Dispositional factors of personality professional development of the future teachers of physical education and sport

N.I. Stepanchenko; Y.A. Briskin

doi:10.15561/20755279.2019.0407

Authors

N.I. Stepanchenko Lviv State University of Physical Culture named after I. Bobersky http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3405-7024
Y.A. Briskin Lviv State University of Physical Culture named after I. Bobersky http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6375-9872

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15561/20755279.2019.0407

Keywords:

physical education and sport, students, professional development, factors

Abstract

Purpose: The relevance of the problem of professional development of teachers led to the emergence of a large number of publications on this topic in the literature. But these publications do not clarify this very complex phenomenon and do not encourage the emergence of new scientific problems. This has determined the research interest. It is based on the need to clarify idea of internal factors on an intrapersonal level that contribute to the effective professional development of future physical education and sport teachers. The purpose of the work is to study them. Methods: Study participants were students from four Physical Education Faculties (physical education, sports, physical therapy and tourism) of higher education in the field of physical education in Western Ukraine. A total of 356 students participated in the study of internal factors on an intrapersonal level. The choice of research sample was random, the age of students - 18-19 years old. We used the questionnaire to determine the correlation between the two signalling systems and to determine the temperamental characteristics of students. To gather and analyze data we used the quantitative method. Result: Result showed that the second signalling system dominates in the majority of surveyed students. Most of the students with the prevailing second signalling system belong to the faculty of tourism (74%). We have determined the average level of the intellectual development sphere for all students without any exceptions. The highest rates were identified for the students of physical therapy faculty. The future teachers of physical education and sport showed the lowest results in communicative sphere. This is insufficient for professional and pedagogical activity. This group of students showed the best development in psychomotor qualities, even though the results were on average level. In general, we have not determined any significant discrepancies in psychomotor, intellectual and communicative spheres of the future teachers of physical education and sports in comparison with the students of other areas of training. Conclusions: We have demonstrated that the properties of the various personality aspects of the future physical education and sports teacher in the intellectual and communication domains are insufficient for professional work. They require the development of targeted effective methods for professional education and psycho-pedagogical means of motivation. The results of internal factors of students’ personality professional development diagnostics are supported by compliance of their characterological features to the professional demands but also by the conscious professional interests.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

N.I. Stepanchenko, Lviv State University of Physical Culture named after I. Bobersky

pp@ldufk.edu.ua; 11, Kostiushko, Str., Lviv, 79000, Ukraine

Y.A. Briskin, Lviv State University of Physical Culture named after I. Bobersky

tmos@ldufk.edu.ua; 11, Kostiushko, Str., Lviv, 79000, Ukraine

References

1. Gynetsinsky VI. Fundamentals of theoretical pedagogy: textbook. St. Petersburg: Publishing House of St. Petersburg; 1992. (in Russian)

2. Psholovsky T. A small encyclopedia of praxeology and organizational theory. Wroclaw - Warzaw: National Institute Ossolinsky; 1978. (in Polish)

3. Serin H. The Use of Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivations to Enhance Student Achievement in Educational Settings. International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies, 2018;5(1):191-194.
https://doi.org/10.23918/ijsses.v5i1p191

4. Erbas MK. Determination of physical education teachers’ educational beliefs. International Journal of Academic Research. 2013;5(5):386- 392.
https://doi.org/10.7813/2075-4124.2013/5-5/B.60

5. Muros RB, Fernandez-Balboa JM. Physical education teacher educators’ personal perspectives regarding their practice of critical pedagogy. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 2005;24:243- 264.
https://doi.org/10.1123/jtpe.24.3.243

6. Morris M, Chrispeels J, Burke P. The Power of Two: Linking External with Internal Teachers’ Professional Development. Phy Delta Kappan, 2003;84(10):764- 767.
https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170308401010

7. Serin H. Developing the Teaching Profession Factors Influencing Teachers’ Performance International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies 2017;4 (2):10-14. 14.
https://doi.org/10.23918/ijsses.v4i2sip10

8. Kennedy MM. How Does Professional Development Improve Teaching? Review of Educational Research, 2016;86(4): 945-980.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626800

9. Wood K, Jaidin H, Jawawi R, Perera JS. How and what teachers learn from collaborative professional development. International Journal of Lesson and Learning Studies, 2017; 6(2):151-168.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLLS-09-2016-0028

10. Romar JE, Aström P, Ferry M. Practical knowledge of preservice physical education teachers: Content and influence of acculturation. Journal of Physical Education and Sport, 2018;15:114-126.

11. Grau V, Calcagni E, Preiss DD. & Ortiz D. Teachers’ professional development through university-school partnerships: Theoretical standpoints and evidence from two pilot studies in Chile. Cambridge Journal of Education, 2017;47(1):19-36.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2015.1102867

12. Girvan G, Conneely C, & Tangney B. Extending experiential learning in teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2016;58:129-139.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.04.009

13. Mohan PP, Chand DD, & Lingam GI. Teachers’ perceptions of the impact of professional development on learning and teaching in a developing nation. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 2017;42(11):18-33.
https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2017v42n11.2

14. Ilyin EP. Psychology of individual differences. Sankt Petersburg: Peter; 2011. (in Russian)

15. Rusalov VM. Temperament in the structure of human individuality. Differential psychophysiological and psychological research. Moscow: Institute of Psychology, Russian Academy of Sciences; 2012. (in Russian)

16. Fokkens-Bruinsma M, & Canrinus E. Motivation to become a teacher and engagement to the profession. Evidence from different contexts. International Journal of Educational Research, 2014; 65:65-74.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2013.09.012

17. Kudryavtsev TV, Sukharev AV. The influence of personality traits on the dynamics of professional self-determination. Questions of psychology, 1985;1:86-94. (in Russian)

18. Freeney EJ. How an orientation to learning influences the expansive-restrictive nature of teacher learning and change. Teacher Development, 2016;20(4):458-481.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2016.1161659

19. Villegas – Reimers E. Teacher professional development: an international review of literature. UNESKO: International Institute for Educational Planning; 2003.

20. Cravens X, Drake TA, Goldring E. Teacher peer excellence groups (TPEGs). Building communities of practice for instructional improvement. International Journal of Lesson and Learning Studies, 2017;55(5):283- 292.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-08-2016-0095

21. Van Driel JH., & Berry AK. Teacher professional development focusing on pedagogical content knowledge. Educational Researcher, 2012;41(1):26-28.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11431010