| Annotation |
The article is a generalization and analysis of materials devoted to the actual problem of interactive learning. Introduction. The interest of scientists and educators in the topic of interactivity was recorded at the end of the twentieth century, but at that time the authors considered such learning as a form of interaction between students and the educational environment. In the present period, the specificity of which is due to global digitalization, both interactive learning itself and its interpretation have been transformed. Today, interactive learning is comprehended through various definitions: method, technology, approach, form, means. This testifies to the heterogeneity of approaches to understanding the theoretical foundations, as well as the practice-oriented possibilities of the described phenomenon. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to determine the essential characteristics of interactive learning, to clarify the methodology that ensures productive implementation – both on the part of teachers and on the part of students. The target orientation of the material also determined its novelty. Materials and research methods. The study uses the semantic differential method for a comparative assessment of the characteristics of classes with students of a pedagogical university, conducted both in traditional and interactive forms. Specific results of the study. Analysis of the data showed that students prefer the interactive form of learning, highly appreciating its characteristics such as activity, collectivity, subjectivity, etc. In traditional classes, respondents noted such characteristics as passivity, monologue, regimentation, etc. Discussion of the research results. The data indicate the need to increase in the process of preparing students for classes in an interactive format. This is especially true for future teachers, who in their future professional activities will themselves have to rely on this format of learning and communication. Conclusions and prospects of the study. In general, the study confirms the need for further understanding of the theoretical foundations and practical approaches related to interactive learning, which also implies a conscious transformation of the positions of the subjects of the educational process. |
| References |
1. Avis, J., Fisher, R., Thompson, R. Teaching in Lifelong Learning 3e Guide to Theory and Practice. McGraw-Hill Education, 2018. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327884349_Teaching_in_lifelong_learning_A_guide_to_theory_and_practice_3rd_Edition/download. (In Eng.)
2. Petrusevich, D. A. Modern trends in digitalization of education. Krasnoyarsk Scientific and Technical City Hall. Krasnoyarsk, Russian Federation: IOP Publishing Limited, p. 12223, 2020. DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/1691/1/012223. (In Eng.)
3. Goli, A., Teymournia, F., Naemabadi, M., Garmaroodi, A. A. Architectural design game: A serious game approach to promote teaching and learning using multimodal interfaces. Education and Information Technologies, pp. 1–32, 2022. DOI: 10.1007/s10639-022-11062-z. (In Eng.)
4. Lassoued, Z., Alkhendavi, M., Bashitialshaer R. Research study of obstacles to achieving the quality of distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Educational sciences, vol. 10, p. 232, 2020. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10090232. (In Eng.)
5. Korotaeva, E. V., Chugaeva, I. G. Pedagogical interaction: questions of methodology and methodology. Scientific notes of the Transbaikal State University, no. 5, pp. 159–167, 2021. DOI: 10.21209/2658-7114-2021-16-5-159-166. (In Rus.)
6. Voronkova, O. B. Information technologies in education: interactive methods. Rostov-on-Don, 2010. (In Rus.)
7. Renner, R. Interactive Learning Definition. 2020. URL: https://www.theclassroom.com/interactive-learning-definition-5494900.html. (In Eng.)
8. Cholak, V. V. Interactive learning. Problems of Science, no. 3, pp. 102–105, 2014. (In Rus.)
9. Kay, R. H. Exploring the use of video podcasts in education: A comprehensive review of the literature. Computers in Human Behavior, no. 3, pp. 820–831, 2012. (In Eng.)
10. ElSayary, A., Zein, R., Antonio, L. S. Using Interactive Technology to Develop Preservice Teachers’ STEAM Competencies in Early Childhood Education Program.EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, t. 18. vol. 2, 2022. DOI: 10.29333/EJMSTE/11649. (In Eng.)
11. Rybakova, A., Shcheglova, D., Bogatov, A. Alieva, L. Using interactive technologies and distance learning in sustainable. E3S Web of Conferences, vol. 250, 2021. DOI: 10.1051/e3sconf/202125007003.
(In Eng.)
12. Tuma, F. The use of educational technology for interactive teaching in lectures. Annals of Medicine and Surgery, vol. 62, pp. 231–235, 2021. DOI: 10.1016/j.amsu.2021.01.051. (In Eng.)
13. Korotaeva, E. V., Andryunina, A. S. Interactive learning: aspects of theory, methodology, practice. Pedagogical education in Russia, vol 4, pp. 26–33, 2021. DOI: 10.26170/2079-8717_2021_04_03. (In Rus.)
14. Lyz, N. A., Labyntseva, I. S. Digital generation: difficulties of students and ways to overcome them. Pedagogy, no. 6, pp. 86–94, 2022. (In Rus.)
15. Dewi, C. A., Pahriah, P., Purmadi, A. The Urgency of Digital Literacy for Generation Z Students in Chemistry Learning. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, vol. 16, pp. 88–103, 2021. DOI: 10.3991/ijet.v16i11.19871. (In Eng.)
16. Titova, E. V. Terminological analysis as a method and task of research. Letters to the Issue. Offline, vol. 6, p. 1425, 2010. (In Rus.).
17. Dobrynina, D. V. Innovative methods of teaching university students as a means of implementing an interactive learning model. Bulletin of the Buryat State University. Education. Personality. Society, no. 5, pp. 172–176, 2010. (In Rus.)
18. Ganiev, R. R. The use of interactive technologies in the process of teaching students at the university and the formation of managerial competence. Problems of modern pedagogical education, no. 6, pp. 84–88, 2020. (In Rus.)
19. Vasilyeva, A. V. Formation of the conceptual apparatus of the subject area of interactive learning (in pedagogy and methodology). Lifelong education: XXI century, vol. 1, pp. 2–18, 2021. DOI: 10.15393/j5.art.2021.6664. (In Rus.)
20. Khonamri, F., Azizi, M., Kralik, R. Using interactive e-based flipped learning to enhance EFL literature students’ critical reading. Science for Education Today, vol. 10, pp. 25–42, 2020. DOI: 10.15293/2658-6762.2001.02. (In Eng.) |
