov (OMO)); "Sociometry" (J. Moreno); “Determination of the level of joint activity” (K.E. Lishchuk).
Methodological basis: The most intensive development of the problems under consideration in the works of T. Newcomb, who introduced the concept, introduces a special concept of "consent"; A. Beivelas attached particular importance to the nature of group goals. A. V. Petrovsky developed the "stratometric concept of group activity."
Practical significance: we have selected diagnostic methods aimed at identifying the level of group cohesion, as well as identifying factors of group cohesion in the 1st, 3rd and 5th courses.
Experimental base: Experimental base: MOU VIEPP, Volzhsky, teachers-psychologists of the 1st, 3rd and 5th courses in the amount of 47 people.
Chapter 1. Theoretical basis and problems of group cohesion
1.1 group problem cohesion in the writings of researchers
Cohesion is interpreted by many foreign authors as an attraction. The most concentrated similar understanding was reflected in the review publication of B. Lott, who defined cohesion as “such a group property that is derived from the number and strength of mutual positive attitudes of group members” .
The interpretation of cohesion as a predominantly emotional phenomenon of interpersonal relationships is inherent, however, not only to many foreign researchers. A review of domestic work in this area of group psychology, carried out by A. I. Dontsov, also reveals a number of attempts at an "emotional" approach to the problem. Domestic authors do not use the concept of attraction. Cohesion is described in their research as a sociometric phenomenon, operationally expressed by the ratio of in-group (in favor of one's own group) and out-group (in favor of some external groups) sociometric choices, which is qualified by specialists as one of the manifestations of interpersonal attraction.
Cohesion as a result of group membership motivation. Although the identification of cohesion with interpersonal attraction is quite common in the literature, nevertheless, there are more interesting, in our opinion, attempts to understand the essence of the phenomenon under discussion. One of them belongs to D. Cartwright, who proposed, perhaps, the most detailed model of group cohesion, which is based on the idea of cohesion as some kind of resultant forces or motives that encourage individuals to maintain membership in this particular group.
D. Cartwright emphasizes that certain characteristics of the group will have a motivating force for the subject only if they meet the corresponding needs that are part of his motivational basis for attraction to the group. Unfortunately, just as at the time when D. Cartwright's work was written, even now the question of the relationship between these two types of variables (the characteristics of the group and the needs of its members) can be safely classified as poorly studied.
Cohesion as a value-oriented unity of group members. In describing the two previous models of cohesion, it is not difficult to find something in common, namely, their inherent emphasis on the predominantly emotional nature of the phenomenon. To some extent, the antithesis of both approaches are the ideas developed by A. V. Petrovsky and supporters of the stratometric concept of group activity about the cohesion of a group as a value-oriented unity of its members.
However, it should be noted that the idea of considering the similarity, or unity, of a number of personal characteristics of group members (for example, their opinions, values, attitudes) in the context of the problem of cohesion is not new. The idea that the similarity of individuals in opinions, values, attitudes is one of the conditions for their mutual attraction, and hence the growth of motivation for group membership, and, in turn, cohesion, was expressed in foreign literature in the early 50s. It is associated primarily with the classical studies of L. Festinger and T. Newcomb.
In a different aspect, the question of interest to us is considered within the framework of the stratometric concept of the team of A. V. Petrovsky. But before presenting the corresponding views of the supporters of this direction, we emphasize that they were presented to the domestic reader in the past by a large number of publications.
According to A. V. Petrovsky, “cohesion as a value-oriented unity is a characteristic of the system of intra-group relations, showing the degree of coincidence of assessments, attitudes and positions of the group in relation to objects (persons, tasks, ideas, events) that are most significant for the group in in general". Value-oriented unity in a team is, first of all, the convergence of assessments in the moral and business spheres, in the approach to the goals and objectives of joint activities.
Within the framework of the approach under consideration, A.I. Dontsov singled out one of the highest forms of value-oriented unity in a group - object-value unity, which reflects the coincidence of the value orientations of group members regarding the subject of joint group activity, and empirically shows the legitimacy of such an understanding of cohesion.
As can be seen from the materials cited above, the interpretation of cohesion as a value-oriented unity, especially in its most clearly manifested activity-determined samples (for example, in the form of subject-value unity), practically eliminates its emotional component from the analysis of this group phenomenon. It would be more accurate to say that this component is taken into account, but, as the supporters of the discussed approach emphasize, only in relation to the surface layer of intragroup relations, which is the third psychological level of the group structure in the conceptual scheme of A.V. Petrovsky.
There is a cohesion of the instrumental type, it should include the subject-value unity of the group, which is dominant for groups focused mainly on solving problems of a professional (instrumental) nature. At the same time, this does not mean that the emotional sphere of the group's life activity and the cohesion of the emotional type corresponding to it are not worthy of attention "moments" of group life.
When describing the structure of a small group, two of its main features were identified: multi-level and heterogeneous. Diversity is represented by systems of intragroup relations hierarchically located in the “space” of group functioning, uniformity is represented by separate, or partial, dimensions of the group structure, each of which reflects a vertical connection between positions of group members of different degrees of prestige. The partial components of the group structure (a kind of "separate structures"), in particular, include: formal status, role, sociometric and communicative dimensions, positions of leadership and social power. In addition, the possibilities of static and (especially) dynamic, procedural representation of the group structure by means of appropriate model constructions are shown.
An important factor in the life of the group are the norms that function in it - a kind of regulators of the group process. The features of normative behavior associated with the influence of norms shared by a majority or a minority of group members, with the consequences of deviation from group standards, were discussed. An analysis of various forms of consent of individuals with the opinion of the majority indicates the need for a differentiated approach to this issue. This kind of agreement in some situations can play a positive role, contributing to the preservation of the integrity of the group, the effectiveness of the tasks it solves, while in other situations it provokes stagnation tendencies that hinder the development of the group process. In a number of cases, an effective counteraction to these tendencies is the activity of the group minority, which introduces elements of novelty and creativity into the life of the group and thereby contributes to its dynamization. Taking into account the simultaneous influences of majority and minority groups requires viewing normative behavior not as a unidirectional, but a reciprocal, reciprocal process of social influence.
Literature data point to the complex nature of such an integrative characteristic of a group as its cohesion, due to the conjugation of many determining factors: intergroup, group, personal. In turn, the consequences of cohesion tangibly affect various aspects of the life of the group: from the personal adaptation of its members to the overall productivity of the group.
1.2 Student group as a social community
A social community is a relatively stable set of people who are characterized by more or less similar features of life and consciousness, and, consequently, interests.
communities various types are formed on a different basis and are extremely diverse. These are communities that are formed in the sphere social production(classes, professional groups, etc.), growing on an ethnic basis (nationalities, nations), on the basis of demographic differences (sex and age communities), etc. 1, p. 98]
A group is a collection of people clearly limited in size, which is isolated from a wide society as a kind of separate psychologically valuable community, united in the logic of any significant grounds: the specifics of a given and implemented activity, socially assessed belonging to a certain category of people included in a group, structurally compositional unity, etc.
A student group is understood as a social community, which is characterized by the presence of direct personal interactions and contacts. Such interactions play a special role, as they ensure the satisfaction of the most important individual and social needs: education, health, social activities, recreation, entertainment, that is, those that make up the everyday meaning of our life. 27 p.49]
A. V. Petrovsky suggests using the structure of a small group consisting of three main layers, or “strata” for this:
the external level of the group structure is determined by direct emotional interpersonal relationships, that is, what has traditionally been measured by sociometry;
the second layer is a deeper formation, denoted by the term "value-oriented unity" (COE), which is characterized by the fact that the relationship here is mediated by joint activity. Relationships between group members are built on this case not on the basis of attachments or antipathies, but on the basis of the similarity of value orientations (A.V. Petrovsky believes that this is a coincidence of value orientations related to joint activities);
the third layer of the group structure is even deeper and involves an even greater inclusion of the individual in the joint group activity. At this level, group members share the goals of group activity, and it can be assumed that the motives for choosing at this level are also associated with the adoption of common values, but at a more abstract level. The third layer of relations is called the "core" of the group structure.
Three layers of group structures can simultaneously be considered as three levels of group cohesion. At the first level, cohesion is expressed by the development of emotional contacts. At the second level, there is a further rallying of the group, and now this is expressed in the coincidence of the main system of values associated with the process of joint activity. At the third level, the integration of the group is manifested in the fact that all its members begin to share the common goals of group activity. 22, p.143]
In the above definition of the concept of "student group", the following features of a student group were recorded:
1) an organized community of people,
2) uniting people on the basis of education,
3) the existence of relations of cooperation, mutual assistance and mutual responsibility,
4) the presence of common interests,
5) the presence of common (unifying) value orientations, attitudes and norms of behavior.
Along with the listed signs, you can also find some others: for example, a sign of the stability of a group of people who study together, or a community of people who study together as individuals, as participants social relations, etc.
There is also a sign of purposeful controllability of the process of functioning and development of this group of jointly trained people. This emphasizes the importance of self-government.
Attention is drawn to some special requirements imposed by the team on authority and leadership. In particular, such as the demand for the organic unity of formal and informal leadership and authority. In addition, attention is drawn to the fact that the collective assumes the voluntariness of its choice by the individual, identification of himself with this group. Competitive relations between its members are called as an important feature of a student team, in contrast, for example, to relations of simple competition.
Collaborative learning allows:
transfer their knowledge and skills to other members of the team;
solve more complex and voluminous tasks than individually;
more fully use individual abilities each person;
to condemn the deeds and actions of comrades that do not meet the norms of morality and morality accepted in the team, and even punish the guilty, up to and including dismissal.
There are three elements in the structure of the student group: the leader group, the so-called core and the peripheral part.
The student group leader himself is a member of the group capable of leading it and who is recognized in this role by the majority of the members of this group. Here it is important that two qualities coincide in one person - the so-called formal and real leadership. The leadership group of the labor collective is made up of the leaders of the student group, taken in its main areas.
The core of the student group is a group that usually makes up 30-40% of their total number, which is the bearer of the consciousness, collective norms and traditions that have developed in this team. In addition, we can talk about a student group with a different number of cores, as well as a kind of nuclear-free groups. Most of the latter are characterized by the underdevelopment of their own collectivist qualities in one respect or another, or in all respects in general. Each case of such deviations from a certain norm requires special study and is a particularly significant and, in general, fruitful object of the student group.
In social psychology, special terms are used that indicate the state of the individual in interpersonal relationships - the role, status, well-being of the student in the group:
"Star" - The member of the group (collective) who receives the largest number of choices. As a rule, there are 1-2 "stars" in a group. In the table. In the 17th example, these are students numbered 5 and 7 in the group list.
"Bazhaniy" - A member of a group (collective) who receives half or slightly less of the number of elections devoted to the popular.
“imprinted” - A member of a group (collective) who receives 1-2 choices.
"Isolation" - A member of a group (collective) who did not receive any choice. In the given example, the 2nd student on the list is in this state.
“Discarded” - The one who is called when answering the question “Who would you like to work with, relax with?” (3rd and 5th questions of the questionnaire.
Studies of groups and collectives show that they have the majority of the "desired" and "repressed" ones.
Thus, each member of the group (collective) takes a certain position, which is not always the same in business and personal relationships. For example, one student in business relationships has the status of "pushed aside", in personal relationships - "desired", the second - in personal relationships - "star", and in business relationships - "desired". But there may also be a coincidence of status: “desired” in business and personal relationships.
An important phenomenon in interpersonal relationships is socio-psychological reflection - the ability of an individual to perceive and evaluate their relationships with other members of the group. The most important concepts in defining a student group as a social institution are the concepts of "learning content" and "learning nature". It is very important to find out the features of the application of these concepts to the problems of the student group.
The nature of learning usually means a certain set of the most common and stable features of the learning process, internal and external conditions. In fact, the nature of learning refers to some of the most general form of learning.
Each student group from the moment of its creation goes through a number of life stages, begins to live its own life, improve, change, “grow up”, gain strength and fully reveal its potential, i.e. become mature.
A formed student group, like any living organism, goes through several stages in its development: the first corresponds to the infant, adolescence; the second is the period effective work and mature age; the third is the weakening of the potential, aging and, ultimately, either elimination or renewal. (American researchers identify five or more stages of team maturity: grinding, close combat, experimentation, efficiency, maturity, etc.)
Conclusions on the first chapter Foreign authors understand attraction as group cohesion. Among the reasons for sympathy, researchers include: the frequency of interaction of individuals, the cooperative nature of their interaction, the style of group leadership, frustration and a threat to the course of the group process, the status and behavioral characteristics of group members, various manifestations of similarity between people, success in performing a group task, etc.
Domestic scientists describe cohesion in their studies as a sociometric phenomenon, operationally expressed by the ratio of in-group and out-group sociometric choices. A. V. Petrovsky defines the structure of a group as: 1. direct emotional interpersonal relationships; 2. "value-oriented unity" 3. the inclusion of the individual in a joint group activity.
A student group is understood as a social community, which is characterized by the presence of direct personal interactions and contacts. 27, c.77]
We have recorded the following features of a student group: an organized community of people, an association of people on the basis of education, the presence of relations of cooperation, mutual assistance and mutual responsibility, the presence of common interests, the presence of common (unifying) value orientations, attitudes and norms of behavior In social psychology, special terms are used , indicating the state of the individual in interpersonal relationships - the role, status, well-being of the student in the group. Each member of the group (collective) takes a certain position, which is not always the same in business and personal relationships.
Chapter 2. The essence and specificity of group cohesion at different stages of education
2.1 Basic Methods and Methods character influence definitions activities and interpersonal relationships for group cohesion students
Based on data on the phenomenon of group cohesion, including: direct emotional interpersonal relationships; "value-oriented unity"; the inclusion of the individual in a joint group activity. We have chosen the following methods:
1. The method of sociometry was developed by the Austrian-American psychologist D. L. Moreno. Sociometry refers to socio-psychological tests and allows you to measure interpersonal relationships, preference relationships that arise in a situation of choosing a partner in a particular activity or situation.
With the help of sociometry, one can identify popularity and leadership, charisma, group conflict, integrators and outsiders of the group. Also, this method allows assessing the socio-psychological climate in the group, measuring competence in communication, and identifying the value orientations of the group.
During sociometry, participants are guaranteed anonymity, their names are encrypted, and the results are presented only in encrypted form.
2. As a basic technique for identifying direct emotional interpersonal relationships, we chose the Questionnaire of Interpersonal Relations (IMO) by A. A. Rukavishnikov. This questionnaire identifies the following needs:
The need for inclusion. It is the need to create and maintain satisfying relationships with others, on the basis of which interaction and cooperation arise.
The need for control. This need is defined as the need to create and maintain satisfying relationships with people based on control and power.
Interpersonal need for affect. It is defined as the need to create and maintain satisfying relationships with other people based on love and emotional relationships.
3. Definitions of the value-oriented unity of the group (COE) (). Designed to determine the degree and nature of the COE of the studied team.
Using the methodology for determining the value-oriented unity (COE) of a group allows the experimenter to answer the question of whether this particular functioning group can be considered a cohesive community, and also experimentally determine the severity of this most important group characteristic.
The creators of this methodological procedure proceeded from the fact that the analysis of the phenomenon of group cohesion cannot be reduced to the consideration of such, in their own way, important characteristics of interpersonal relations as the frequency and intensity of contacts between members of the community, the degree of their mutual sympathy, etc. Following their argumentation, with which it is difficult to disagree, we have to admit that in a number of cases of intensification of interpersonal contacts of group members, sometimes a sharp intensification of their interaction can be a direct reflection of not centripetal, but, on the contrary, centrifugal forces, naturally leading not to cohesion, but to the actual disintegration of the community . In this regard, within the framework of the theory of activity mediation of interpersonal relations, a fundamentally different approach was developed to understanding the psychological essence of the phenomenon of group cohesion as a value-oriented unity of members of the contact group. In fact, we are talking here about the degree of consistency of opinions, positions of members of a particular community in relation to the most significant objects for its life.
4. "Formation of positive group motivation" This test is used for the collective assessment of factors related to the formation of group activities. For effective group work certain preconditions are required. Along with the importance of the process of joint solution of tasks and problems in the group, one should take into account the climate in the group, the “growing” of the group to a certain degree of maturity, the process of preparing group members for joint work. Thus, the advantage of group work is achieved due to the synergistic effect that is possible when the participants in the interaction enter into a kind of psychological resonance, feel comfortable and confident, and when their activity increases.
5. To determine the characteristics of group activities, we compiled a questionnaire based on three research questions: “Is there a positive interdependence of group members?”, “Is there personal responsibility for the work done in the group”, “Is there simultaneous interaction of students?”. These questions were compiled on the basis of the following signs of joint activity:
Positive interdependence of participants (the goal is perceived as a single one, requiring the unification of the efforts of all members of the group).
Personal reporting of each on the work done in the group (the organization of activities involves the division of labor, the establishment of a relationship of responsibility for their part of the work).
Simultaneous interaction of students (when preparing a group assignment and group performance in the lesson).
Equal participation of everyone in the work of the group.
Group reporting (control of activities is partially carried out by the students themselves).
Reflective activity in groups (collective analysis and introspection). 5 c.345]
2.2 Features of the nature of activities and interpersonal relationships on the group cohesion of students
To confirm the hypothesis, we conducted a study of group cohesion at different stages of education. The study involved 47 students.
The method of sociometry was carried out on study group first-year educational psychologists. The group consisted of 18 people. The study involved 15 respondents. Based on the data obtained during the survey, tables were constructed with the primary answers of all respondents (encrypted in letters) (Appendix 1).
Based on the existing number of mutual elections and their potential number, the group cohesion index is calculated using a special formula. It is believed that with values of this index of about 0.6-0.7, cohesion is quite high, connections are saturated, there are almost no “isolated” members of the group. In the group under consideration, the index is 0.52. This result means low group cohesion at the moment.
Sociometry methodology was also carried out on the study group of the third year of teachers of psychologists. The group consisted of 15 people. The study involved 15 respondents.
Based on the existing number of mutual elections and their potential number, the group cohesion index was calculated, it is 0.66. This result means high group cohesion at the moment.
Also, the methodology of sociometry was carried out on a training group of fifth-year psychologists. The group consisted of 17 people, 15 respondents participated in the study (Appendix 3).
Based on the existing number of mutual elections and their potential number, the group cohesion index was calculated, it is 0.61. This result means not high group cohesion at the moment.
Figure 1 - Results according to the "sociometry" method
In this regard, we can say that in the first year, group cohesion is at a low level. By the third year, connections in the group become more extensive, integrators appear. In the fifth year, connections remain strong, while there are significantly fewer integrators.
The external level of the group structure is determined by the immediate emotional interpersonal relationships in the group. In order to determine the nature of interpersonal relations in the student group, we used the methodology "Questionnaire of interpersonal relations (OMO)" A. A. Rukavishnikov, V. Schutz. This technique reveals interpersonal needs. This technique was carried out by three training groups of psychologists.
A group of first-year psychologists showed the following results (Appendix 4).
The need for inclusion. This need, to create and maintain satisfactory relationships with other people, on the basis of which interaction and cooperation arise, is at a high level. Students feel good among their group members and tend to develop interpersonal relationships (80%). There is a need for inclusion in the group, a desire to create and maintain a sense of mutual interest (70%). Behavior corresponding to the need for inclusion is aimed at establishing connections between people.
The need for control. This need is defined as the need to create and maintain satisfying relationships with people based on control and power. First-year students try to take responsibility, combined with a leading role (80%), and in this group there is a need for dependence and hesitation when making a decision (60%).
Interpersonal need for affect. It is defined as the need to create and maintain satisfying relationships with other people based on love and emotional relationships. Members of the group are more inclined to establish close sensual relationships (60%), less willing to avoid establishing close contacts (40%). Also, some students are more careful when choosing people with whom they create deeper emotional relationships (60%), another part requires that the rest indiscriminately establish close emotional relationships with them (40%).
In the third year, the results of this technique showed the following results (Appendix 5).
The need for control. The majority of students in the 3PP group do not take control of themselves (80%). At the same time, one part of the students try to take responsibility (60%), while the other avoids making decisions and taking responsibility (40%).
In the fifth year, the results of this technique showed the following results (Appendix 6).
The need for inclusion. Students feel good among their classmates, tend to expand their connections in the group (70%). Third-year students have a strong need to be accepted in their group (60%), and some third-year students tend to communicate with a small number of people (40%) .
The need for control. The majority of students in the 5PP group do not take control of themselves (80%). At the same time, one part of the students try to take responsibility (60%), while the other avoids making decisions and taking responsibility (40%).
Interpersonal need for affect. Most members of the third year group (80%) demand that others indiscriminately establish close emotional relationships with them. In the group there are those who are careful when establishing close intimate relationships (50%), and those who tend to establish close sensual relationships (50%).
Figure 2 - The results obtained during the implementation of the methodology "Questionnaire of interpersonal relations (IRO)"
Based on the results obtained, it can be said that in the first year there is a high level of need for communication, in the third year the need for communication with group members decreases, in the fifth year this trend continues. In the first year, the propensity to establish close relationships is higher than in the third year; in the fifth year, this need is at a low level. Also, the acceptance of control from the group in the first year is significantly lower than in the third, but in the fifth year the control is reduced.
The next criterion for determining the development of a group is the value-oriented unity of the group. To do this, we used the method of determining the value-oriented unity (COE) of the group. It allowed us to answer the question of whether this particular functioning group can be considered a cohesive community, as well as experimentally determine the degree of expression of this most important group characteristic.
We determined the degree of agreement among the members of the surveyed community about what qualities a leader should have. We introduced each subject to a generalized list and asked him to indicate the five most important characteristics for a leader from those that were included in the summary list.
The technique was carried out on a training group of first-year psychologists (Appendix 7). The members of the group made the following choice, in their opinion, of the five most valuable qualities for a leader.
Based on the existing number of choices of personality traits, the COE index was calculated, it is 28%.
Third-year students made the following choice of the most important characteristics for a leader (Appendix 8).
Based on the existing number of choices of personality traits, the COE index was calculated, it is 64%, such an indicator of the level of cohesion is at an average level. Fifth-year students made the following choice of the most important characteristics for a leader (Appendix 9).
Based on the existing number of choices of personality traits, the COE index was calculated, it is 45%, this result can be called the average level.
Figure 3 - The results obtained during the "COE" technique
The next layer of group structure is the joint activities of the group. To determine it, we used:
1. "Determination of the level of joint activity" Lishchuk K. E.
During the study, we obtained the following results: in the first year, the group is not sufficiently motivated for a positive result in their activities. In the third year, the group is sufficiently focused on achieving success in their activities. In the fifth year, the group is not sufficiently motivated for positive results in activities, while the results obtained are lower than those of the first year.
Figure 4 — Results obtained during the methodology "Determining the level of joint activity"
2. A survey was conducted, the purpose of which was to answer the following research questions: “Is there a positive interdependence of group members?”, “Is there personal responsibility for the work done in the group”, “Is there simultaneous interaction of students?”. The following results were obtained (Appendix).
In the first year it was revealed that 18% of students are dissatisfied with joint activities, in turn 82% are satisfied with joint activities. Also, a small part of 18% would prefer independent work to group work, 36% wish to work only with a few specific members of the group, the remaining 46% preferred independent work to group work.
It turned out that there is no personal responsibility of each for the work done in the group. Students do not distribute questions among all group members when preparing for an exam. Part of the students partly believes that they are responsible for preparing for the seminar in front of the whole group 36%, the rest do not adhere to this opinion 64%.
It can be said that in the first year there is interaction between students. The group has such duties as: leisure organizer and duty officer. The group has established communication and organization of activities, while 63% are satisfied with the effectiveness of the dissemination of information in the group, 27% are only partly satisfied, 9% are dissatisfied in general.
The results of the third-year survey showed that 80% have a desire to work in a group, and 20% have a desire to be present sometimes, while 80% of the respondents enjoy joint work, 20% are dissatisfied with joint activities.
It turned out that there is no personal responsibility of each for the work done in the group. 90% of third-year students distribute questions among themselves in preparation for the exam. At the same time, 20% of the respondents, when preparing for the seminar, believe that they are letting their group down, 40% believe that they are only partly responsible, the remaining 40% are confident that they will not let the group down if they do not prepare for the seminar.
We can say that in the third year there is a high level of interaction between students. The group has such duties as: the one who monitors the schedule changes, the person on duty, the one who informs about events at the institute, the organizer of the group's leisure. The group has established communication and organization of activities 70% are satisfied with the dissemination of information in the group, the remaining 30% are partially satisfied.
In the fifth year, students enjoy working in a group, while 90% would prefer independent group work, and 10% would prefer individual work group.
Fifth-year students do not distribute questions in preparation for exams among all members of the group, only a part of the students (20%) distribute questions between some members of the group. At the same time, 20% of the respondents, when preparing for the seminar, believe that they are letting their group down, 40% believe that they are only partly responsible, the remaining 40% are confident that they will not let the group down if they do not prepare for the seminar.
It turned out that in the fifth year with there is a simultaneous interaction between students. The group has such responsibilities as: the one who monitors the changes in the schedule, the one who informs about events within the walls of the institute, the organizer of leisure. The group has established communication and organization of activities 70% are satisfied with the dissemination of information in the group, the remaining 10% are partially satisfied, 20% are not satisfied at all.
Figure 5 - The results obtained during the survey Based on the data obtained, we can say that our hypothesis, the factors of group cohesion among junior students are interpersonal relationships, and among senior students, joint group activity was not confirmed.
Conclusions on the second chapter An important aspect of the group structure is how cohesive it is. In the first year, group cohesion is at a low level. By the third year, connections in the group become more extensive, integrators appear. In the fifth year, connections remain strong, while there are significantly fewer integrators.
In the first year, the desire to look for new connections within the group is greater than in the third and fifth years, but at the same time, the need to find new connections remains quite high in these courses. In addition, there is a tendency to reduce the need to communicate with a large number of people within their group. If in the first year this need is at a sufficiently high level, then by the fifth year it is significantly reduced.
In the first year, most tend to avoid responsibility for making decisions, while by the fifth year this need becomes one of the leading needs in communication. It can also be said that first-year students do not accept the control of the group over themselves, while in the third year there is dependence and hesitation in decision-making, by the fifth year the dependence on the group decreases, but at the same time it is higher than that of the first year.
The need to establish close relationships in the first year is higher than in the third year, in turn, in the fifth year this need is greatly reduced, fifth-year students have almost no tendency to establish close sensual relationships. In the first year there is no strong need to establish close relationships, by the third year this need increases greatly, and in the fifth year the need to create deep emotional relationships ceases to be relevant.
Conclusion
A characteristic of the system of intra-group relations, showing the degree of coincidence of assessments, attitudes and positions of the group in relation to objects, people, ideas, events that are most significant for the group as a whole. Cohesion as a feature expresses the degree of like-mindedness and unity of its members, is a generalized indicator of their spiritual community and unity. In a group made up of strangers, some part of the time will necessarily be spent on achieving the level of cohesion that is necessary for solving group problems. The military calls this process "combat coordination."
Among the main factors of group cohesion are primarily:
the similarity of the main value orientations of the members of the group;
clarity and certainty of group goals;
democratic style of leadership (leadership);
cooperative interdependence of group members in the process of joint activities;
relatively small group size;
the absence of conflicting microgroups; prestige and tradition of the group.
Specific indicators of psychological cohesion are usually:
the level of mutual sympathy in interpersonal relationships (the more members of the group like each other, the higher its cohesion);
the degree of attractiveness (usefulness) of the group for its members: it is the higher, the greater the number of people who are satisfied with their stay in the group - those for whom the subjective value of the advantages acquired through the group exceeds the significance of the efforts expended.
Group cohesion consists of the following levels
1. direct emotional interpersonal relationships;
2. "value-oriented unity"
3. inclusion of the individual in a joint group activity.
A student group is understood as a social community, which is characterized by the presence of direct personal interactions and contacts.
AT term paper The following questions were considered:
1. The concept of a student group as a social community, signs of a group, group structure.
2. Characteristics of the features of the characteristics of the student team.
3. Approaches to the problem of cohesion, the concept of cohesion, forming cohesion, approaches for measuring group cohesion, types of work collectives depending on their cohesion, “personality-cohesion” variables.
If in the first year a group is formed, interpersonal relations develop, relationships become stronger, a value-oriented unity begins to form, a desire arises to unite in the name of educational and leisure activities, in the third year ties continue to strengthen within the group, integrators appear, responsibilities within the group expand , there is a dependence of the members of the group on the group. The group becomes cohesive, the desire to work in the group increases, there is a space for the dissemination of information (a common Email, page in social network), members of the group are interested in achieving a common goal.
In the fifth year in the group there are no common goals, value-oriented unity, interpersonal ties are destroyed.
The group will cease to exist in a few months, therefore, such patterns can be traced as: a decrease in interpersonal relationships, a decrease in the level of value-oriented unity, the level of joint group activity is insignificant.
This study will help to take into account the features of the development of interpersonal relations within the group at various stages of the educational process, the dynamics of the formation of the value-oriented unity of the group, the features of interaction in the group in the educational process.
1. Andreeva G. M. Social psychology. M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 1998. 431p.
2. Anikeeva N. P. Psychological climate in the team M.: Education, 2005. 224p.
3. Antonyuk V. I., Zolotova O. I., Mochenov G. A., Shorokhova E. V. Problems of the socio-psychological climate in Soviet social psychology. / Socio-psychological climate of the team. M., Science. 2000. p. 5−25.
4. Belinskaya E. P., Tihomandritskaya O. A. Social psychology: Reader. - M .: Aspect Press, 2003. - 475 p.
5. Bagretsov S. A., Lvov V. M., Naumov V. V., Oganyan K. M. Diagnostics of the socio-psychological characteristics of small groups with an external status.
6. Vichev VV Moral and social psychology. M., 1999.
7. Dontsov AI Psychology of collectives. M. Publishing House of Moscow State University 2004. 246 p.
8. Dontsov AI On the concept of "group" in social psychology. West. Moscow university Psychology. 1997. No. 4. p. 17−25
9. Dontsov A. I. Problems of group cohesion. M.: MGU, 1979. 128s.
10. Zhuravlev A. L. Socio-psychological problems of management.
11. Applied problems of social psychology. M. 1999. 184p.
12. Neimer Yu. L. Cohesion as a characteristic of the primary Collective and its sociological dimension - Sots. research 1995. No. 2
13. Krichevsky R. L., Dubovskaya E. M. Psychology of a small group: Theoretical and applied aspects. M. Publishing House of Moscow State University, 2001, 152 p.
14. Kono T. Strategy and structure of Japanese enterprises. M.: 1987.
15. Kolominsky Ya. L. Psychology of relationships in small groups. Minsk, 1976
16. Krysko V. Social psychology. St. Petersburg: Peter, 2006, 432.
17. Krysko V. Dictionary-reference book on social psychology St. Petersburg: Peter, 2003, 416.
18. Kunz G., O. Donnell. Control. System and situational analysis of managerial functions. M.: 1981.
19. Levin K. Field theory in the social sciences. M.: 2000.
20. Obozov N. N. Psychology of small groups. Social Psychology. L. 1979.
21. Petrovsky A. V. Personality. Activity. Collective. Moscow: Politizdat. 1982.- 255p.
22. Petrovsky A. V. Psychological theory of the team. M. Pedagogy. 1979. - 315p.
23. Platonov K. K., Kazakov V. G. Development of the system of concepts of the theory of psychological climate in psychology. /Social and psychological climate of the team./Ed. Shorokhova E. V. and Zotova O. I. M.: 2006. p. 32-44.
24. Platonov Yu. P. Psychology of collective activity: Theoretical and methodological aspect. L. publishing house of Leningrad State University. 2000. 181 p.
25. Psychology. Textbook. / Ed. Krylova. M .: "Prospect" 1998. 584 p.
26. Psychology. Dictionary./Ed. Petrovsky. M. 2000. 586 p.
27. Sidorenkov A. V. Informal subgroups in a small group: socio-psychological analysis. Rostov n/a: RGU, 2004.
28. Fetiskin B. E. Social and psychological development of personality and small groups
29. Shakurov R. X. Socio-psychological problems of teaching staff management. M., 1982.
30. Show M. E. Group dynamics. New York. 1971.
Application BUT
Table A1 - Sociometric matrix 1PP | ||||||||||||||||||||
Figure A1 - The results obtained during the implementation of the "sociometry" technique in the 1st course. Sociometric status index
Application B
Table B1 - Sociometric matrix 3PP
Figure B1 - The results obtained during the implementation of the "sociometry" technique in the 3rd year. Sociometric status index
Application AT
Table B1 - Sociometric matrix 5PP | ||||||||||||||||||||
Figure B 1 - The results obtained during the implementation of the "sociometry" technique in the 5th year. Sociometric status index
Application G
Figure D1 - The results obtained during the implementation of the methodology "Questionnaire of interpersonal relations (OMO)" in the 1st course
Application D
Figure E1 - The results obtained during the implementation of the methodology "Questionnaire of interpersonal relations (IMO)" in the 3rd year
Application E
Figure E1 - The results obtained during the implementation of the methodology "Questionnaire of interpersonal relations (IMO)" in the 5th year
Application AND
Table G1 - Results obtained during the implementation of the "COE" technique at the 1st trial
Justice | a responsibility | sociability | modesty | Ready to help | Admitting mistakes | exactingness | performance | persistence | Caution | Ability to avoid punishment | Physical strength | complaisance | ||||
Figure G1 - Figure. The results obtained during the implementation of the COE method in the 1st course.
Application W
Table H1 - Results obtained during the implementation of the COE method at 3PP
Justice | a responsibility | sociability | modesty | Ready to help | Admitting mistakes | exactingness | performance | persistence | Caution | Ability to avoid punishment | Physical strength | complaisance | ||||||
Figure H1 - The results obtained during the "COE" technique in the 3rd year
Annex I
Table I1 - Results obtained during the implementation of the COE method at 5PP
Justice | a responsibility | sociability | modesty | Ready to help | Admitting mistakes | exactingness | performance | persistence | Caution | Ability to avoid punishment | Physical strength | complaisance | ||||
Figure I 1 - The results obtained during the "COE" technique in the 5th year
Annex K
student cohesion interpersonal attitude Training program for the formation of cohesion of the student group.
The cohesion of the student group is an important aspect of its activities. However, often the group is cohesive, but not to achieve educational goals, but to meet a variety of non-educational needs. The situation becomes especially tense when the cohesion of the group is directed against one of its members. Therefore, it is necessary to organize and conduct special events to develop group cohesion of the student team with a positive development vector of its direction.
To this end, it is necessary to conduct a socio-psychological training "Development of the cohesion of the student group."
Purpose of the training:
* increasing the cohesion of the group, the development of the team as an integral group subject.
Training sessions develop the following skills and abilities:
* benevolence, interest and ability to build trusting relationships with each other;
* emotionally empathize with a classmate;
* cooperate and act together;
* coordinate their actions with others and jointly solve tasks;
* resolve conflict situations;
All this contributes to the rapprochement and development of a sense of "We" in the student team.
The content of the training program "Development of the cohesion of the student group" is based on the solution of problems that are close and understandable to students: how to build relationships in a team and resist pressure; how to understand another person during a conversation, and how important it is to be able to convey your thoughts and feelings to the interlocutor. Thus, communicative competence is formed, and group cohesion dynamically develops on its basis.
We have developed a training program aimed at forming the cohesion of the student group.
1. Lesson. Self respect.
1) Acquaintance. Establishing contact.
Participants sign badges. The facilitator introduces himself and says a few words about what will happen.
2) Rules for working in a group.
Then the leader is set certain rules group work, which is necessary for all participants to feel comfortable and safe. The rules are written out in advance on a piece of drawing paper, and after the group has accepted them, they are fixed in a conspicuous place. During all subsequent classes, the rules of the group are in the same place and are reminded by the leader at the beginning of the lesson.
List of rules:
1. Listen carefully to each other.
2. Do not interrupt the speaker
3. Respect each other's opinions
4. I am a statement
5. Non-judgmental judgments
6. Activity
7. Rule "stop"
8. Confidentiality Each of the points of the rules is explained by the moderator.
3) Warm up. "Swap Places"
Description of the exercise Participants sit on chairs in a circle. The driver goes to the middle of the circle and says the phrase: “Change places” those who ... (knows how to fry eggs) ". At the end, some sign or skill is called. The task of those who have this skill or sign is to change places. The leader's task is have time to sit in any vacant seat.The one who did not have time to sit down becomes the new driver.
The psychological meaning of the warm-up exercise, creating conditions in order to get to know each other better, to understand how much they have in common, to increase the interest of the participants in each other.
4) Main exercise. "Good and Bad Deeds"
Description of the exercise Participants are randomly divided into two teams. Each team is given a piece of drawing paper, felt-tip pens or markers and A4 paper. The task of one team is to write as many actions as possible that allow a person to respect himself more. Accordingly, the task is different - to write as many actions as possible, because of which a person's self-respect is lost. If desired, each team can reinforce the words with drawings of the corresponding actions.
Discussion Each team presents their topic. Then there is a general discussion, at the end the leader summarizes everything that has been said. It is very important to pay attention to the fact that everyone has a choice between these and other actions, but each time, choosing this or that behavior, we gain or lose respect for ourselves.
The psychological meaning of the exercise Children's awareness of the connection between actions and self-esteem. Identification of the very concept of self-esteem and the discovery of its connection with mutual respect. And this is a necessary condition for full-fledged communication, without which the development of cohesion is impossible.
5) Final exercise. "Thanks!"
Description of the exercise The participants stand in a circle, and the facilitator invites everyone to mentally put on their left hand everything that they came with today, their luggage of mood, thoughts, knowledge, experience, and on right hand- what I got in this lesson new. Then, all at the same time strongly clapped their hands and shouted - YES! or THANK YOU!
The psychological meaning of the exercise The final ritual. Allows you to think about the content and result of the past lesson, as well as complete it beautifully on a positive emotional note.
Lesson 2. "Beautiful garden"
1) Warm up. Exercise "Hello"
Description of the exercise The facilitator invites everyone to shake hands, but in a special way. You need to greet with two hands with two participants at the same time, while you can release one hand only when you find someone who is also ready to say hello, i.e. hands should not remain idle for more than a second. The task is to greet all the members of the group in this way. There should be no talking during the game.
The psychological meaning of the warm-up exercise. Establishing contact between participants. The handshake is a symbolic gesture of openness and goodwill. It is important that eye contact occurs during this - this contributes to the emergence of intimacy and a positive internal attitude. The fact that the action takes place without words increases the concentration of the group members and gives the action the charm of novelty.
2) The main exercise. "Beautiful garden"
Description of the exercise Participants sit in a circle. The host offers to sit quietly, you can close your eyes, and imagine yourself as a flower. What would you be? What kind of leaves, stem, and maybe thorns? High or low? Bright or not so bright? And now, after everyone has submitted this, draw your flower. Everyone is given paper, felt-tip pens, crayons.
Next, the participants are invited to cut their own flower. Then everyone sits in a circle. The facilitator spreads a canvas of any fabric inside the circle, preferably plain, distributes a pin to each participant. The fabric is declared a garden clearing to be planted with flowers. All participants take turns coming out and attaching their flower.
Discussion It is proposed to admire the “beautiful garden”, to capture this picture in memory so that it shares its positive energy. It should be noted that although there are many flowers, there was enough space for everyone, everyone occupied only his own, the one he chose. To see, surrounded by different, unlike flowers, yours grows. But there is something in common - someone has a color, someone has the size or shape of the leaves. And without exception, flowers need sun and attention.
The psychological meaning of the exercise Art therapy itself is a very powerful tool that is used to psychological correction and serves to explore feelings, to develop interpersonal skills and relationships, to strengthen self-esteem and self-confidence. In this case, the exercise allows you to understand and feel yourself, to be yourself to freely express your thoughts and feelings, as well as to understand the uniqueness of everyone, to see the place that you occupy in the diversity of this world and to feel like a part of this beautiful world.
Final exercise. "Thanks!"
Lesson 3. Development of communication skills. Non-verbal communication
1) Warm up. Exercise "Let's line up"
Description of the exercise The facilitator offers to play a game where the main condition is that the task is performed silently. It is impossible to talk and correspond at the same time, you can communicate only with the help of facial expressions and gestures. "Let's see if you can understand each other without words?" In the first part of the exercise, the participants are given the task to line up by height, in the second part the task becomes more complicated - you need to line up by date of birth. In the second option, at the end of the construction, the participants alternately announce their birthdays, while checking the correctness of the exercise. The psychological meaning of the Warm-up exercise. Demonstration of the possibility of an adequate exchange of information without the use of words, development of expression and non-verbal communication skills. The unusual conditions that the participants find themselves in include interest, makes them find ways to convey their thoughts more accurately to another person, to contact each other in order to achieve a common goal.
2) The main exercise. "Drawing on the back"
Description of the exercise Participants are randomly divided into three teams and lined up in three columns in parallel. Each participant looks at the back of his friend. The exercise is performed without words. The facilitator draws some simple picture and hides it. Then the same picture is drawn with a finger on the back of each last member of the teams. The task is to feel and convey this drawing as accurately as possible further. In the end, standing first in teams, draw what they felt on sheets of paper and show it to everyone. The presenter takes out his picture and compares.
Participants are invited to discuss in teams the mistakes and findings that were made during the exercise. Draw conclusions, then, taking into account these conclusions, repeat the exercise. In this case, the first and last members of the teams change places.
Discussion Discussion in a general circle. What helped to understand and convey feelings? How did the first and last members of the teams feel in the first and second cases? What prevented you from doing the exercise?
Control
Table of contents
Introduction………………………………………………………………….3
Chapter 1
learning from students………………………………………………………..5
1.1. The concept of group cohesion…………………………...5
1.2. The emergence of group cohesion among students ... ... 7
1.3. The basis of group cohesion among students……………10
1.4. Motivation for learning from students……………………….12
Summary……………………………………………………………………….18
Chapter 2. Methodology and methods of researching the problem………….20
2.1. Methodology and principles…………………………………..20
2.2. Research methods and techniques…………………………21
2.3. Justification of the sample……………………………………….22
2.4. Research progress…………………………………………….23
2.5. Data processing methods…………………………………24
Chapter 3. Analysis and interpretation of results
psychodiagnostic research…………………………………25
3.1. Data on the diagnostic method
personal and group values………………………………...25
3.2. Data on the diagnostic method
learning motivation of students…………………………………..28
Summary…………………………………………………………………………33
Conclusion………………………………………………………………...34
Conclusions……………………………………………………………………..35
Literature…………………………………………………………………36
Introduction.
The relevance of the research topic: a person has always been in society and has always been a member of various groups, with the attitudes of which he is in solidarity.
A person in a group feels himself in his place, because cohesion is the result of agreement, similarity of value orientations, views; the search for common directions, ideas, interests with other people is due to the need for social recognition, which will provide the individual with security and emotional comfort. This means that it will allow you to develop and be interested in labor and educational activities, to be motivated to work without getting interfering with outside factors. The cohesion of small permanent groups, such as student groups, is multifaceted, dealing not only with personal and group settings but also with constant close interpersonal interactions. It is on cohesion that the success of the group, the performance of the group and its members depends. Reduced anxiety and interest in things that require high motivation to be successful. The motivation of the stronger learning members of the group will influence the increase in the motivation of the weaker members if the cohesion in the group is high. The motivation of each member of the group, the efforts that he made to be recognized in the group, will affect the motivation of the entire group as a whole.
The study of group cohesion is present in the works of Festinger L., Cartwright D., Levine K., Godefroy J., Rudestam K., Petrovsky A.V., Volkov I.P., Alexandrov A.A. and etc.
Studies of educational motivation and student motivation were carried out by Hekhauzen N., Mormuzheva N.V., A.A. Rean, Markova A.K., Bozhovich L.I. and etc.
The purpose of the study: to identify the relationship between the cohesion of the student group and motivation for learning.
Object of study: the cohesion of the student group, the motivation for learning in a psychological group.
Subject of study: the relationship between the cohesion of the student group and motivation for learning.
Research hypotheses:
1. The cohesion of the student group increases the motivation for learning of all its members.
2. The longer the interpersonal interactions of the student group, the higher will be the motivation for learning in the group.
Research objectives:
1. To study the phenomenon of cohesion of small groups, various approaches to the study of cohesion of small groups in Russian and foreign psychology.
2. To study the level of cohesion in student groups.
3. To study the phenomenon of motivation for learning among students, various approaches to studying the motivation of student groups in Russian and foreign psychology.
4. To study the relationship between the cohesion of the student group and the motivation for learning.
Methods: systemic approach (B.F. Lomov, 1971); the principle of development (S.L. Rubinshtein, 1968); psychodiagnostic method.
Methods:
1) Methods for diagnosing personal and group values (A.V. Kaptsov, L.V. Karpushina),
2) Methods for diagnosing student learning motivation (A.A. Rean and V.A. Yakunin, modified by N.Ts. Badmaeva).
Chapter 1
1.1. The concept of group cohesion
Group cohesion is an indicator of the strength, unity and stability of interpersonal interactions and relationships in a group, characterized by mutual emotional attraction of group members and satisfaction with the group. Group cohesion can act both as the goal of psychological training and as a necessary condition for successful work. In a group formed from strangers, some part of the time will necessarily be spent on achieving the level of cohesion that is necessary for solving group problems.
The concept of "cohesion" is used to refer to such socio-psychological characteristics of a small group as the degree of psychological community, the unity of group members, the tightness and stability of interpersonal relationships and interaction, the degree of emotional attractiveness of the group for its members.
Group cohesion is also the subject of close attention from domestic and foreign experts who have not come to a unified definition of this phenomenon.
The beginning of a systematic study of group cohesion dates back to the end of the 40s, when the first special studies were carried out under the leadership of L. Festinger. L. Festinger, a student of K. Levin, owns the most common definition of group cohesion as "the result of all the forces acting on the members of the group in order to keep them in it." Almost two decades later, D. Cartwright will practically repeat the original definition: "group cohesion is characterized by the extent to which members of the group wish to remain in it." T. Newcomb (1969) had his own approach to the formation of group cohesion, who connected the concept of group cohesion with the concept of “group consent”. The author defined group consent as a similarity, a coincidence of opinions and views that occurs in the process of direct interaction between group members.
Closely related to this approach is the understanding of cohesion as a value-oriented unity of the group, proposed by A.V. Petrovsky and V.V. Shpalinsky, which is understood as similarity, coincidence of values regarding the subject of joint activity, its goals and motives.
A.A. Alexandrov understood group cohesion as an indicator of the strength, unity and stability of interpersonal interactions and relationships in a group, characterized by mutual emotional attraction of group members and satisfaction with the group.
Thus, group cohesion contributes to the satisfaction of a person from being in a group. The cohesive forces of a group have two generators: firstly, the degree of attractiveness of one's own group, and secondly, the force of attraction of other accessible groups. A group can therefore be defined as a collection of individuals connected in such a way that each regards the benefits of the association as greater than can be obtained from outside.
Socio-psychological compatibility in a group means that the given composition of the group is possible for the group to provide its functions, that the members of the group can interact. This is one of the most important internal factors affecting the psychological climate in the group.
According to N.N. Obozov, cohesion in a group is such an effect of a combination of people that gives the maximum result of activity with minimal psychological "costs" of interacting persons. Cohesion can be considered in connection with two main types of group life: business (instrumental) and emotional (interpersonal). In fact, in the case of instrumental compatibility, we are talking about harmony, which is associated with the success of the activity.
1.2. The emergence of group cohesion among students.
In the scientific psychological literature, one can find many diverse characteristics of the criteria for the level of development of student study groups, ranging from the unity of the worldview orientation and value orientations in them to such features as "coincidence of formal and informal structure", "high academic performance" and even the absence of conflicts in groups. From this set of criteria, the most significant groups can be distinguished:
1. the level of social significance of the subject activity of the student group, the fulfillment of the main student function, the impact on the harmonious development of the personality of a member of the team;
2. the level of cohesion as a value-oriented unity of the group;
3. the level of organizational unity of the group;
4. the level of satisfaction of group members with the state of affairs and relationships in the group;
5. the level of her emotional culture;
6. the level of all types of group social activity;
7. the level of group self-awareness and the need for its development.
Based on the two-factor model of the group, the English psychologists G. Stanford and A. Roark identified the following seven stages in the development of group cohesion.
1. The stage of forming students' ideas about the place of study and each other. The first interpersonal interactions at this time are still very cautious, and lead to the formation of dyads. The teacher is perceived as the only authority.
2. The period of formation of group norms, the beginning of the formation of group self-consciousness.
3. The stage of conflict - there are clashes between individual members of the group due to their overestimation of their capabilities and the desire to solve all problems of self ........
Literature
1. Andreeva G.M. "Social Psychology". M., 2003.
2. Antipova I.G. Attitude to educational activity of high school students and students. / I.G. Antipova // Author. dis. . cand. psychol. Sciences. Rostov-on-Don, 2000.
3. . Aseev, V.G. Motivation of educational activity and personality formation. Text. / V.G. Aseev. M., 2006.
4. Verbitsky, A.A. Development of student motivation in contextual learning / A.A. Verbitsky, N.A. Bakshaeva. M.: Research Center for Quality Problems in Training Specialists, 2000.
5. Verkhova, Yu.L. Formation of personal and professional orientation of students in contextual learning: autoref... cand. psychol. Sciences: 19.00.07 / Yu.L. Verkhov. - M., 2007.
6. Dontsov A.I. "Psychological Unity of the Collective". M., 2002.
7. Dontsov A.I. "Problems of group cohesion". M., 2009.
8. Krichevsky R.L., Dubovskaya E.M. Psychology of a small group. 2001
9. Marisova L.I. "Student team: bases of formation and activity". Kyiv, 2005.
10. Nemov R.S., Shestakov A.G. questions of psychology "Cohesion as a factor of group effectiveness", 2001
11. Platonov Yu.P. "Psychology of collective activity". 2000.
12. Psychology of joint activity of small groups and organizations / otv. ed. Zhuravlev A.L. - M.: Sotsium: Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2001.
13. Psychological and pedagogical support of multilevel higher education / Ed. Kaptsova A.V. - Samara, 2003
14. Maklakov A.G. General psychology: Proc. manual for students of universities and students of courses of psychological disciplines / A.G. Maklakov. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2008
15. Markova A.K. Formation of learning motivation: Book. for the teacher / A.K. Markova, T.A. Matis, A.B. Orlov. - M.: Enlightenment, 2000
16. Sidorenkov A.V. Group cohesion and informal subgroups // Psychological journal. 2006. №1
17. Fetiskin N.P., Kozlov V.V., Manuilov G.M. Socio-psychological diagnostics of personality development and small groups. - M., 2002.
As a manuscript
Kolesnikova Ekaterina Ivanovna
STUDY GROUP COHELICITY AS A FACTOR
SOCIAL IDENTIFICATION OF A STUDENT
Specialty: 19.00.05 - social psychology
dissertations for a degree
candidate of psychological sciences
Samara - 2007
The work was done at the Department of Educational Psychology
Samara State Pedagogical University
Scientific adviser: doctor of pedagogical sciences, professor
Miniyarov Valery Maksimovich
Official opponents: Doctor of Psychology, Associate Professor
Shamionov Rail Munirovich
candidate of psychological sciences
Doroshina Ilona Gennadievna
Lead organization– Moscow State
humanitarian University
them. M.A. Sholokhov
The defense will take place on May 28, 2007 at 12 o'clock at a meeting of the dissertation council K. 212.216.06 at the Samara State Pedagogical University at the address: 443099, Samara, M. Gorky, 65/67.
The dissertation can be found in the fundamental library of the Samara State Pedagogical University.
Scientific Secretary
dissertation council
candidate of psychological sciences, associate professor T.V. Semenov
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK
The relevance of research. Modern society is characterized by the high dynamism of the changes taking place in it, the destruction of previously stable structures and, at the same time, the development of new spaces for a person to see himself, the world and himself in the world. When forming a future competitive specialist, a higher school should take into account that the individual development of a student's personality, his professional and social development are conditioned by joint activities and interpersonal relationships that arise in it. This dictates the relevance of the ability to identify (identify) an individual with another person and a group as one of the mechanisms of cognition and mutual understanding in the course of socialization.
Thanks to the identification of individuals with groups, their norms and rules, the stability of the behavior of different social strata, professional groups, cultural associations and relations of a person, his personal and professional growth, there is a deeper understanding of reality in which he acts as a social subject. Therefore, modern society needs individuals with a developed ability for social identification, especially in the current situation of erosion of attitudes and norms, changes in values, the collapse of old social groups and the formation of new ones.
The problem of social identification is not new. This concept, introduced into scientific circulation by Z. Freud, was first studied in foreign psychology by representatives of the psychoanalytic approach, paying attention to the emotional aspects of identification (M. Klein, R. Spitz, A. Freud, E. Erikson, J. Marcia, P. Priz ), behaviorism as copying optimal forms of behavior (A.Bandura, P.Berger, T.Lukman), cognitive approach as certain categorization structures (G.Tashfel, J.Turner, S.Moscovici, T.Shibutani).
In domestic psychology, identification as a mechanism of mutual influence of an individual and a social group, assimilation, the emergence of a sense of community and cohesion of the group was studied by B.F. Porshnev, B.D. Parygin, N.N. Obozov, V.S. Ageev, G.M. Andreeva . Identification was studied in connection with the development of personality (V.S. Mukhina, V.V. Stolyarov), as emotional (N.N. Avdeeva, V.S. Sobkin), moral (V.A. Bratchikov), semantic (E. Z. Basina, F.R. Malyukova) behavior regulator. Russian society and consciousness in terms of categories of identification was studied by G.V. Akopov, E.N. Danilova, S.G. Klimova, T.Z. Kozlova, T.G. Stefanenko, V.A. Yadov.
In the educational and professional sphere, identification is considered as a multi-level and multi-aspect phenomenon from the point of view of professional identity (E.F. Zeer, E. Ibarra, A.K. Markova, L.M. Mitina, V.P. Mokhonko, A.A. Shatokhin, L.B. Schneider) and the level of identification (E.M. Petrova, L.B. Schneider), the correlation of personal and social identification (O.S. Balykina, F.R. Malyukova), from the standpoint of commitment to the organization (C .A. Lipatov).
Identification acts as a professionally important quality (A.A. Rean) of a student as a future specialist (L.V. Menshikova, N.M. Peisakhov, V.A. Yakunin). A number of researchers pay attention to identification as a social component of the developing educational environment (V.V. Abramov, Yu.A. Azarov, V.S. Zavyalova, M.S. Kozlitin, T.N. Martynova, L.V. Menshikova, L. .V.Popova, V.A.Yasvin). Identification promotes adaptation in the group, unity and integrity of interpersonal relationships (V.S. Ageev, V.I. Andreev, N.M. Peisakhov).
However, although the factors of the formation of identification have been studied, the issues related to the substantiation of the means and methods of the formation of identification have not been sufficiently developed, especially in the student group in which the social and professional formation of a young specialist is carried out, socially and professionally important qualities are formed. According to G. M. Andreeva, one of such means can be the development of group cohesion.
An analysis of the scientific literature on the topic of the study made it possible to identify a significant contradiction between the existing need for the purposeful formation of a future specialist's ability to identify with other people and the insufficient development of the means of forming this ability in a social group.
The desire to find ways to resolve this contradiction determined research problem. In theoretical terms, this is the substantiation of the dependence of the formation of a student's social identification at a university on the cohesion of the student group. In practical terms - the definition of means for developing the cohesion of the student group as a factor of social identification.
Object of study- social identification of the student with his study group and the image of a professional.
Subject of study– cohesion of the study group as a factor in the student's social identification.
Purpose of the study - theoretical and experimental substantiation of the relationship between the cohesion of the study group and the social identification of the student at the university.
Research hypothesis. The factor of social identification of a student with his study group is the cohesion of the group, the formation of which is possible with the help of a program of socio-psychological training aimed at: awareness of the individual characteristics of one's own and classmates (cognitive aspect of cohesion); increasing the emotional attractiveness of the group ( emotional aspect); manifestation of options for cooperation, coordination of actions (behavioral aspect); search for common values in the group, formation of an atmosphere of respect for the opinions of group members (value aspect).
Research objectives:
- clarify the content of the concept of "cohesion" of the study group;
- specify the content of the concept of "social identification" of a student with a study group and the image of a professional;
- to identify criteria for assessing and interrelation of the development of the cohesion of the study group at different levels of the group structure and social identification of the student;
- develop and test a program of socio-psychological training for the development of the cohesion of the study group as a factor in the student's social identification.
Scientific novelty of the research:
- clarified the content of the concept of "cohesion" of the study group, which is interpreted as a three-level phenomenon, at the first level manifested in the reciprocity of the choices of classmates based on emotional relationships; at the second level - in coincidence among the members of the group of value orientations related to joint educational activities (COE); on the third - in the formation of the motivational core of the group as the adoption of common, worldview values of a more abstract level;
- the content of the concept of "social identification" of a student is concretized, which is expressed in the ability to identify oneself with classmates in terms of such qualities as intellectual, emotional-volitional, motivational, expressing the attitude towards other people, to the work performed and the image of a professional;
- Criteria have been identified that make it possible to assess the development of the cohesion of the study group as a three-level phenomenon: at the first level - by increasing the reciprocity of choices in situations of joint performance of educational tasks and rest, cognitive, emotional, behavioral and value aspects of cohesion; on the second - in increasing the degree of coincidence of value orientations related to joint activities; on the third - the enlargement of the motivational core of the group as a coincidence of worldview values; the formation of social identification is assessed by qualitative and quantitative changes in identifications with members of the study group and the image of a professional; interrelations of indicators of social identification and cohesion of the group were revealed;
- a program of socio-psychological training for the development of student group cohesion was developed and tested. The program includes sections such as preparatory (analysis and justification of the need to develop the cohesion of the study group, comparison of the effectiveness various forms classes and interactions between the teacher and students), practical (including four blocks of training aimed at reducing psychological tension, expanding perceptual experience, stimulating the activity of participants, gaining experience in group interaction, forming attitudes towards the image of a professional) and final (assessing the results of developing group cohesion, generalizing participants' opinions).
Theoretical significance of the study. The results of the study make it possible to implement a broader approach to solving the problem of using group psychological mechanisms (cohesion and social identification) in a university, expand scientific understanding of the course of identification processes in the study group of a university and the means of their formation through group cohesion, serve as the basis for new scientific developments aimed at to improve the quality of training of future specialists.
Practical significance of the study is that it aims to improve educational activities taking into account the development of cohesion of the student group to increase the effectiveness of group teaching methods, in determining the means that contribute to the development of cohesion and social identification of the student. The development and approbation of the cohesion development program became a prerequisite for creating an active educational environment (the social component of education and upbringing), which contributes to the socialization of the student as a future specialist and professional.
Methodological basis studies were: the concept of different structural levels of interpersonal relations and the manifestations of group cohesion corresponding to them (G.M. Andreeva, A.I. Dontsov, Ya.L. Kolominsky, A.V. Petrovsky, V.V. Shpalinsky); position on the unity of social and psychological factors in the dynamics of group processes (G.M. Andreeva, A.I. Dontsov, R.L. Krichevsky, L.A. Petrovskaya, A.A. Sventsitsky); position on the leading role of joint activity and communication in the development of the group as an integrity (B.F. Lomov, N.N. Obozov, I.P. Volkov); theory of personality development in the context of social relations (V.M.Miniyarov, A.V.Petrovsky, A.Adler, E.Erikson); theories of "social learning" (G.V. Akopov, M.V. Demidenko, A.L. Zhuravlev, A.G. Leaders, B.M. Masterov, V.I. Panov, D.I. Feldstein, G. A. Tsukerman, A. S. Chernyshev, V. A. Yasvin, I. S. Yakimanskaya); works on the student environment, group, functions and stages of development (B.G. Ananiev, M.I. Dyachenko, V.T. Lisovsky, N.N. Obozov, O.I. Perkova); works devoted to the study of social identification as a phenomenon (A.A. Bodalev, A.I. Dontsov, R.L. Krichevsky, B.D. Parygin, N.N. Obozov, B.F. Porshnev, V.A. Yadov , S. Moskovichi, Z. Freud, K. Jung, E. Erikson, P. Berger, T. Lukman); works devoted to the methodology of socio-psychological training (L.A. Petrovskaya, N.I. Frumina, G.N. Zukerman, J. Piaget, K. Whitaker, K. Levin, K. Rudestam, K. Fopel).
To solve the tasks and test the hypothesis, we used the complex methods adequate to the subject of research: theoretical analysis of the problem using psychological, pedagogical and philosophical literature; organizational (method of "contrasting groups"); empirical methods (questionnaires, testing); experimental: ascertaining and forming experiment; methods for determining the level of reliability and significance of the results obtained using the SPSS 12.0 for Windows software package.
Organization and stages of the study.
The study was carried out on the basis of the Samara State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering.
The study involved 27 educational student groups of various specialties of universities in Samara (587 people). An empirical study was conducted in five student groups of the 1st year of engineering specialties who participated in the cohesion development program (considered as an experimental group: 128 people, of which 42 were girls) and in five student groups of the same specialties, course and university, who did not participate in the program development of cohesion (considered as a control group: 120 people, 40 of them girls).
The study was carried out in three stages.
The first stage (1998-2004). The analysis of domestic and foreign literature on various aspects of the problem under study was carried out; the main directions in the study of the cohesion of study groups and the social identification of students were identified. The main contradictions are formulated that determine the need to use the socio-psychological mechanisms of the study group in the theory and practice of teaching in high school. The research problem, object, subject and purpose are defined, the hypothesis, tasks are formulated, research methods are selected.
Second stage (2004 - 2005). A set of methods has been selected to determine the aspects of the cohesion of student groups at the levels of direct emotional contacts, the coincidence of value orientations regarding joint educational activities and a more abstract level, and the level of identification of a student with his study group. Using the methods of qualitative and quantitative analysis, the obtained data are analyzed and summarized. A program of socio-psychological training for the development of the cohesion of the study group, which acts as a factor in the formation of the student's social identification with his study group and the image of a professional, has been developed.
Third stage (2005-2006). In the course of the experimental work, combined with a theoretical analysis of the problem of the formation of social identification based on the use of socio-psychological means of developing the cohesion of the student group in the educational process of the university, the research hypothesis was tested and refined. An analysis of the effectiveness of the experimental work was carried out. The results are systematized, conclusions are formulated, confirming a number of theoretical provisions of the study.
Reliability of results research is ensured by the validity of the methodology and its compliance with the problem; the implementation of research at the theoretical and practical levels; the use of a set of research tools that are adequate to the purpose and subject of the study; statistical verification of the significance of experimental data, confirmed using the Mann-Whitney and Wilcoxon criteria; Fisher's angular transform; Spearman and Kendall's rank correlation method with calculation of correction factors; cluster analysis using the single link method; regression analysis (linear multiple regression); the possibility of implementing research results into practice academic work universities.
Testing and implementation of research results
The results of the study are reflected in articles, abstracts of reports published by the author, and were also discussed at the All-Russian Scientific and Technical Conference “Actual Problems in Construction and Architecture. Education. The science. Practice "(Samara, 2005), All-Russian scientific and practical conference" Actual directions the work of the psychological service in the educational environment "(Balashov, 2005), the All-Russian INTERNET-conference (Tambov, 2005), the All-Russian scientific and practical conference "Professional and personal self-determination of youth in the period of socio-economic stabilization of Russia" (Samara, 2005 d.), regional scientific and methodological conference "Actual problems of multilevel higher vocational education"(Samara, 2005), the All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference "Motivation in the Psychology of Management" (Samara, 2006), in reports made at the Department of Social Sciences and Humanities of the SGASU (2002–2006), the Department of Psychology of the SAGA ( 2004–2006) and the Department of Educational Psychology, SSPU (2006). Research materials put into practice educational process Samara State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Samara Humanitarian Academy.
The work was carried out within the framework of the Russian Foundation for the Humanities, grant No. 07-06-26604 a/B
Provisions for defense:
- Features of the formation of identification are determined by the nature of the development of cohesion (spontaneous or purposeful).
- The formation of social identification is possible during the implementation of a specially designed program of socio-psychological training for the development of cohesion of the study group
- Purposeful implementation of the program of socio-psychological development of cohesion accompanies changes in the structure of the group and leads to an increase in the level of identification of the student with his study group as a whole in the group and in microgroups.
- The development of the cohesion of the study group, accompanied by the growth of social identification of students, is determined by the creation of situations for the manifestation of the individuality of each member of the group, an atmosphere of good mood, respect for the opinions of group members, the opportunity to openly and safely share impressions, cooperation, rapprochement and search for similar values.
Thesis structure corresponds to the logic of the study. The work consists of an introduction, three chapters, a conclusion, a bibliography and an appendix. The text of the work is illustrated with diagrams, tables, diagrams.
The main content of the work
In administered the relevance of the research topic is substantiated, its purpose, object and subject are indicated, hypotheses and research objectives are formulated. The methodological foundations, scientific novelty, theoretical and practical significance of the work are revealed, a meaningful description of the stages of the study and information about the testing of the results are given. The provisions submitted for defense are given.
AT first chapter « Theoretical analysis scientific approaches to the Problem of Social Identification and Cohesion in Domestic and Foreign Psychology” gives an understanding of identification from the point of view of various approaches in psychology, considers various factors in the formation of social identification in the study group, including the study of the cohesion of the study group.
Until now, the concept of "identification" is debatable among scientists of various fields. In a psychological context, the notion of identification was introduced into scientific circulation by Z. Freud as “likening the Self to someone else’s Self”, and this process presupposes the presence of an identifying subject, an identifiable object and a third element (separate individuals, social group, ethnos, personal qualities significant others, professional ideal). Psychoanalytic scientists in understanding the concept of “identification” focus on the “initial emotional connection with the object”, for example, “good breasts” (M. Klein), “the process of achieving human status” (R. Spitz), “suppression of instinctive desires” ( A. Freud), and the interpretation of "imitation processes of parental gestures, feelings, words, desires" (D. Koff, W. Martin, W. Meissner, S. Stoke, R. Schafer). For E. Erickson, identification means the desire of a person to acquire a psychosocial identity with certain social groups.
The concept of "identification" as a process of acquiring ready-made forms of behavior of others, leading through reinforcements to the formation of a secondary motivational system or a generalized skill of imitation, is considered by most adherents of behaviorism. They comprehend identification through the concept of copying the "model" of behavior (A. Bandura), through the context social structure socialization (P. Berger and T. Lukman), conflict of interest (M. Sheriff, D. Campbell).
In the positions of the cognitive approach in understanding the phenomenon of identification, the main role is played by categorization as structuring the variety of stimuli of the external world into a more ordered set of individual categories by analyzing, comparing, categorizing, assimilation, accommodation, determining the meaning and value of the content of the identification model (G. Tashfel and J. Turner ) or "identification matrix" as a special categorical system in the subject's knowledge system ("dynamic model" S. Moscovici, T. Shibutani). To remove inconsistencies in categorizations, the individual develops "explanatory concepts".
In domestic psychology, many researchers focus on the affective component of identification, as in psychoanalysis. So, A.V. Petrovsky notes that identification is “an act of interpersonal identification, in which the experiences of others are given to individuals as their own”. In addition to the emotional (N.N. Avdeeva, E.M. Dubovskaya, R.L. Krichevsky, V.S. Sobkin), identification is moral (T.Z. Kozlova) and behavioral (V.A. Bratchikov, E .N.Danilova, S.G.Klimova) a personality regulator associated with the formation of self-consciousness (F.R. Malyukova) and the semantic sphere of personality (E.Z. Basina); may accompany the development of personality (V.S. Mukhina, V.V. Stolyarov, K.G. Jung), leading to the emergence of conflicting value systems and a forced change in patterns of social interaction (I.A. Klimov, T.G. Stefanenko ) and expressed in ethnic and gender stereotypes (M.S. Andrianov). The concept of identification was also considered as “likening individuals to each other” (N.N. Obozov, B.F. Porshnev), the coincidence of goals and values of intergroup interaction (V.S. Ageev).
This concept, N.N. Avdeeva believes, “... this is a genetically initial concept in the study of the processes of mutual understanding”, together with her and B.D. Parygin defines identification as the basis of mutual understanding: “If the external manifestations of mutual understanding are the ability to empathize and empathy and sympathy, consistency in joint actions, then the inner, deep basis of all these phenomena is the ability for mutual assimilation, for identification. The deep essence of the studied phenomenon is emphasized by E.3.Basina: "the specific role of identification in the comprehension of reality by a person in reincarnation, likening it, and not due to the study of an object from the outside, in its externally expressed properties."
E.M. Dubovskaya pays special attention to the behavioral characteristics of the phenomenon, highlighting the levels of identification based on how it manifests itself in behavior.
Identification can act as an externally given phenomenon, as a result and form of relationships, having a constantly reproducible (more or less pronounced) result - a special quality of a person (identity). Assigning rules of behavior, norms, patterns of behavior in the process of identification, a person acquires identity as coherence, a sense of unity for himself or as a set (range) of symbolic means of self-expression that determine the attitude to various social categories.
We share the point of view of N.N. Obozov, who analyzes identification as a set of affective, cognitive and behavioral processes. However, we do not agree with the fact that the author singles out cognitive identification as an independent phenomenon, defining it, following the representatives of the cognitive-oriented direction, as “a subjective idea of the identity own properties partner properties. We believe that along with cognitive identification as independent phenomena, there are emotional and behavioral components of identification.
Among the forms of organization of training in the university for the formation of identification, we note the psychological-pedagogical and correctional.
The purpose of the psychological and pedagogical direction is to correlate the identification of the I-real (student) with the I-future (professional). Here, the identification formation factors are the organization of a professionally oriented educational environment, the study of students as a social community to study the influence various factors on the identification process, the consequences of the presence or absence of this process, the professional career support program.
The purpose of the corrective direction is to influence certain aspects of future and present professional activity. These are socio-psychological trainings, business, role-playing games, imitating professional activity, business communication skills, interaction of a person with a profession (E.F. Zeer, L.M. Mitina, A.K. Markova). This leads to a change in subjective characteristics (attitudes, relationships, needs, behavior, etc.) in the interaction of this person with another or a system that communicates with him (G.A. Kovalev).
Thus, the factors of the formation of identification in a higher educational institution are mainly reduced to various forms of organization of the educational process. This is due to the fact that the social and professional development of a student is influenced by the characteristics of the study group, in which individual characteristics student, including ideas about the image of a professional. With spontaneous identification, we may encounter unhealthy, antisocial behavior of individual groups.
Under the condition that many individuals join the study group at the same time, their activity is organized not simply as outwardly prescribed, but as “appropriated” by the group. In this case, according to G.M. Andreeva, “the process of its further development appears as a process of its ever greater rallying”. Therefore, as the most important characteristic structure of the group and dynamic processes, cohesion and its development can be considered as a factor of social identification in the group (V.S. Ageev, N.N. Obozov, B.F. Porshnev, V.A. Yadov, Z. Freud, M. Sheriff ).
The study of cohesion in the unity of emotional, value and activity approaches formed the basis of A.V. Petrovsky’s “stratometric concept of group activity”. We adhere to his idea that the entire structure of a small group can be thought of as consisting of three layers, or "strata": the outer level of the group structure (emotional interpersonal relationships); the second layer (COE as a coincidence for the members of the group of orientations to the core values regarding the process of joint activity); the third layer is the "core" of the group structure, which implies an even greater acceptance of common values of the abstract level: values associated with a more general attitude to work, to others, to the world. Three layers of group structures can be simultaneously considered as three levels of group cohesion.
Then the development of cohesion implies the development of intra-group bonds at the levels under consideration.
We draw attention to the fact that in real groups there are substructures (microgroups) characterized by a higher intensity of interaction than in the whole group (A.A. Rean, Ya.L. Kolominsky, V.A. Yakunin), and this is necessary take into account when analyzing processes in the study group
An analysis of the interrelations of such a factor in the formation of social identification as the development of cohesion of the study group that we have identified will expand our understanding of the processes of identification in the study group, using the results obtained to organize group work in the educational process and improve the quality of training.
In the second chapter"Organization and conduct of an experimental study of the cohesion of the study group as a factor of social identification" describes the stages of the study, justifies the choice of methods, criteria for assessing the development of cohesion and social identification. The content of the program of socio-psychological training for the development of cohesion of the study group is given.
The study was conducted in the period from 1998 to 2006 on the basis of the Samara State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering at such stages as: theoretical, ascertaining experiment (diagnostics and calculations), forming experiment, re-diagnostic, stages of statistical analysis and hypothesis evaluation.
To participate in the study, five study groups of the 1st year of engineering specialties were involved as an experimental group participating in the program of socio-psychological training for the development of cohesion and five groups that did not participate in the training (control group). The program of socio-psychological training for the development of cohesion of the study group includes three sections: preparatory, practical and final.
The preparatory section included an analysis and substantiation of the need to develop the cohesion of the study group, studied the features of the implementation of individual exercises and their combinations in strictly temporary and specific conditions for conducting training in classrooms. The effectiveness of various forms of classes, their intensity and features of interactions between students and the teacher were studied.
The practical section describes a system of methods for developing the cohesion of the study group, purposefully contributing to the emergence of similar opinions, orientations, attitudes in relation to significant events, group unity of emotional relations, actions and values, affecting, respectively, the cognitive, emotional, value, behavioral aspects of cohesion.
The final section included an assessment of the results of the development of cohesion of the student group, a generalization of the participants' opinions on the perception of exercises, blocks and training in general, preparing the transition to a re-diagnostic and statistical steps research and formulation of conclusions to prove the research hypotheses.
To assess the effectiveness of the training program, we have formed a set of psychodiagnostic methods that allow us to evaluate changes in cohesion and identification.
The study of indicators of the cohesion of the study group was carried out: at the first structural level - using a non-parametric sociometric survey with dual criteria for assessing the cognitive, emotional, behavioral and value aspects of cohesion, as well as situations of joint performance of educational tasks and rest; at the second level - V.V. Shpalinsky's methods for studying the degree of COE and at the third level - using the MTLC questionnaire (L.V. Karpushina, V.F. Sopov) and cluster analysis of its results to study the coincidence of worldview values. The method of microgroups allocation was used, taking into account the positive status of group members and coefficients of interpersonal compatibility (A.V. Kaptsov, N.N. Obozov).
To study the identification of a student with classmates, we used the TSI-M test, developed by A.V. Bulgakov based on the repertoire method of J. Kelly. The members of the group filled out an individual identification matrix, in which they correlated themselves with the members of their group (role identifications) according to five polar qualities-constructs from the Atlas of personality traits of A.G. Shmelev (intellectual, emotional-volitional, motivational, attitude towards other people and towards the performed work). Next, a group identification matrix was compiled. The identification of a student with the image of a professional was studied using a questionnaire consisting of pairs of statements opposite in meaning and describing his ideas.
In the third chapter"Analysis of the results of an experimental study of cohesion in the study group as a factor in the student's social identification" the analysis of the results of the ascertaining and forming experiment on the development of cohesion in the study group is given and their interpretation for the spontaneous and purposeful development of cohesion and social identification is given, the relationship between the studied values is revealed, conclusions are formulated research.
At the ascertaining stage of the experiment, there were no differences in the number/gender composition, level of social status, place of residence. All students in the groups are first-year students and are collected according to formal criteria, they study according to the same curriculum. The beginning of the study was the stage of life of the group after a month of study at the university, which is due to the use of a sociometric survey, which is recommended to be carried out no less than 3-4 weeks of coexistence of the group (I.P. Volkov, Ya.L. Kolominsky).
At the stage of the ascertaining experiment, at the first structural level of cohesion (emotional contacts), all the studied groups can be characterized as uncohesive, non-referential, with a small number of mutually negating pairs. The greatest cohesion and reference, the least stratification of the group is noted in a situation of joint rest. At the second structural level, an equally low level of COE development (0.3) is observed. There were no differences (Fisher's test) in terms of the degree and level of identification, the feeling of belonging to a group, which have low and medium values. Average values are noted for all components of identification with the standard of a professional.
The absence of differences between the studied groups at the stage of the ascertaining experiment confirms the homogeneity of the sample and the randomness of further division into experimental (participating in the cohesion development program) and control (not participating in the program).
Exploring the relationship between cohesion and social identification, the results were subjected to correlation analysis (Spearman's rank correlation) (see Table 1).
Table 1
Spearman's rank correlation coefficients of r criteria and aspects of cohesion and intensity of identification of a student with a group
| Coefficient of cohesion Criteria | Cgr | Spn | MSPL | R | Sgr | Cr |
| Co-study | 0,76 | 0,84 | 0,33 | 0,44 | 0,72 | -0,85 |
| Joint rest | -0,26 | -0,54 | 0,68 | -0,56 | 0,79 | -0,17 |
| cognitive | 0,38 | 0,18 | 0,35 | 0,25 | 0,37 | -0,13 |
| Emotional | -0,37 | -0,28 | 0,08 | -0,49 | -0,37 | -0,13 |
| Behavioral | 0,42 | 0,39 | -0,52 | 0,21 | -0,61 | 0,13 |
| valuable | 0,45 | 0,58 | -0,17 | -0,61 | -0,23 | -0,01 |
| Professional | 0,08 | 0,18 | -0,22 | 0,11 | -0,34 | 0,34 |
Note. Significant relationships are highlighted in bold type (for the significance level p 0.05 r > 0.72, for the level p 0.01 r > 0.88).
Analysis of Table 1 shows that the intensity of identification has significant relationships only in the areas of joint study and recreation, determining the measure and magnitude of cohesion, interpersonal compatibility and stratification of the group. Moreover, an increase in the desire to complete tasks together in laboratory, practical classes and relax together is associated with an increase in the measure and value of cohesion, as well as the coefficient of interpersonal compatibility, but at the same time with an increase in the group stratification coefficient. These contradictory, at first glance, results can be explained by the active passage of the stage of adaptation, selection and enumeration of future partners in educational interaction and recreation.
To adequately describe the dependence of some variables on others, we used regression analysis (linear multiple regression). The dependent variable was the coefficient of identification intensity (II), and the independent variables were the cohesion indicators calculated by us based on the results of a sociometric survey. The previous correlation analysis of the cohesion coefficients revealed significant correlations between the coefficients Сgr, Сн, Мсм and R, therefore, we excluded these coefficients from the list of independent variables, and the coefficients Sgr and Кр were left for regression analysis.
Regression analysis was carried out using the statistical package SPSS 12.0 for Windows. Table 2 shows the values of the regression constant Const, standardized (st) and non-standardized (nst) -coefficients, initial Rin and adjusted multiple determination coefficients Rcorr, Fisher's test F, and the significance level of calculated p values for predictor II.
table 2
Regression analysis results
| Sociometric survey criteria | CСonst | Sgr | Cr | RRin | RRcorrect | F F | R | ||
| SST | nnst | cSt | nnst | ||||||
| Studies | 00,287 | 00,391 | 0,285 | 0,544 | 0,711 | 0,883 | 0,779 | 8,82 | 0,023 |
| Relaxation | 0,959 | 0,925 | 0,791 | 0,011 | 0,006 | 0,788 | 0,621 | 4,1 | 0,029 |
| cognitive | 0,393 | 0,393 | 0,343 | 0,093 | 0,175 | 0,412 | 0,17 | 0,511 | 0,04 |
| Emotional | 0,773 | 0,631 | 0,363 | 0,51 | 0,079 | 0,381 | 0,145 | 0,426 | 0,67 |
| Behavioral | 0,627 | 0,462 | 0,744 | 0,417 | 0,379 | 0,814 | 0,704 | 2,06 | 0,03 |
| valuable | 0,736 | 0,535 | 0,242 | -0,022 | 0,043 | 0,24 | 0,32 | 0,152 | 0,86 |
| Professional | 0,64 | 0,547 | 0,639 | 0,507 | 0,641 | 0,664 | 0,218 | 1,976 | 0,06 |
Significant regression equations (р<0,05). Анализ Таблицы 2 показывает, что данный набор предикторов обеспечивает высокие уровни значимости и процент объясненной дисперсии в основном по критериям совместного отдыха и учебы, когнитивному и поведенческому критериям. Увеличение межличностной совместимости и снижение расслоения группы в ситуациях совместного отдыха, осознания особенностей собственных и своих одногруппников, особенно среди тех, на чье поведение ориентируются в группе, вносит положительный вклад в становление идентификации.
The results obtained at the stage of the ascertaining experiment confirm the existence of a relationship and the primacy of cohesion in relation to social identification, thereby giving grounds for implementing the program for developing the cohesion of the study group as a factor in the formation of social identification.
First, let us consider the question of the effectiveness of the cohesion development training program we have developed. To do this, we will identify differences in the results of repeated diagnostics between the control and experimental groups (see Table 3).
Analysis of Table 3 shows that in the control groups (with spontaneous development of cohesion) in indicators of cohesion at the first level - emotional contacts, the changes are chaotic and generally tend to decrease, especially in reference and interpersonal compatibility; most of the coefficients do not change (criterion *emp<1,4 при *кр >1.56); at the second structural level (the degree of COE), the choice of qualities that reflect the attitude towards oneself has increased (Wilcoxon's Wemp criterion<3 при Wкр=5 для р <0,05). Учебные группы по-прежнему остаются на низком уровне развития (степень ЦОЕ С=0,3), для них характерна разобщенность ценностно-ориентационного пространства группы.
Changes in the experimental groups can be characterized as: at the first level - multiple and varied, tending to increase. In all groups, the degree and measure of cohesion in terms of the emotional aspect increased, i.e. the groups began to trust each other more, the coefficients of sociometric cohesion, reference and interpersonal compatibility increased in a situation of joint recreation, and in 4 out of 5 experimental groups - in a situation of joint study. The stratification coefficient has increased, i.e. the study group has become much more homogeneous.
At the second structural level in the experimental groups in the degree of COE, the choice of qualities that generally characterize learning activity has increased, there is a sharp increase in the degree of COE, the groups are approaching a higher level of development, the value-orientation space is more homogeneous (Wilcoxon's Wemp criterion).<2,5 при Wкр=5 для р <0.05).
Table 3
Generalized results of the study of cohesion and social identification in study groups (“before” - the stage of the ascertaining experiment, “after” - after the formative experiment, statistically significant results are marked in bold)
| coefficient | Name | Research results | |||||||
| Control | Experiment. | ||||||||
| before | Rep | before | repeat | ||||||
| % u s e r e | UI | identification level. | 25-32 | 30-38 | 20-45 | 96-100 | |||
| organized crime group | feeling of belonging to a group | 20-38 | 34-38 | 20-46 | 71-85 | ||||
| SI | degree of identification | 35-40 | 30-35 | 30-48 | 45-52 | ||||
| GChK | group identification in the semantic space of group members | 10-47 | 20-44 | 10-57 | 55-95 | ||||
| Prof. | Identification with a professional | 0-40 | 0-30 | 10-50 | 50-75 | ||||
| ii | Group index of identification intensity | 0,48-0,59 | 0,51-0,6 | 0,5-0,59 | 0,74-0,81 | ||||
| Cgr | Index of "sociometric cohesion of the group" | 0,02-0,12 | 0,03-0,14 | 0,0 – 0,18 | 0,02-0,43 | ||||
| Spn | Reciprocity coefficient | 0,08-0,43 | 0,01-0,36 | 0,07-0,37 | 0,13-0,63 | ||||
| MSPL | Measure of group cohesion | 0,1-0,35 | 0,12-0,36 | 0,06-0,35 | 0,15-0,68 | ||||
| Kn | Conflict Index | 0-0,02 | 0-0,02 | 0-0,02 | 0-0,01 | ||||
| R | Reference index. | 0,22-0,48 | 0,23-0,45 | 0,2-0,46 | 0,23-0,66 | ||||
| Ku | Relationship Stability Coefficient | 0,4 – 0,85 | 0,3-0,85 | ||||||
| Cr | Group spread coefficient | 0,05-0,38 | 0,18-0,32 | 0,07-0,35 | 0,35-1,00 | ||||
| FROM | COE level | 0,29-0,34 | 0,29-0,38 | 0,26-0,32 | 0,5-0,53 | ||||
The analysis of changes at the third structural level as a result of the cluster analysis carried out using the single link method is represented by changes in the motivational core of the studied groups. In the control groups, there was and remains a disunity of views, attitudes regarding worldview values, there are multiple groupings. In the experimental groups, the development of cohesion leads to the fact that from the existing groupings there are closely related formations - motivational cores, and their composition coincides with the microgroups identified by us on the basis of a positive status and interpersonal compatibility coefficient by 60-80%.
Thus, the identified differences show the effectiveness of the developed program for the development of cohesion, leading in the experimental groups to the optimization of relationships and structure, which differ from the spontaneous process of development of cohesion in the control groups.
Characterizing the changes in the indicators of identification, let's say that in all control groups there were no differences and changes in the degree and level of identification (Wilcoxon test Wamp> 8 with Wcr<5 для р<0,05), которые, по-прежнему, очень малы, так же как и ощущение принадлежности к группе (в основном средние значения данного индекса). Исключение составляет возросшая степень единства групповых семантических представлений по критерию «дружелюбный-неприветливый» (критерий Вилкоксона Wэмп <4,5 при Wкр <5 для р<0,05).
In the experimental groups, there is an increase in the level of identification and a sense of belonging to a group, an increase in the index of semantic unity according to the criterion of activity, organization and friendliness (Fischer's criterion * emp<1,225 при *кр>1.56)
Analyzing the changes in the group index of the intensity of identification of a student with his study group, we note that the initial values of the intensity of identification show approximately the same level in all the studied groups, and the tendency to identify oneself approximately on average with every second of the group. With the course of training in the control groups, the situation does not change, no differences were found between the results. In the experimental groups, there is an increase in the desire for identification.
Thus, the work shows that during spontaneous development, the cohesion of the group and identification changes slightly, remaining at a low level, while the purposeful development of cohesion leads to its growth, increasing, in turn, identification with the group.
Consider how the attitude towards the image of a professional is changing.
Table 4 shows the results of studying changes in the distribution of identification components with the image of a professional.
Table 4
Changes in students' perceptions of the image of a professional
(significant changes are highlighted in bold), %
| № | Changes | Control | experimental | ||||||
| cogn | Emotions | behavior | valuable | cogn | emots | behavior | valuable | ||
| 1 | On the positive side | 0 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 90 | 75 | 75 | 70 |
| 2 | Zero | 75 | 80 | 75 | 70 | 10 | 25 | 25 | 30 |
| 3 | in a negative direction | 25 | 15 | 20 | 30 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
In the experimental groups (Wilcoxon test Wemp< Wкр <5 и для р<0,05) не осталось ни одного испытуемого даже с нулевым уровнем, не говоря уже о негативном отношении. Это подтверждает литературные данные, что возникновение идентификации с объектом приводит к более позитивному к нему отношению (критерий знаков Gэмп=Gкр=0). Кроме того, в экспериментальных группах половина и более студентов имеют высокий положительный уровень идентификации по всем компонентам (максимальный балл), т.е. тренинг повлиял на представление о профессиональных возможностях и действиях настоящих профессионалов, придал большую эмоциональную привлекательность и ценность будущей профессии по сравнению с контрольными группами мы наблюдаем даже снижение привлекательности профессии критерий (*эмп<1,4 при *кр <1,56), не говоря уж о части студентов, которые так и остались равнодушными к будущей специальности.
When identifying the relationship between the degree of COE and the intensity of identification, the Kendall correlation method was used with the calculation of correction factors. Note that in groups with formed identification, an increase in the degree of COE is associated with an even more increasing desire for identification with the training group (a measure of consistency from 0.52% to 0.74% of the variance), and in control groups - on the contrary (from 0.5% up to 0.42%).
It is of interest to consider how the nature of the development of cohesion is reflected in the microstructure of the group.
Initially, in the selected microgroups, the degree of CFU is higher than in the group as a whole, but in all the studied groups it is in the range of 0.3–0.5 (low). Repeated measurement of COE indicates the absence of significant changes in the control groups (Mann-Whitney test Uemp> 3 at Ucr<1), а в экспериментальных увеличение степени ЦОЕ выводит группы на более высокий уровень развития (более 0,5) (Uэмп In the microgroups of the control groups, there is a tendency either to the absence of changes (such are the majority) (sign criterion Gemp>Gcr>0), or to a less favorable attitude towards the image of a professional and future professional activity. In the microgroups of the experimental groups, there is a general group tendency towards a more positive attitude towards the future profession and the image of a professional. The number of rejected members has changed from 75% to 10% compared to the control groups, where the number of rejected members is 75-95% of the number of people in the student group. Consequently, the conducted research allows us to conclude that the implementation of the study group development program contributes to a more positive attitude of the student towards his classmates and the image of a professional, leads to a more pronounced coincidence of choices and values related to joint educational activities. The changes that take place in the experimental groups testify to the effectiveness of the student cohesion development program. AT imprisonment The dissertation summarizes the results of the study, outlines its main conclusions, confirming the hypothesis and the provisions submitted for defense, and outlines the prospects for further research. A theoretical analysis of the literature has shown that identification serves as an important mechanism for interpersonal communication, cognition and interaction of people, but the factors for the formation of identification have not yet been sufficiently studied, especially in the study group of the university, in which the student is socially and professionally formed as a future specialist. The paper substantiates consideration of the development of cohesion of the study group as such a factor, stimulating the process of identification. Under the social identification of a student, we mean the ability to identify oneself with classmates in terms of such qualities as intellectual, emotional-volitional, motivational, reflecting the attitude towards people and the work performed and the image of a professional. We have clarified the content of the concept of cohesion, understood as a three-level phenomenon, manifested at the first level in the reciprocity of the choices of classmates; as a coincidence among members of the group of value orientations related to joint activities (COE) at the second level and worldview values at the third level. Criteria have been identified that make it possible to assess the development of the cohesion of the study group as a three-level phenomenon, at the first level - by increasing the reciprocity of choices in situations of joint performance of educational tasks and rest, cognitive, emotional, behavioral and value aspects of cohesion; at the second level - by increasing the degree of coincidence of value orientations related to joint educational activities; on the third - consolidation of the motivational core of the group as a coincidence of worldview values; the formation of social identification is assessed by the qualitative and quantitative changes in identifications with group members and the image of a professional. The developed and tested program of socio-psychological training for the development of cohesion of the student group made it possible to substantiate the possibility and necessity of developing the cohesion of the study group, conducting socio-psychological training made it possible to expand perceptual experience, stimulate the activity of participants in acquiring experience in group interaction, form a positive attitude towards the image of a professional, evaluate the results development of cohesion of the group and to summarize the opinions of the program participants. The effectiveness of the program was determined, which is determined by various changes in the experimental groups compared to the control ones. The primacy of cohesion in relation to identification has been established, i.e. it is the development of the cohesion of the study group that leads to an increase in the intensity of identification of the student with his study group. The results of the study showed the dependence of the formation of social identification on the nature of cohesion: the spontaneous development of the cohesion of the study group is not accompanied by an increase in the studied indicators, the groups remain at a diffuse level of development, and their members show a slight desire to identify with classmates, the processes of individualization and isolation go on more than assimilation. In groups with developing cohesion, we observe an increase in the reciprocity and adequacy of choices, the emergence of similar opinions, experiences, behavior, values, as well as a more benevolent attitude towards the image of a professional. In microgroups, similar tendencies are observed, which are characteristic of the whole group. The reliability of the changes is confirmed by the increase in the above indicators. The obtained data confirm our hypothesis. Thus, the results of the study led to the conclusion that cohesion determines the characteristics of the student's social identification, and if the development of cohesion, and therefore identification, is not carried out specifically (as in control groups), then the spontaneous formation of these phenomena occurs inefficiently. And, despite the fact that a number of scientists recognize the group as a self-organizing system, it must be recognized that a small push is needed to optimize group processes, for example, the socio-psychological trainings we conducted to develop the cohesion of the study group. The results obtained can be used in the practice of psychological service at the university to improve teaching and educational work, to enhance the personal and professional potential of future specialists. They will make it possible to implement a broader approach to solving the problems of the quality of training of higher education graduates. The study makes a significant contribution to the development of the problem of the formation of social identification in the university. However, the results and conclusions obtained do not claim to fully cover all aspects of this complex problem of the formation of social identification. In particular, the issue of the influence of personal characteristics of students of the studied groups needs a deeper theoretical and empirical study. The main content of the dissertation is reflected in the following Similar works: "Karavanova Lyudmila Zhalalovna Professional and personal development of a social work specialist during the period of university education Specialty: 19.00.07 - pedagogical psychology ABSTRACT of the dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Psychology Moscow 2012 Social University Scientific consultant:...» "Matveeva Natalia Alexandrovna The influence of television on the formation of value orientations of adolescents and ways to overcome its negative consequences 19.00.05 - social psychology Abstract of the dissertation for the degree of candidate of psychological sciences Kursk 2009 The work was done in the State educational institution of higher professional education Voronezh State Pedagogical University Supervisor: doctor of psychological sciences, ... " «KAGALNITSKAYA Oksana Grigoryevna Psychological features of stereotyping girls’ life-meaning orientations at the initial stage of professional self-determination 19.00.07 – Pedagogical psychology (psychological sciences) ABSTRACT of the dissertation for the degree of Candidate of Psychological Sciences Rostov-on-Don 2006 The work was done at the Rostov State University at the Department of Pedagogy and educational psychology. Scientific adviser: doctor...» “Zybina Lyudmila Nikolaevna Structural components and dynamics of the professional orientation of personality (on the material of a student sample) Specialty 19.00.01 – general psychology, personality psychology, history of psychology ABSTRACT of the dissertation for the degree of candidate of psychological sciences Novosibirsk – 2009 The work was done at the Department of Personality Psychology and special psychology in a state educational institution of higher professional education ... " «PANTSYR SERGEY NIKOLAEVICH INTRAPERSONAL CONFLICTS OF TEENAGERS WITH DEVIANT BEHAVIOR 19.00.13 - Developmental Psychology, acmeology Abstract of the dissertation for the degree of Candidate of Psychological Sciences Moscow - 2012 The work was done at the Department of Differential Psychology of the Moscow City Psychological and Pedagogical University Supervisor: Candidate of Psychological Sciences.. ." "Lupenko Elena Anatolyevna Psychological nature of intermodal generality of sensations Specialty 19.00.01 - general psychology, personality psychology, history of psychology Abstract of the dissertation for the degree of candidate of psychological sciences Moscow 2008 The work was done in the laboratory of developmental psychology of the Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences Scientific supervisor - Doctor of Psychology , professor Sergienko Elena Alekseevna Official opponents - doctor ... " «Zotova Olga Yurievna SOCIAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL SECURITY OF THE PERSON Specialty: 19.00.05 – Social psychology (psychological sciences) ABSTRACT of the dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Psychology Moscow – 2011 AT. Lomonosov Scientific consultant: Zinchenko Yury Petrovich - doctor ... " «Shevchenko Anna Alexandrovna PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTENT AND FEATURES OF THE APPEARANCE OF PROFESSIONAL DESTRUCTIONS OF THE PERSON Specialty 19.00.01 – General psychology, personality psychology, history of psychology Abstract of the dissertation for the degree of candidate of psychological sciences Chelyabinsk – 2012 The work was done at South Ural State University (national research University) Supervisor – Doctor of Psychology,...» «BELYANIN Valery Pavlovich PSYCHOLINGUISTIC PREDICTORS OF ACCENTED PERSONALITY FEATURES Specialty 19.00.01 – General psychology, personality psychology, history of psychology (psychological sciences) ABSTRACT of the dissertation for the degree of Candidate of Psychological Sciences Rostov-on-Don 2008 The work was done at the Kaluga State Pedagogical University. K.E. Tsiolkovsky. Scientific adviser - doctor of psychological sciences, doctor ... " “Melnikova Nina Vasilyevna development of the MORAL SPHERE OF THE PERSONALITY OF THE PRESCHOOL CHILD 19.00.13 – developmental psychology, acmeology Abstract of the dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Psychology Kazan - 2009 The work was done in the state educational institution of higher professional education Kurgan State University Scientific consultant: Doctor of Psychology, Professor Ovcharova Raisa Viktorovna Official opponents: Doctor...» "Novikov Mikhail Gennadievich Professional activity of the collective subject of labor of the university in the formation of the social and psychological climate of the student group Specialty: 19.00.03 - labor psychology, engineering psychology, ergonomics Abstract of the dissertation for the degree of candidate of psychological sciences Tver 2011 Dissertation work completed on Department of Labor Psychology, Organizational and Clinical Psychology, GOU VPO Tver State ... " «GEBEL Kira Manfredovna DYNAMICS OF CLINICAL AND MEDICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS IN THE PROCESS OF REHABILITATION OF PATIENTS WITH SCHIZOPHRENIA WHO LOST SOCIAL CONNECTIONS Specialties: 14.00.18 psychiatry 19.00.04 - medical psychology Abstract of the dissertation for the degree of Candidate of Medical Sciences09 St. Petersburg Petersburg Research Psychoneurological Institute. V. M. Bekhterev of the Federal Agency for ... " "POPOVA Oksana Sergeevna Psychological support for the development of the personality of students in the process of vocational and secondary specialized education Specialty: 19.00.07 - pedagogical psychology ABSTRACT of the dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Psychology Moscow 2013 The work was done at the Department of Psychology of the educational institution Belarusian State Pedagogical University named after Maxim Tanka Official opponents: Grigorovich Lyubov...» "SERGEEVA Anastasia Sergeevna GENRE-THEMATIC STRUCTURE A OF THE DISCOURSE FIELD OF ORGANIZATION Specialty 19.00.03 - Labor Psychology, Engineering Psychology, Ergonomics (Psychological Sciences) ABSTRACT of the dissertation for the degree of Candidate of Psychological Sciences Moscow - 2012 The work was done at the Department of Ergonomics and Engineering Psychology of the Faculty of Psychology Federal State Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education...» “Dobrovidova Natalya Aleksandrovna features of the emotional-volitional sphere of high school students and students with different levels of computer gaming activity Specialty 19.00.07 – pedagogical psychology General and Social Psychology of the Samara Branch of the State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education Moscow City Pedagogical University Supervisor - Doctor ... " "ZAKHAROVA Olga Leonidovna DEVELOPMENT OF A CHILD'S READINESS FOR SCHOOL IN THE CONDITIONS OF DIFFERENT AGE GROUPS OF KINDERGARTEN 19.00.07 - pedagogical psychology ABSTRACT of the dissertation for the degree of candidate of psychological sciences Moscow 2006 The work was done at the department of general and social psychology of Kurgan State University Scientific adviser doctor of psychological sciences, professor Schneider..." “Gudkova Elena Vladimirovna GLOBAL RELATIONS OF THE PERSON TO HIMSELF AND TO THE WORLD Specialty 19.00.01 – General psychology, personality psychology, history of psychology Department of General Psychology, South Ural State University "KHALIFAEVA OLGA ALEKSEEVNA Psychological conditions for the development of adolescent creativity in the educational process 19.00.13 - developmental psychology, acmeology ABSTRACT of the dissertation for the degree of candidate of psychological sciences Astrakhan - 2007 The work was done at the department of developmental psychology, acmeology of the Astrakhan State University Sci., Professor Kaigorodov Boris Vladislavovich Official opponents:...» «Esenkova Natalya Yuryevna INTERRELATION OF LEARNING MOTIVATION AND PROFESSIONAL ORIENTATION OF THE DOCTOR AT THE STAGE OF TRAINING IN UNIVERSITY 19.00.07 - pedagogical psychology ABSTRACT of the dissertation for the degree of candidate of psychological sciences Kursk - 2010 The work was done in the State educational institution of higher professional education Kursk State Medical University of the Federal Agency for Health and Social Development Scientific...» «UDK 159.9:370 Filipovich Elena Ivanovna THE CRISIS OF PROFESSIONAL CHOICE OF PSYCHOLOGIST STUDENTS AT THE INITIAL STAGE OF TRAINING AND THE CONDITIONS FOR OVERCOMING ITS 19.00.07 – pedagogical psychology (psychological sciences) ABSTRACT of the dissertation for the degree of candidate of psychological sciences Recommended for publication Chairman of the Dissertation Council,.. ." GROUP CONSISTENCY IN STUDENT GROUPS 1-2 AND 4-5 COURSES Suslova Yulia Alekseevna
3rd year student, faculty of psychology, valeology and sports, KSU, RF, Kurgan Nikolaeva Irina Alexandrovna
scientific supervisor, Ph.D. psychol. Sciences, Associate Professor, Department of General and Social Psychology, KSU, Russian Federation, Kurgan Considering the patterns of development of a small group as a certain combination of the processes of group differentiation and integration, cohesion or unity of the group can be singled out as one of the main parameters of the development of a small group. The concept of "cohesion" is used to refer to such socio-psychological characteristics of a small group as: the degree of psychological community, the unity of group members, the closeness and stability of interpersonal relationships and interaction, the degree of emotional attractiveness of the group for its members. In other words, cohesion is the interest of the members of the group in its existence. The first empirical studies of group cohesion began in Western social psychology in the school of group dynamics. L. Festinger defined group cohesion as the result of the influence of all forces acting on group members in order to keep them in it. As the forces that keep the individual in the group, the emotional attractiveness of the group for its members, the usefulness of the group for the individual and the related satisfaction of individuals with their membership in this group were considered. group cohesion- it's the same an indicator of the strength, stability and coherence of the work of the group, it is based on interpersonal relationships between people. Group cohesion is influenced by various factors that can both increase it and significantly reduce it. The most important factors of group cohesion include: the size of the group, the composition of the group, the success of the group, the amount of time that group members spend together, etc. The relevance of research problems of cohesion is determined by the influence of this phenomenon on the effectiveness of the group and the development of the individual. The cohesion of the group determines its progress, the number of students who are expelled, etc. The cohesion of the group improves the socio-psychological climate and student satisfaction with their life in the group. Group support, which is characteristic of a cohesive group, liberates the individual, increases self-esteem, freedom of expression and creativity. The degree of development of a scientific problem. The phenomenon of group cohesion was studied by such scientists as L. Festinger, T. Newcomb, A.I. Dontsov, A.V. Petrovsky, Ya.L. Moreno and others. The American psychologist L. Festinger was one of the first to devote a number of empirical studies to group cohesion, and he owns one of the first definitions of group cohesion. Cohesion is not a uniquely positive phenomenon. In a number of cases, cohesion can arise in conditions of competitive struggle between groups or leaders and groups, in conditions of an external threat, or as conformal unanimity in conditions of authoritarian leadership. The consequences of such cohesion may be the search for a "scapegoat" in the group, the fear of punishment (expulsion), as well as group thinking, reduced responsibility. But, nevertheless, in most cases, group members perceive cohesion as an achievement of the group and dream that their groups are cohesive. Cohesion is a dynamic phenomenon, it is associated with the life history of the group, and, as follows from the theories of the development of the team by A.V. Petrovsky and L.I. Umansky, the group must go through several stages in its development in order to become cohesive. Thus, it takes time to build cohesion. In this regard, we have made the study of cohesion throughout the existence of the student group the goal of our work. Target Work: To study group cohesion in student groups in different courses of study. An object: group cohesion in student groups of 1-2 and 4-5 courses of the university. Subject: features of cohesion in student groups of 1-2 and 4-5 courses of the university. Hypothesis: Group cohesion among students of 1-2 courses is lower than the cohesion of students of 4-5 courses. Sample: 5 study groups, namely students enrolled in 1,2,4,5 courses of the Faculty of Psychology, Valueology and Sports. The age range of the respondents is from 17 to 22 years old. The number of all respondents is 64 students. Tasks: 1.
To study the theoretical material on the problem; 2.
determine the level and characteristics of group cohesion in student groups in different courses of study; 3.
reveal the differences between the group cohesion of first-year students and senior students. Methods: 1. Methodology "Determination of the Sishore Group Cohesion Index". 2. Methodology “Determination of indirect group cohesion” (V. S. Ivashkin, V. V. Onufrieva). The purpose of the methodology- the study of group cohesion mediated by the goals and objectives of joint activities. $13. Method of mathematical processing and analysis of data: to determine the significance of differences between groups, the method of mathematical comparison (calculation of the Mann-Whitney U-test) was used using Microsoft Excel for Windows. Research results Based on the data obtained using the first method (Table 1), we see that the group cohesion index for 1 course is slightly lower than the cohesion index for groups of 2,4,5 courses. Table 1.
Method data"Determination of the Seashore Group Cohesion Index" According to the methodology, in groups of 2,4,5 courses, the index corresponds to a high level of cohesion. According to the Mann-Whitney test highly significant differences at p ≤ 0.01 were identified between group 1 and 5 courses. In other cases, the differences were in the zone of uncertainty (at the level of p ≤ 0.05), and there were no differences between the 2nd and senior years. The business, moral and emotional qualities of a person, reflecting the value orientations of student groups, were taken as stimulus material for the methodology “Defining indirect group cohesion”. Each member of the group had to choose from the proposed list only 5 qualities that, in his opinion, are necessary for a person as a member of the team, these are the qualities that are most valuable for successful teamwork. Based on all the qualities selected by the group, it can be concluded which qualities the group values the most. And you can also determine what percentage the group assigns to business, moral and emotional qualities. This explains the level of group cohesion mediated by the goals and objectives of joint group activities. After counting the total selected qualities and the most frequently chosen ones, we calculated the percentage of choices that fall on emotional, business and moral qualities. Percentage data are presented in Table 2. Table 2.
The percentage of choices attributable to emotional, business and moral qualities From the table, we see that students of the 2nd, 4th, 5th courses appreciate more the business qualities that a person needs for successful teamwork, to achieve successful joint activities. And first-year students appreciate more emotional qualities that are important for interpersonal relationships, but not for productive, including educational activities. Based on the data of both methods, it can be argued that there are still differences between the cohesion of groups of first-year students and groups of students 2,4,5. As the data of the second methodology show, these differences are due to the fact that first-year students do not yet have a good idea of the goals and objectives of group activities, which is evidenced by the low percentage of choice of business qualities. Thus, the hypothesis of our work was partially confirmed, since cohesion turned out to be high in the 2nd year groups, as well as in the 4th and 5th year students. Conclusions: 1. The difference between 1st year students and senior students was revealed, both in terms of the level of cohesion and its grounds. First-year students are united on the basis of emotional relationships, while senior students are united on the basis of business relationships. 2. The 2nd year students are closer to senior students in terms of the content of relations than to first-year students. Business relations are the basis of cohesion for them. 3. The dynamics of the formation of cohesion in the student group is uneven. It is not "stretched" for the entire period of study. The main dynamic processes that affect group cohesion take place during the first year, and already in the second year, groups can be as cohesive as undergraduates. Bibliography: Introduction
Relevance. Groups play a role in human relationships. They influence our perceptions and attitudes, provide support in stressful situations, influence our actions and decisions. The very first and one of the most important steps in the education of students is the formation of a cohesive group with developed socially significant goals, self-government bodies. It is the formed student group that has power and can become a source of transformation of modern reality. In sociology, a group is defined as two or more individuals who interact with each other in such a way that each individual influences and is influenced by each other. The essential features that distinguish a group from a simple accumulation of people are: interaction, a certain duration of existence, the presence of a common goal or goals, the development of at least a rudimentary group structure, awareness of the individuals included in it themselves as “we” or their membership in the group. The problem of group cohesion is based on the understanding of the group primarily as a system of interpersonal relationships that have an emotional basis. In addition, there is an approach to the study of cohesion, which is based on the idea that the main integrator of the group is the joint activity of its members. The “stratometric concept of group activity” integrates such factors as interpersonal relationships, value-oriented group unity and joint activity. Object of study: group cohesion of a student group as a socio-psychological phenomenon. Subject of research: the influence of interpersonal relations and the nature of the activity on the group cohesion of the student group. Hypothesis: the factors of group cohesion among junior students are interpersonal relationships, and among senior students it is joint group activity. To analyze the problem of group cohesion in the works of researchers; Highlight the characteristics of the student group as a social community; To study the influence of the nature of activity and interpersonal relations on the group cohesion of students of the 1st, 3rd and 5th year; Research methods: To achieve the goal of the study, solve the tasks and test the hypothesis put forward, we used a set of scientific methods that are adequate to the object and subject of the study: theoretical analysis of general and special literature on the research problem, empirical methods: Methodology for determining the degree of value-oriented unity of the group (Kondratiev M.Yu.); Questionnaire of interpersonal relations (A.A. Rukavishnikov (OMO)); "Sociometry" (J. Moreno); “Determination of the level of joint activity” (K.E. Lishchuk). Methodological basis: The most intensive development of the problems under consideration in the works of T. Newcomb, who introduced the concept, introduces a special concept of "consent"; A. Beivelas attached particular importance to the nature of group goals. A.V. Petrovsky developed the "stratometric concept of group activity". Practical significance: we have selected diagnostic methods aimed at identifying the level of group cohesion, as well as identifying factors of group cohesion in the 1st, 3rd and 5th courses. Experimental base: Experimental base: MOU VIEPP, Volzhsky, teachers-psychologists of the 1st, 3rd and 5th courses in the amount of 47 people. Chapter 1. Theoretical Foundations and Problems of Group Cohesion
.1 The problem of group cohesion in the writings of researchers
Cohesion is interpreted by many foreign authors as an attraction. The most concentrated similar understanding was reflected in the review publication of B. Lott, who defined cohesion as “such a group property that is derived from the number and strength of mutual positive attitudes of group members” . The interpretation of cohesion as a predominantly emotional phenomenon of interpersonal relationships is inherent, however, not only to many foreign researchers. A review of domestic work in this area of group psychology, carried out by A. I. Dontsov, also reveals a number of attempts at an "emotional" approach to the problem. Domestic authors do not use the concept of attraction. Cohesion is described in their research as a sociometric phenomenon, operationally expressed by the ratio of in-group (in favor of one's own group) and out-group (in favor of some external groups) sociometric choices, which is qualified by specialists as one of the manifestations of interpersonal attraction. Cohesion as a result of group membership motivation. Although the identification of cohesion with interpersonal attraction is quite common in the literature, nevertheless, there are more interesting, in our opinion, attempts to understand the essence of the phenomenon under discussion. One of them belongs to D. Cartwright, who proposed, perhaps, the most detailed model of group cohesion, which is based on the idea of cohesion as some kind of resultant forces or motives that encourage individuals to maintain membership in this particular group. D. Cartwright emphasizes that certain characteristics of the group will have a motivating force for the subject only if they meet the corresponding needs that are part of his motivational basis for attraction to the group. Unfortunately, just as at the time when D. Cartwright's work was written, even now the question of the relationship between these two types of variables (the characteristics of the group and the needs of its members) can be safely classified as poorly studied. Cohesion as a value-oriented unity of group members. In describing the two previous models of cohesion, it is not difficult to find something in common, namely, their inherent emphasis on the predominantly emotional nature of the phenomenon. To some extent, the antithesis of both approaches are the ideas developed by A. V. Petrovsky and supporters of the stratometric concept of group activity about the cohesion of a group as a value-oriented unity of its members. However, it should be noted that the idea of considering the similarity, or unity, of a number of personal characteristics of group members (for example, their opinions, values, attitudes) in the context of the problem of cohesion is not new. The idea that the similarity of individuals in opinions, values, attitudes is one of the conditions for their mutual attraction, and hence the growth of motivation for group membership, and, in turn, cohesion, was expressed in foreign literature in the early 50s. It is associated primarily with the classical studies of L. Festinger and T. Newcomb. In a different aspect, the question of interest to us is considered within the framework of the stratometric concept of the team of A. V. Petrovsky. But before presenting the corresponding views of the supporters of this direction, we emphasize that they were presented to the domestic reader in the past by a large number of publications. According to A. V. Petrovsky, “cohesion as a value-oriented unity is a characteristic of the system of intra-group relations, showing the degree of coincidence of assessments, attitudes and positions of the group in relation to objects (persons, tasks, ideas, events) that are most significant for the group as a whole » . Value-oriented unity in the team is, first of all, the convergence of assessments in the moral and business spheres, in the approach to the goals and objectives of joint activities. Within the framework of the approach under consideration, A.I. Dontsov singled out one of the highest forms of value-oriented unity in a group - subject-value unity, which reflects the coincidence of value orientations of group members regarding the subject of joint group activity, and empirically shows the legitimacy of such an understanding of cohesion. As can be seen from the materials cited above, the interpretation of cohesion as a value-oriented unity, especially in its most clearly manifested activity-determined samples (for example, in the form of subject-value unity), practically eliminates its emotional component from the analysis of this group phenomenon. It would be more accurate to say that this component is taken into account, but, as the supporters of the discussed approach emphasize, only in relation to the surface layer of intragroup relations, which is the third psychological level of the group structure in the conceptual scheme of A.V. Petrovsky. There is a cohesion of the instrumental type, it should include the subject-value unity of the group, which is dominant for groups focused mainly on solving problems of a professional (instrumental) nature. At the same time, this does not mean that the emotional sphere of the group's life activity and the cohesion of the emotional type corresponding to it are not worthy of attention "moments" of group life. When describing the structure of a small group, two of its main features were identified: multi-level and heterogeneous. Diversity is represented by systems of intragroup relations hierarchically located in the "space" of group functioning, uniformity - by separate, or partial, dimensions of the group structure, each of which reflects a vertical connection between positions of group members of different degrees of prestige. The partial components of the group structure (a kind of "separate structures"), in particular, include: formal status, role, sociometric and communicative dimensions, positions of leadership and social power. In addition, the possibilities of static and (especially) dynamic, procedural representation of the group structure by means of appropriate model constructions are shown. An important factor in the life of a group is the norms that function in it - a kind of regulators of the group process. The features of normative behavior associated with the influence of norms shared by a majority or a minority of group members, with the consequences of deviation from group standards, were discussed. An analysis of various forms of consent of individuals with the opinion of the majority indicates the need for a differentiated approach to this issue. This kind of agreement in some situations can play a positive role, contributing to the preservation of the integrity of the group, the effectiveness of the tasks it solves, while in other situations it provokes stagnation tendencies that hinder the development of the group process. In a number of cases, an effective counteraction to these tendencies is the activity of the group minority, which introduces elements of novelty and creativity into the life of the group and thereby contributes to its dynamization. Taking into account the simultaneous influences of majority and minority groups requires viewing normative behavior not as a unidirectional, but a reciprocal, reciprocal process of social influence. Literature data point to the complex nature of such an integrative characteristic of a group as its cohesion, due to the conjugation of many determining factors: intergroup, group, personal. In turn, the consequences of cohesion tangibly affect various aspects of the life of the group: from the personal adaptation of its members to the overall productivity of the group. 1.2 Student group as a social community
A social community is a relatively stable set of people who are characterized by more or less similar features of life and consciousness, and, consequently, interests. Communities of different types are formed on different basis and are extremely diverse. These are communities that are formed in the sphere of social production (classes, professional groups, etc.), growing on an ethnic basis (nationalities, nations), on the basis of demographic differences (sex and age communities), etc. A group is a set of people clearly limited in size, which is isolated from a wide society as a kind of separate psychologically valuable community, united in the logic of any significant grounds: the specifics of a given and implemented activity, socially assessed belonging to a certain category of people included in a group, structurally compositional unity, etc. A student group is understood as a social community, which is characterized by the presence of direct personal interactions and contacts. Such interactions play a special role, as they ensure the satisfaction of the most important individual and social needs: education, health, social activities, recreation, entertainment, that is, those that make up the everyday meaning of our life. A. V. Petrovsky suggests using the structure of a small group consisting of three main layers, or “strata” for this: the external level of the group structure is determined by direct emotional interpersonal relationships, that is, what has traditionally been measured by sociometry; the second layer is a deeper formation, denoted by the term "value-oriented unity" (COE), which is characterized by the fact that the relationship here is mediated by joint activity. Relations between members of the group are built in this case not on the basis of attachments or antipathies, but on the basis of the similarity of value orientations (A.V. Petrovsky believes that this is a coincidence of value orientations related to joint activities); the third layer of the group structure is even deeper and involves an even greater inclusion of the individual in the joint group activity. At this level, group members share the goals of group activity, and it can be assumed that the motives for choosing at this level are also associated with the adoption of common values, but at a more abstract level. The third layer of relations is called the "core" of the group structure. Three layers of group structures can simultaneously be considered as three levels of group cohesion. At the first level, cohesion is expressed by the development of emotional contacts. At the second level, there is a further rallying of the group, and now this is expressed in the coincidence of the main system of values associated with the process of joint activity. At the third level, the integration of the group is manifested in the fact that all its members begin to share the common goals of group activity. In the above definition of the concept of "student group", the following features of a student group were recorded: an organized community of people ) uniting people on the basis of education, ) the existence of relations of cooperation, mutual assistance and mutual responsibility, ) the presence of common interests, ) the presence of common (unifying) value orientations, attitudes and norms of behavior. Along with the listed signs, you can also find some others: for example, a sign of the stability of a group of people who study together, or a community of people who study together as individuals, as participants in social relations, etc. There is also a sign of purposeful controllability of the process of functioning and development of this group of jointly trained people. This emphasizes the importance of self-government. Attention is drawn to some special requirements imposed by the team on authority and leadership. In particular, such as the demand for the organic unity of formal and informal leadership and authority. In addition, attention is drawn to the fact that the collective assumes the voluntariness of its choice by the individual, identification of himself with this group. Competitive relations between its members are called as an important feature of a student team, in contrast, for example, to relations of simple competition. Collaborative learning allows: transfer their knowledge and skills to other members of the team; solve more complex and voluminous tasks than individually; more fully use the individual abilities of each person; to condemn the deeds and actions of comrades that do not meet the norms of morality and morality accepted in the team, and even punish the guilty, up to and including dismissal. There are three elements in the structure of the student group: the leader group, the so-called core and the peripheral part. The student group leader himself is a member of the group capable of leading it and who is recognized in this role by the majority of the members of this group. Here it is important that two qualities coincide in one person - the so-called formal and real leadership. The leadership group of the labor collective is made up of the leaders of the student group, taken in its main areas. The core of the student group is a group that usually makes up 30-40% of their total number, which is the bearer of the consciousness, collective norms and traditions that have developed in this team. In addition, we can talk about a student group with a different number of cores, as well as a kind of nuclear-free groups. Most of the latter are characterized by the underdevelopment of their own collectivist qualities in one respect or another, or in all respects in general. Each case of such deviations from a certain norm requires special study and is a particularly significant and, in general, fruitful object of the student group. In social psychology, special terms are used that indicate the state of the individual in interpersonal relationships - the role, status, well-being of the student in the group: "Star" - The member of the group (collective) who receives the most elections. As a rule, there are 1-2 "stars" in a group. In the table. 17 example - these are students numbered 5 and 7 in the group list. "Bazhaniy" - A member of a group (collective) who receives half or slightly less of the number of elections devoted to the popular. "imprinted" - A member of a group (collective) who receives 1-2 choices. "Isolation" - A member of a group (collective) who did not receive any choice. In the given example, the 2nd student on the list is in this state. "Discarded" - The one who is called when answering the question "Who would you like to work with, relax with?" (3rd and 5th questions of the questionnaire. Thus, each member of the group (collective) takes a certain position, which is not always the same in business and personal relationships. For example, one student in business relationships has the status of "pushed aside", in personal relationships - "desired", the second - in personal relationships - "star", and in business relationships - "desired". But there may also be a coincidence of status: “desired” in business and personal relationships. An important phenomenon in interpersonal relationships is socio-psychological reflection - the ability of an individual to perceive and evaluate their relationships with other members of the group The most important concepts in defining a student group as a social institution are the concepts of "content of learning" and "character of learning". It is very important to find out the features of the application of these concepts to the problems of the student group. The nature of learning usually means a certain set of the most common and stable features of the learning process, internal and external conditions. In fact, the nature of learning refers to some of the most general form of learning. Each student group, from the moment of its creation, goes through a number of life stages, begins to live its own life, improve, change, “grow up”, gain strength and fully reveal its potential, i.e. become mature. A formed student group, like any living organism, goes through several stages in its development: the first corresponds to infancy, adolescence; the second - the period of effective work and adulthood; the third - weakening of the potential, aging and, ultimately, either elimination or renewal. (American researchers identify five or more stages of team maturity: grinding, close combat, experimentation, efficiency, maturity, etc.) Conclusions on the first chapter Foreign authors understand attraction as group cohesion. Among the reasons for sympathy, researchers include: the frequency of interaction between individuals, the cooperative nature of their interaction, the style of group leadership, frustration and a threat to the course of the group process, status and behavioral characteristics of group members, various manifestations of similarity between people, success in performing a group task, etc. Domestic scientists describe cohesion in their studies as a sociometric phenomenon, operationally expressed by the ratio of in-group and out-group sociometric choices. A. V. Petrovsky defines the structure of a group as: 1. direct emotional interpersonal relationships; 2. "value-oriented unity" 3. the inclusion of the individual in a joint group activity. A student group is understood as a social community, which is characterized by the presence of direct personal interactions and contacts. We have recorded the following features of a student group: an organized community of people, an association of people on the basis of education, the presence of relations of cooperation, mutual assistance and mutual responsibility, the presence of common interests, the presence of common (unifying) value orientations, attitudes and norms of behavior In social psychology, special terms are used that indicate the state of the individual in interpersonal relationships - the role, status, and well-being of the student in the group. Each member of the group (collective) takes a certain position, which is not always the same in business and personal relationships. Chapter 2. The essence and specificity of group cohesion at different stages of education
1 The main methods and ways of determining the influence of the nature of the activity and interpersonal relations on the group cohesion of students Based on data on the phenomenon of group cohesion, including: direct emotional interpersonal relationships; "value-oriented unity"; the inclusion of the individual in a joint group activity. We have chosen the following methods: The sociometric method was developed by the Austrian-American psychologist D.L. Moreno. Sociometry refers to socio-psychological tests and allows you to measure interpersonal relationships, preference relationships that arise in a situation of choosing a partner in a particular activity or situation. With the help of sociometry, one can identify popularity and leadership, charisma, group conflict, integrators and outsiders of the group. Also, this method allows assessing the socio-psychological climate in the group, measuring competence in communication, and identifying the value orientations of the group. During sociometry, participants are guaranteed anonymity, their names are encrypted, and the results are presented only in encrypted form. As a basic technique for identifying direct emotional interpersonal relationships, we chose the questionnaire of interpersonal relations (IMO) by A.A. Rukavishnikov. This questionnaire identifies the following needs: The need for inclusion. It is the need to create and maintain satisfying relationships with others, on the basis of which interaction and cooperation arise. The need for control. This need is defined as the need to create and maintain satisfying relationships with people based on control and power. Interpersonal need for affect. It is defined as the need to create and maintain satisfying relationships with other people based on love and emotional relationships. Definitions of the value-orientational unity of the group (COE) (). Designed to determine the degree and nature of the COE of the studied team. Using the methodology for determining the value-oriented unity (COE) of a group allows the experimenter to answer the question of whether this particular functioning group can be considered a cohesive community, and also experimentally determine the severity of this most important group characteristic. The creators of this methodological procedure proceeded from the fact that the analysis of the phenomenon of group cohesion cannot be reduced to the consideration of such, in their own way, important characteristics of interpersonal relations as the frequency and intensity of contacts between members of the community, the degree of their mutual sympathy, etc. Following their argument, which is hard to disagree with, we have to admit that in a number of cases of intensification of interpersonal contacts of group members, sometimes a sharp intensification of their interaction can be a direct reflection of not centripetal, but, on the contrary, centrifugal forces, naturally leading not to unity, but to the actual disintegration of the community. In this regard, within the framework of the theory of activity mediation of interpersonal relations, a fundamentally different approach was developed to understanding the psychological essence of the phenomenon of group cohesion as a value-oriented unity of members of the contact group. In fact, we are talking here about the degree of consistency of opinions, positions of members of a particular community in relation to the most significant objects for its life. . "Formation of Positive Group Motivation" This test is used for collective assessment of factors related to the formation of group activity. Certain preconditions are necessary for effective group work. Along with the importance of the process of joint solution of tasks and problems in the group, one should take into account the climate in the group, the “growing” of the group to a certain degree of maturity, the process of preparing group members for joint work. Thus, the advantage of group work is achieved due to the synergistic effect that is possible when the participants in the interaction enter into a kind of psychological resonance, feel comfortable and confident, and when their activity increases. To determine the characteristics of group activities, we compiled a questionnaire based on three research questions: “Is there a positive interdependence of group members?”, “Is there personal responsibility for the work done in the group”, “Is there simultaneous interaction of students?”. These questions were compiled on the basis of the following signs of joint activity: Positive interdependence of participants (the goal is perceived as a single one, requiring the unification of the efforts of all members of the group). Personal reporting of each on the work done in the group (the organization of activities involves the division of labor, the establishment of a relationship of responsibility for their part of the work). Simultaneous interaction of students (when preparing a group assignment and group performance in the lesson). Equal participation of everyone in the work of the group. Group reporting (control of activities is partially carried out by the students themselves). Reflective activity in groups (collective analysis and introspection). 2.2 Features of the nature of activities and interpersonal relationships on the group cohesion of students
To confirm the hypothesis, we conducted a study of group cohesion at different stages of education. The study involved 47 students. The method of sociometry was carried out on the study group of the first year of teachers of psychologists. The group consisted of 18 people. The study involved 15 respondents. Based on the data obtained during the survey, tables were constructed with the primary answers of all respondents (encrypted in letters) (Appendix 1). Based on the existing number of mutual elections and their potential number, the group cohesion index is calculated using a special formula. It is believed that with the values of this index about 0.6-0.7, the cohesion is quite high, the connections are saturated, there are almost no “isolated” members of the group. In the group under consideration, the index is 0.52. This result means low group cohesion at the moment. Sociometry methodology was also carried out on the study group of the third year of teachers of psychologists. The group consisted of 15 people. The study involved 15 respondents. Based on the existing number of mutual elections and their potential number, the group cohesion index was calculated, it is 0.66. This result means high group cohesion at the moment. Also, the methodology of sociometry was carried out on a training group of fifth-year psychologists. The group consisted of 17 people, 15 respondents participated in the study (Appendix 3). Based on the existing number of mutual elections and their potential number, the group cohesion index was calculated, it is 0.61. This result means not high group cohesion at the moment. Figure 1 - Results according to the "sociometry" method In this regard, we can say that in the first year, group cohesion is at a low level. By the third year, connections in the group become more extensive, integrators appear. In the fifth year, connections remain strong, while there are significantly fewer integrators. The external level of the group structure is determined by the immediate emotional interpersonal relationships in the group. In order to determine the nature of interpersonal relations in the student group, we used the methodology "Questionnaire of interpersonal relations (IMO)" by A.A. Rukavishnikov, V. Schutz. This technique reveals interpersonal needs. This technique was carried out by three training groups of psychologists. A group of first-year psychologists showed the following results (Appendix 4). The need for inclusion. This need, to create and maintain satisfactory relationships with other people, on the basis of which interaction and cooperation arise, is at a high level. Students feel good among their group members and tend to develop interpersonal relationships (80%). There is a need for inclusion in the group, a desire to create and maintain a sense of mutual interest (70%). Behavior corresponding to the need for inclusion is aimed at establishing connections between people. The need for control. This need is defined as the need to create and maintain satisfying relationships with people based on control and power. First-year students try to take responsibility, combined with a leading role (80%), and in this group there is a need for dependence and hesitation in making decisions (60%). Interpersonal need for affect. It is defined as the need to create and maintain satisfying relationships with other people based on love and emotional relationships. Group members are more likely to establish close sensual relationships (60%), less willing to avoid establishing close contacts (40%). Also, some students are more careful when choosing people with whom they create deeper emotional relationships (60%), another part requires that the rest indiscriminately establish close emotional relationships with them (40%). In the third year, the results of this technique showed the following results (Appendix 5). The need for control. The majority of students in the 3PP group do not take control of themselves (80%). At the same time, one part of the students try to take responsibility (60%), while the other avoids making decisions and taking responsibility (40%). Interpersonal need for affect. Most members of the third year group (80%) demand that others indiscriminately establish close emotional relationships with them. In the group there are those who are careful when establishing close intimate relationships (50%), and those who tend to establish close sensual relationships (50%). In the fifth year, the results of this technique showed the following results (Appendix 6). The need for inclusion. Students feel good among their classmates, tend to expand their connections in the group (70%). Third-year students have a strong need to be accepted in their group (60%), and some third-year students tend to communicate with a small number of people (40%) . The need for control. The majority of students in the 5PP group do not take control of themselves (80%). At the same time, one part of the students try to take responsibility (60%), while the other avoids making decisions and taking responsibility (40%). Interpersonal need for affect. Most members of the third year group (80%) demand that others indiscriminately establish close emotional relationships with them. In the group there are those who are careful when establishing close intimate relationships (50%), and those who tend to establish close sensual relationships (50%). Figure 2 - The results obtained during the implementation of the methodology "Questionnaire of interpersonal relations (IRO)" Based on the results obtained, it can be said that in the first year there is a high level of need for communication, in the third year the need for communication with group members decreases, in the fifth year this trend continues. In the first year, the propensity to establish close relationships is higher than in the third year; in the fifth year, this need is at a low level. Also, the acceptance of control from the group in the first year is significantly lower than in the third, but in the fifth year the control is reduced. The next criterion for determining the development of a group is the value-oriented unity of the group. To do this, we used the method of determining the value-oriented unity (COE) of the group. It allowed us to answer the question of whether this particular functioning group can be considered a cohesive community, as well as experimentally determine the degree of expression of this most important group characteristic. We determined the degree of agreement among the members of the surveyed community about what qualities a leader should have. We introduced each subject to a generalized list and asked him to indicate the five most important characteristics for a leader from those that were included in the summary list. The technique was carried out on a training group of first-year psychologists (Appendix 7). The members of the group made the following choice, in their opinion, of the five most valuable qualities for a leader. Based on the existing number of choices of personality traits, the COE index was calculated, it is 28%. such an indicator of the level of group cohesion cannot be regarded otherwise than as very low. Third-year students made the following choice of the most important characteristics for a leader (Appendix 8). Based on the existing number of choices of personality traits, the COE index was calculated, it is 64%, such an indicator of the level of cohesion is at an average level Fifth-year students made the following choice of the most important characteristics for a leader (Appendix 9). Based on the existing number of choices of personality traits, the COE index was calculated, it is 45%, this result can be called the average level. The next layer of group structure is the joint activities of the group. To determine it, we used: . "Determination of the level of joint activity" Lishchuk K. E. During the study, we obtained the following results: in the first year, the group is not sufficiently motivated for a positive result in their activities. In the third year, the group is sufficiently focused on achieving success in their activities. In the fifth year, the group is not sufficiently motivated for positive results in activities, while the results obtained are lower than those of the first year. Figure 4 - Results obtained during the methodology "Determining the level of joint activity" A survey was conducted, the purpose of which was to answer the following research questions: “Is there a positive interdependence of group members?”, “Is there personal responsibility for the work done in the group”, “Is there simultaneous interaction of students?”. The following results were obtained (Appendix). In the first year it was revealed that 18% of students are dissatisfied with joint activities, in turn 82% are satisfied with joint activities. Also, a small part of 18% would prefer independent work to group work, 36% wish to work only with a few specific members of the group, the remaining 46% preferred independent work to group work. It turned out that there is no personal responsibility of each for the work done in the group. Students do not distribute questions among all group members when preparing for an exam. Some of the students from a part believe that they are responsible for preparing for the seminar in front of the whole group 36%, the rest do not adhere to this opinion 64%. It can be said that in the first year there is interaction between students. The group has such duties as: leisure organizer and duty officer. The group has established communication and organization of activities, while 63% are satisfied with the effectiveness of the dissemination of information in the group, 27% are only partly satisfied, 9% are dissatisfied in general. The results of the third-year survey showed that 80% have a desire to work in a group, and 20% have a desire to be present sometimes, while 80% of the respondents enjoy joint work, 20% are dissatisfied with joint activities. It turned out that there is no personal responsibility of each for the work done in the group. 90% of third-year students distribute questions among themselves in preparation for the exam. At the same time, 20% of respondents, when preparing for the seminar, believe that they are letting their group down, 40% believe that they are only partly responsible, the remaining 40% are confident that they will not let the group down if they do not prepare for the seminar. We can say that in the third year there is a high level of interaction between students. The group has such duties as: the one who monitors the schedule changes, the person on duty, the one who informs about events at the institute, the organizer of the group's leisure. The group has established communication and organization of activities 70% are satisfied with the dissemination of information in the group, the remaining 30% are partially satisfied. In the fifth year, students enjoy working in a group, while 90% would prefer independent work to group work, and 10% would prefer individual work to group work. Fifth-year students do not distribute questions in preparation for exams among all members of the group, only a part of the students (20%) distribute questions between some members of the group. At the same time, 20% of respondents, when preparing for the seminar, believe that they are letting their group down, 40% believe that they are only partly responsible, the remaining 40% are confident that they will not let the group down if they do not prepare for the seminar. It turned out that in the fifth year with there is a simultaneous interaction between students. The group has such responsibilities as: the one who monitors the changes in the schedule, the one who informs about events within the walls of the institute, the organizer of leisure. The group has established communication and organization of activities 70% are satisfied with the dissemination of information in the group, the remaining 10% are partially satisfied, 20% are not satisfied at all. Figure 5 - Results obtained during the survey On the basis of the data obtained, it can be said that our hypothesis that interpersonal relationships are the factors of group cohesion among junior students, and joint group activity among senior students, was not confirmed. Conclusions on the second chapter An important aspect of a group structure is how cohesive it is. In the first year, group cohesion is at a low level. By the third year, connections in the group become more extensive, integrators appear. In the fifth year, connections remain strong, while there are significantly fewer integrators. In the first year, the desire to look for new connections within the group is greater than in the third and fifth years, but at the same time, the need to find new connections remains quite high in these courses. In addition, there is a tendency to reduce the need to communicate with a large number of people within their group. If in the first year this need is at a sufficiently high level, then by the fifth year it is significantly reduced. In the first year, most tend to avoid responsibility for making decisions, while by the fifth year this need becomes one of the leading needs in communication. It can also be said that first-year students do not accept the control of the group over themselves, while in the third year there is dependence and hesitation in decision-making, by the fifth year the dependence on the group decreases, but at the same time it is higher than that of the first year. The need to establish close relationships in the first year is higher than in the third year, in turn, in the fifth year this need is greatly reduced, fifth-year students have almost no tendency to establish close sensual relationships. In the first year there is no strong need to establish close relationships, by the third year this need increases greatly, and in the fifth year the need to create deep emotional relationships ceases to be relevant. Conclusion
A characteristic of the system of intra-group relations, showing the degree of coincidence of assessments, attitudes and positions of the group in relation to objects, people, ideas, events that are most significant for the group as a whole. Cohesion as a feature expresses the degree of like-mindedness and unity of its members, is a generalized indicator of their spiritual community and unity. In a group formed from strangers, some part of the time will necessarily be spent on achieving the level of cohesion that is necessary for solving group problems. The military calls this process "combat coordination." Among the main factors of group cohesion are primarily: the similarity of the main value orientations of the members of the group; clarity and certainty of group goals; democratic style of leadership (leadership); cooperative interdependence of group members in the process of joint activities; relatively small group size; the absence of conflicting microgroups; prestige and tradition of the group. Specific indicators of psychological cohesion are usually: the level of mutual sympathy in interpersonal relationships (the more members of the group like each other, the higher its cohesion); the degree of attractiveness (usefulness) of the group for its members: it is the higher, the greater the number of people who are satisfied with their stay in the group - those for whom the subjective value of the benefits acquired through the group exceeds the significance of the efforts expended. Group cohesion consists of the following levels Direct emotional interpersonal relationships; . "value-oriented unity" The inclusion of the individual in a joint group activity. A student group is understood as a social community, which is characterized by the presence of direct personal interactions and contacts. In the course work "" the following questions were considered: The concept of a student group as a social community, signs of a group, group structure. Characterization of the features of the characteristics of the student team. Approaches to the problem of cohesion, the concept of cohesion, forming cohesion, approaches to measuring group cohesion, types of work collectives depending on their cohesion, “personality-cohesion” variables. If in the first year a group is formed, interpersonal relations develop, relationships become stronger, a value-oriented unity begins to form, a desire arises to unite in the name of educational and leisure activities, in the third year ties continue to strengthen within the group, integrators appear, responsibilities within the group expand , there is a dependence of the members of the group on the group. The group becomes cohesive, the desire to work in the group increases, there is a space for the dissemination of information (a common e-mail, a page on a social network appears in the group), members of the group are interested in achieving a common goal. In the fifth year in the group there are no common goals, value-oriented unity, interpersonal ties are destroyed. The group will cease to exist in a few months, therefore, such patterns can be traced as: a decrease in interpersonal relationships, a decrease in the level of value-oriented unity, the level of joint group activity is insignificant. This study will help to take into account the features of the development of interpersonal relations within the group at various stages of the educational process, the dynamics of the formation of the value-oriented unity of the group, the features of interaction in the group in the educational process. Bibliography
1.Andreeva G.M. Social Psychology. M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 1998. 431p. 2.Anikeeva N.P. Psychological climate in the team M .: Education, 2005. 224 p. .Antonyuk V.I., Zolotova O.I., Mochenov G.A., Shorokhova E.V. Problems of the socio-psychological climate in Soviet social psychology. / Socio-psychological climate of the team. M., Science. 2000. p. 5-25. .Belinskaya E.P., Tihomandritskaya O.A. Social Psychology: A Reader. - M.: Aspect Press, 2003. - 475s. .Bagretsov S.A., Lvov V.M., Naumov V.V., Oganyan K.M. Diagnosis of socio-psychological characteristics of small groups with an external status St. Petersburg: Iz-vo Lan, 1999. - 640 p. .Vichev V.V. Morality and social psychology. M., 1999. .Dontsov A.I. Psychology of collectives. M. Publishing House of Moscow State University 2004. 246 p. .Dontsov A.I. On the concept of "group" in social psychology. West. Moscow university Psychology. 1997. No. 4. With. 17-25 .Dontsov A.I. Problems of group cohesion. M.: MGU, 1979. 128s. .Zhuravlev A.L. Socio-psychological problems of management. .Applied problems of social psychology. M. 1999. 184p. .Neimer Yu.L. Cohesion as a characteristic of the primary Collective and its sociological dimension - Sots. research 1995. #2 .Krichevsky R.L., Dubovskaya E.M. Psychology of a small group: Theoretical and applied aspects. M. Publishing House of Moscow State University, 2001, 152 p. .Kono T. Strategy and structure of Japanese enterprises. M.: 1987. .Kolominsky Ya.L. Psychology of relationships in small groups. Minsk, 1976 .Krysko V. Social psychology. SPb.: Peter, 2006, 432. .Krysko V. Dictionary-reference book on social psychology SPb.: Piter, 2003, 416. .Kunz G., O. Donnell. Control. System and situational analysis of managerial functions. M.: 1981. .Levin K. Field theory in social sciences. M.: 2000. .Obozov N.N. Psychology of small groups. Social Psychology. L. 1979. .Petrovsky A.V. Personality. Activity. Collective. Moscow: Politizdat. 1982.- 255p. .. Platonov K.K., Kazakov V.G. Development of the system of concepts of the theory of psychological climate in psychology. /Social and psychological climate of the team./Ed. Shorokhova E.V. and Zotova O.I. M.: 2006. p. 32-44. .Platonov Yu.P. Psychology of collective activity: Theoretical and methodological aspect. L. publishing house of Leningrad State University. 2000. 181 p. .Psychology. Textbook. / Ed. Krylova.M.: Avenue 1998. 584p. .Psychology. Dictionary./Ed. Petrovsky. M. 2000. 586 p. .Sidorenkov A.V. Informal subgroups in a small group: a socio-psychological analysis. Rostov n/a: RGU, 2004. .Fetiskin B.E. Socio-psychological development of the individual and small groups .Shakurov R. Kh. Socio-psychological problems of teaching staff management. M., 1982. 30.Show M.E. group dynamics. New York. 1971. Annex A
Table A1 - Sociometric matrix 1PP 1234567891011121314151Жк22329115692Иа32139131693Км2321862624Ка3121119154695Мл33219108696Ма3377237Нм3222985698По325123389Са33391156910Сд32319696911Саа00012Тк232291236913Тп222391086914Та3361324615Че000686175721160775142 Figure A1 - The results obtained during the implementation of the "sociometry" technique in the 1st course. Sociometric status index Annex B
Table B1 - Sociometric matrix 3PP 1234567891011121314151Ге23117123542Га3339169693Да333969694Ид23139123695Ис122319108696Ко31318154627Кс321129123698Км3339108699Ле33391156910Ое133291546911Пю00012Пн313291006913Ра211121191236914Тл33391546915Ям213391626991367512756118471112 Figure B1 - The results obtained during the implementation of the "sociometry" technique in the 3rd year. Sociometric status index Annex B
Таблица В1 - Социометрическая матрица 5ПП1234567891011121314151Бр333969692Бе121329169693Во333969694Дю331119162695Жо3339100696Ко32229138697Кн232792548Ме1311129115699Ма33391626910Пе33852311Пп3317545412Пм3339926913Пмс3227775414Са231171545415Хн333910069013131249561281033194 Figure B 1 - The results obtained during the implementation of the methodology "sociometry" in the 5th year. Sociometric status index Annex D
Figure D1 - The results obtained during the implementation of the methodology "Questionnaire of interpersonal relations (OMO)" in the 1st course Annex D
Figure D1 - The results obtained during the implementation of the methodology "Questionnaire of interpersonal relations (IMO)" in the 3rd year Annex E
Figure E1 - The results obtained during the implementation of the methodology "Questionnaire of interpersonal relations (IRO)" in the 5th year Annex G
Table G1 - The results obtained during the implementation of the COE method at the 1st trial СправедливостьумответственностьобщительностьскромностьГотовность придти на помощьДобротаПризнание ошибокТребовательностьРаботоспособностьНастойчивостьОсторожностьУмение избежать наказанияФизическая силапокладистостьЖк11111Иа11111Км11111Ка11111Мл11111Ма1111Нм11По11111Са11111Сд11111СааТк11111Тп1111Та11111Че1111сумма855834444751403 COE=42% Figure G1 - Figure. The results obtained during the implementation of the COE method in the 1st course. Annex H
Table H1 - Results obtained during the implementation of the COE method at 3PP The validity of the intelligibility of the community -screening of the renunciation of the help of the error -compensation for the work of the work of the work is to avoid the punishment of the Physical Power of the Holy of Pods12354g21345da3421354km13245om12435PN2354SUMMA COE=64% Figure Z1 - The results obtained during the "COE" technique in the 3rd year Annex I
Table I1 - Results obtained during the implementation of the COE method at 5PP FairnessMindresponsibilitySociabilityModestyReadiness to helpKindnessRecognition of mistakesDemandingnessEffectivenessPerseveranceCaution Ability to avoid punishmentPhysical strength complaisanceBr11111Be11111Vo11111Du11111Zho11111Ko11111Kn11111Me11111Ma11111Pe11111TsOE1111113541Ppsum21111 Figure I 1 - The results obtained during the implementation of the COE method in the 5th year Annex K student cohesion interpersonal attitude Training program for the formation of cohesion of the student group. The cohesion of the student group is an important aspect of its activities. However, often the group is cohesive, but not to achieve educational goals, but to meet a variety of non-educational needs. The situation becomes especially tense when the cohesion of the group is directed against one of its members. Therefore, it is necessary to organize and conduct special events to develop group cohesion of the student team with a positive development vector of its direction. To this end, it is necessary to conduct a socio-psychological training "Development of the cohesion of the student group." Purpose of the training: increasing the cohesion of the group, the development of the team as an integral group subject. Training sessions develop the following skills and abilities: goodwill, interest and ability to build trusting relationships with each other; emotionally empathize with a classmate; cooperate and work together; coordinate their actions with others and jointly solve tasks; resolve conflict situations; All this contributes to the rapprochement and development of a sense of "We" in the student team. The content of the training program "Development of the cohesion of the student group" is based on the solution of problems that are close and understandable to students: how to build relationships in a team and resist pressure; how to understand another person during a conversation, and how important it is to be able to convey your thoughts and feelings to the interlocutor. Thus, communicative competence is formed, and group cohesion dynamically develops on its basis. We have developed a training program aimed at forming the cohesion of the student group. Occupation. Self respect. ) Acquaintance. Establishing contact. Participants sign badges. The facilitator introduces himself and says a few words about what will happen. ) Rules for working in a group. Then the facilitator establishes certain rules for working in a group, which are necessary for all participants to feel comfortable and safe. The rules are written out in advance on a piece of drawing paper, and after the group has accepted them, they are fixed in a conspicuous place. During all subsequent classes, the rules of the group are in the same place and are reminded by the leader at the beginning of the lesson. List of rules: Listen carefully to each other. Respect each other's opinion I am a statement Non-judgmental judgments Activity stop rule Confidentiality Each of the points of the rules is explained by the moderator. ) Warm-up. "Swap Places" Description of the exercise Participants sit on chairs in a circle. The driver goes to the middle of the circle and says the phrase: - “Change places” those who ... (knows how to fry fried eggs). At the end, some sign or skill is called. The task of those who possess this skill or sign is to change places. The leader's task is to have time to sit in any vacant seat. The one who did not have time to sit down becomes the new driver. Warm-up, creating conditions in order to get to know each other better, to understand how much they have in common, to increase the interest of the participants in each other. ) The main exercise. "Good and Bad Deeds" Description of the exercise Participants are divided into two teams randomly. Each team is given a piece of drawing paper, felt-tip pens or markers and A4 paper. The task of one team is to write as many actions as possible that allow a person to respect himself more. Accordingly, the task is different - to write as many actions as possible, because of which a person's self-respect is lost. If desired, each team can reinforce the words with drawings of the corresponding actions. Discussion Each team presents its own topic. Then there is a general discussion, at the end the leader summarizes everything that has been said. It is very important to pay attention to the fact that everyone has a choice between these and other actions, but each time, choosing this or that behavior, we gain or lose respect for ourselves. The psychological meaning of the exercise Children's awareness of the connection between actions and self-esteem. Identification of the very concept of self-esteem and the discovery of its connection with mutual respect. And this is a necessary condition for full-fledged communication, without which the development of cohesion is impossible. ) Final exercise. "Thanks!" Description of the exercise The participants stand in a circle, and the facilitator invites everyone to mentally put on their left hand everything that they came with today, their luggage of mood, thoughts, knowledge, experience, and on their right hand - what they received in this new lesson. Then, all at the same time strongly clapped their hands and shouted - YES! or THANK YOU! The psychological meaning of the exercise Final ritual. Allows you to think about the content and result of the past lesson, as well as complete it beautifully on a positive emotional note. Lesson 2. "Beautiful garden" ) Warm-up. Exercise "Hello" Description of the exercise The host invites everyone to shake hands, but in a special way. You need to greet with two hands with two participants at the same time, while you can release one hand only when you find someone who is also ready to say hello, i.e. hands should not remain idle for more than a second. The task is to greet all the members of the group in this way. There should be no talking during the game. The psychological meaning of the exercise Warm up. Establishing contact between participants. The handshake is a symbolic gesture of openness and goodwill. It is also important that eye contact occurs - this contributes to the emergence of intimacy and a positive internal attitude. The fact that the action takes place without words increases the concentration of the group members and gives the action the charm of novelty. ) The main exercise. "Beautiful garden" Description of the exercise The participants sit in a circle. The host offers to sit quietly, you can close your eyes, and imagine yourself as a flower. What would you be? What kind of leaves, stem, and maybe thorns? High or low? Bright or not so bright? And now, after everyone has submitted this - draw your flower. Everyone is given paper, felt-tip pens, crayons. Next, the participants are invited to cut their own flower. Then everyone sits in a circle. The facilitator spreads a canvas of any fabric inside the circle, preferably plain, distributes a pin to each participant. The fabric is declared a garden clearing to be planted with flowers. All participants take turns coming out and attaching their flower. Discussion It is proposed to admire the "beautiful garden", to capture this picture in memory so that it shares its positive energy. It should be noted that although there are many flowers, there was enough space for everyone, everyone occupied only his own, the one he chose. To see, surrounded by different, unlike flowers, yours grows. But there is something in common - someone has a color, someone has the size or shape of the leaves. And without exception, flowers need sun and attention. The psychological meaning of the exercise In itself, art therapy is a very powerful tool that is used for psychological correction and serves to explore feelings, to develop interpersonal skills and relationships, to strengthen self-esteem and self-confidence. In this case, the exercise allows you to understand and feel yourself, to be yourself to freely express your thoughts and feelings, as well as to understand the uniqueness of everyone, to see the place that you occupy in the diversity of this world and to feel like a part of this beautiful world. Final exercise. "Thanks!" Lesson 3. Development of communication skills. Non-verbal communication ) Warm-up. Exercise "Let's line up" Description of the exercise The facilitator offers to play a game where the main condition is that the task is performed silently. It is impossible to talk and correspond at the same time, you can communicate only with the help of facial expressions and gestures. "Let's see if you can understand each other without words?" In the first part of the exercise, the participants are given the task to line up by height, in the second part the task becomes more complicated - you need to line up by date of birth. In the second option, at the end of the construction, the participants alternately voice their birthdays, while checking the correctness of the exercise The psychological meaning of the exercise Warm up. Demonstration of the possibility of an adequate exchange of information without the use of words, development of expression and non-verbal communication skills. The unusual conditions that the participants find themselves in include interest, makes them find ways to convey their thoughts more accurately to another person, to contact each other in order to achieve a common goal. ) The main exercise. "Drawing on the back" Description of the exercise Participants are randomly divided into three teams and lined up in three columns in parallel. Each participant looks at the back of his friend. The exercise is performed without words. The facilitator draws some simple picture and hides it. Then the same picture is drawn with a finger on the back of each last member of the teams. The task is to feel and convey this drawing as accurately as possible further. At the end, those who stand first in teams draw what they felt on sheets of paper and show it to everyone. The presenter takes out his picture and compares. Participants are invited to discuss in teams the mistakes and findings that were made during the exercise. Draw conclusions, then, taking into account these conclusions, repeat the exercise. In this case, the first and last members of the teams change places. Discussion Discussion in a general circle. What helped to understand and convey feelings? How did the first and last members of the teams feel in the first and second cases? What prevented you from doing the exercise? The psychological meaning of the exercise Development of communication skills, responsibility, cohesion within the team. Realize how important it is to tune in to understanding another person, as well as the very desire to understand another. Demonstration of the possibility of an adequate exchange of information without the use of words, development and skills of non-verbal communication.