And the sleeping masses of deserted streets are clear. Pushkin Alexander Sergeevich - (Poems)

Introduction

Konstantin Dmitrievich Ushinsky entered the history of Russian pedagogy as outstanding teacher and psychologist. A practical teacher and theorist, a gifted writer, distinguished by independent thinking and humanistic views, he will forever remain a classic of our culture. KD. Ushinsky is considered the founder of scientific pedagogy in Russia.

Activities of K.D. Ushinsky proceeded during the crisis serfdom, the rise of the social democratic movement and the formation of a revolutionary democratic direction in it. That is why the core of it pedagogical system demands for democratization of the education and training system began. In the public views of K.D. Ushinsky, generally idealistic, reflected the progressively democratic idea of ​​the progressive development of society, protest against despotism, recognition of the active essence of man, labor as the most important factor in life.

Considerable teaching experience of K.D. Ushinsky on raising a child based on traditions folk culture, successful justification of the education system in accordance with cultural and historical national values ​​created the conditions for an objective and comprehensive study of the heritage of K.D. Ushinsky.

A comprehensive analysis of the pedagogical system by K.D. Numerous works of pre-revolutionary and Soviet researchers are devoted to Ushinsky. Such prominent teachers of the pre-October period as N.F. made a great contribution to the study and implementation of Ushinsky’s legacy into practice. Bunakov, V.I. Vodovozov, M.I. Demkov, K.V. Elpitsky, V.E. Ermilov, P.F. Kapterev, L.N. Modzalevsky, V.P. Ostrogorsky, D.D. Semenov, D.I. Tikhomirov, V.I. Chernyshev, as well as Soviet researchers G.P. Belozertsev, N.K. Goncharov, M.A. Danilov, N.K. Krupskaya, D.O. Lordkipanidze, E.N. Medynsky, V.Ya. Struminsky, N.A. Konstantinov. The increased interest in the pedagogical heritage of the past led to the revival and targeted study of the ideas of K.D. Ushinsky at the end of the 20th century.

Taking into account the above, the purpose of the abstract is the following: to reveal and justify the relevance of the main provisions of the teachings of K.D. Ushinsky about the idea of ​​national education, its elements, the unity of universal and national education.

1. Life and teaching activity of K.D. Ushinsky

Konstantin Dmitrievich Ushinsky (1824 - 1870) was born in Tula, into the family of a small nobleman, and spent his childhood and adolescence on his father’s estate near the city of Novgorod-Seversk.

He received his general education at the Novgorod-Severskaya gymnasium.

In 1840, K. D. Ushinsky entered the law faculty of Moscow University, where he attended lectures by prominent professors (Granovsky and others). IN student years Ushinsky was seriously interested in literature and theater, and dreamed of spreading literacy among the people. He sought to independently understand the debates that were going on among leading Russian people about the paths of historical development of Russia, about nationality national culture.

After graduating from the university, 22-year-old K. D. Ushinsky was appointed acting professor at the Yaroslavl Law Lyceum. In his lectures, which made a deep impression on students, Ushinsky, criticizing scientists for their isolation from people's life, said that science should help improve it. He encouraged students to study life, the needs of the people, and help them.

But the young scientist’s professorship did not last very long. The authorities considered this direction of his activity to have a harmful influence on young people, inciting them to protest against the existing order, and he was soon fired. For Ushinsky, difficult years of hardship and struggle for existence began. For several years he served as an official, engaged in random, petty literary work in magazines. All this did not satisfy him, who dreamed of a broad social activities for the benefit of his homeland. “To do as much good as possible for my fatherland is the only goal of my life; “I must direct all my abilities to her,” said young Ushinsky.

The social and pedagogical movement of the 60s contributed to the formalization of the pedagogical vocation of K. D. Ushinsky. Working in 1854-1859. a senior teacher of the Russian language, and then an inspector of classes at the Gatchina Orphan Institute, he carried out a number of measures to improve educational work there.

From 1859 to 1862, K. D. Ushinsky worked as an inspector of classes at the Smolny Institute of Noble Maidens, in which he also carried out fundamental reforms: he united the independently existing departments for noble and bourgeois maidens, introduced teaching educational subjects in Russian, opened pedagogical class, in which pupils received training to work as educators. invited talented teachers to the institute, introduced meetings and conferences of teachers into practice; pupils received the right to spend vacations and holidays with their parents.

The progressive activities of K. D. Ushinsky at the Smolny Institute caused great dissatisfaction among the courtiers, who led the institution. Ushinsky began to be accused of atheism, of the fact that he was going to educate “peasants” from noblewomen.

In 1862 he was dismissed from the institute. Then he was asked to go abroad under the pretext of studying the production of the initial and female education and compiling a textbook on pedagogy. This business trip was actually a disguised exile.

Everything he suffered in Russia had a serious impact on Ushinsky’s health and aggravated a long-standing lung disease. But despite serious illness, he worked intensively abroad: he carefully and critically studied women's educational institutions, kindergartens, orphanages and schools in Germany and Switzerland, wrote and published in 1864 a wonderful educational book “Native Word” (Years I, II) and “Guide to “ Native Word" for teachers and parents." (“Native Word” had 146 editions until October 1917.) In 1867, Ushinsky wrote his main work, “Man as a Subject of Education,” which was a most valuable contribution to pedagogical science.

A serious illness and intense social and pedagogical work, which evoked a sharply negative attitude from the ruling circles, undermined the strength of the talented teacher and accelerated his death. On the eve of it, having found himself in the south, he received some satisfaction when he saw how highly his teaching was valued.

2. The idea of ​​national education - central idea pedagogical theory K.D. Ushinsky

In the pedagogical system of the great Russian teacher K.D. Ushinsky leading place occupies his teaching about the purpose, principles and essence of education.

The most important link in the moral improvement of the individual is, as K.D. argued. Ushinsky, the idea of ​​nationality, which he substantiated in many works such as “On the moral element in Russian education”, “Three elements of school”, “Labor in its mental and educational meaning”, “On the benefits of pedagogical literature”, “Questions about public schools”, “A general view of the emergence of our public schools”, “Sunday schools”, especially in the work “On Nationality in Public Education”. He noted that education, if it does not want to be powerless, must be popular”, that “education created by the people themselves and based on popular principles has that educational power that is not found in the most best systems based on abstract ideas or borrowed from another people."

He viewed education as “the creation of history,” as a public, social phenomenon and believed that it has its own objective laws, the knowledge of which is necessary for the teacher to carry out his activities rationally. But in order to know these laws and conform to them, one must first of all study the “subject of education” itself. “If pedagogy wants to educate a person in all respects, then it must first of all get to know him in all respects,” wrote Ushinsky.

Ushinsky believed that upbringing is decisive in this process and that the development of a child occurs in the process of his upbringing and education. A person becomes a person through education. “Education,” wrote Ushinsky, “when improved, can far expand the limits of human strength: physical, mental and moral.”

Education is conceived by Ushinsky as a purposeful, deliberate process of “personality management,” the goal of which is to prepare a person for life and active work, to raise a harmoniously developed person who knows how to combine his interests with the interests of his people and all humanity.

From areas of education main role According to Ushinsky, moral education plays a role; it is the center of his pedagogical concept. It is more important than filling your head with knowledge. Ushinsky writes that enrichment with knowledge will bring many benefits, but, alas, I do not believe that botanical or zoological knowledge... could make Gogol’s mayor a “well-fed person.” Education, according to Ushinsky, devoid of moral strength, destroys a person. It is important to cultivate in children the desire for good, a sense of patriotism, hard work, a sense of social duty, humanism, discipline, strong character and will as a powerful lever that can change not only the soul, but also the body. In the process of moral education, it is also necessary to overcome such feelings and qualities as stubbornness, laziness, boredom, melancholy, careerism, hypocrisy, and idleness.

The important tasks of moral education are:

formation of worldview, moral knowledge, correct views on life and the formation of a belief system, which Ushinsky considers the most important path of human behavior;

Development of moral feelings, in particular aesthetic ones. Ushinsky considered the highest, fiery feeling in a person, “his social cement,” to be a patriotic feeling, which “is the last to perish even in a villain.” The feeling will translate consciousness and belief into human behavior;

development of skills and habits of behavior. According to Ushinsky, a person, thanks to a good habit, “erects the moral edifice of his life higher and higher.” The process of their formation is long, requiring persistence and patience.

Moral education should not be based on the fear of punishment or tedious “verbal admonitions.”

Methods and means of education depend on its content and purpose. As for the method of persuasion, it should be used in moderation, not to impose one’s beliefs, but, according to Ushinsky, to awaken a thirst for these beliefs. At the same time, he warned against annoying instructions and persuasion, which often do not reach the consciousness of children. A special role in the system of means of moral education K.D. Ushinsky devoted mental and physical labor to students, their various activities.

Education itself, he believed, if it wishes a person happiness, should help ensure that children are mentally developed, morally (morally) perfect, aesthetically developed, and physically healthy. All these qualities, in his opinion, need to be educated and developed on the basis of the principle of nationality.

Ushinsky taught that education will achieve its goal and contribute to the development of national self-awareness, national life as a whole, if it has a national character.

By nationality, he understood such education, which was created by the people themselves and based on popular principles, which expresses the desire of the people to preserve their nationality and contribute to its progressive development in all areas of socio-economic life. The history of a people, its character and characteristics, culture, geographical and natural conditions determine the direction of education with its own values ​​and ideals.

Education must be original, national, the matter of public education must be in the hands of the people themselves, who would organize it, lead and manage the school, the people determine the content and nature of education, the entire population must be covered by education, public education, true nationality is expressed first everything in your native language.

The principle of nationality is associated with the tasks of personality formation, and with instilling in children love for their homeland, their fatherland, humanity, truthfulness, hard work, responsibility, a sense of duty, will, a sense of pride in its correct understanding, and an aesthetic attitude to life. All these qualities come from the people and correlate with their character and traditions, help to form the national self-awareness of the people, the principle of nationality should be realized through the teaching of national studies at school: the history of one’s country, geography, the study of Russian writers and poets (literature), the nature of Russia.

Considering nationality to be a source of activity and development, an expression of the people’s aspirations to preserve their national traits, K. D. Ushinsky argued that nationality unites obsolete and future generations, giving the people a historical existence.

Ushinsky criticized everyone who underestimated the rich, centuries-old experience of the great Russian people in the field of education and, without taking into account the interests of the people, mechanically implanted European, especially German, pedagogical theory and practice. Only folk education, which has developed over centuries, preserves its originality and originality. “It is in vain that we want to invent education: education has existed in the Russian people for as many centuries as the people themselves have existed - they were born with it, grew up with it, reflected their entire history, all their best and worst qualities. This is the soil from which new generations of Russia grew, replacing one another. It can be fertilized, improved, by adapting to itself, to its requirements, strengths, and shortcomings, but it is impossible to recreate it,” wrote Ushinsky.

The Russian nobility, as is known, imitated the tastes and morals of the foreign aristocracy, had a nihilistic attitude towards everything domestic and raised children in families in the French, English and German way, alienating them from everything domestic as “common.” This trend also prevailed in closed educational institutions where is the knowledge French and literature served as an indicator of “good form.” A direction of education alien to everything Russian penetrated into gymnasiums, where classicism and Herbartian pedagogy dominated. Learning your native language, Russian literature, history, and geography received little attention. All this hindered the development of education on its own, popular basis.

True education, emphasized teacher K.D. Ushinsky, has been preserved among the common people, the working people and patriots, to whom everything native is dear - the language, their oral creativity, song, nature, the heroic past, the desire for freedom. “Is it surprising... that education, created by the people themselves and based on popular principles, has that educational power that is not found in the best systems based on abstract ideas or borrowed from another people.”

And he not only, in the form of criticism, led a merciless struggle against the planting of an educational system alien to the Russian people on Russian soil, but also built his original pedagogical system on the basis of the idea of ​​nationality, on the basis of the requirements of the life of the Russian people. Defining the task original development Russian life, Ushinsky wrote: “Now it is no longer possible only to continue the work begun by Peter the Great, only to assimilate what appears abroad... Now we must ourselves find the path, throwing away foreign decrees, and in order to find the true path, more than someday it is necessary to turn to the people themselves; find out not only his material, but also his spiritual needs. But it’s not enough to know, you need to become close to them, make them the needs of your own soul and, satisfying these needs, pave the people’s historical path forward.”

K.D. Ushinsky warned that external similarity in the organization of education cannot serve as a reason to consider education to be the same for all peoples both in its direction and in content. He pointed out that the educational ideas of each people are imbued with the national spirit to the point that it is impossible to transfer them to foreign soil. Noting the harmfulness of one people borrowing pedagogical ideas or experience from another, without taking into account the characteristic specifics of life and the general spirit of each people, Ushinsky concludes: “Is it surprising after this that education, created by the people themselves and based on popular principles, has the educational power that not in the best systems based on abstract ideas or borrowed from another people.”

But we would make a mistake if we considered Ushinsky to be a supporter of fencing off, isolating Russia and its culture from other states of the world. According to Ushinsky, in the field of development of pedagogical ideas in practice there are achievements that do not belong to one nation, such as, for example, ideas of public education, the school system, different methodological rules of teaching, etc., but these achievements must be reworked in the spirit of the requirements of each people individually.

You can also use the pedagogical experience of another people, the experience of another state. “But this use turns out to be harmless only when the foundations of public education are firmly laid by the people themselves. You can and should borrow tools, means of invention, but you cannot borrow someone else’s character and the system in which the character is expressed. On the other hand, the more character a person has, the safer any society is for him; and the more character there is in the social education of a people, the more freely it can borrow whatever it pleases from other nations.”

In the development of mankind there are general patterns, and they are repeated by any people, argued K.D. Ushinsky, but if these patterns were accurately reproduced by all peoples, regardless of place and time, then there would be no peoples, no nations, no nationalities, no tribes. Historical conditions the lives of peoples are very different around the globe and cannot but determine differences in public education systems different nations.

These differences are determined, therefore, not by random circumstances, but by the peculiarities of historical development. Each nation, due to circumstances, plays its own special role in history. In every educational system, nationality is manifested as the main idea of ​​education. “A people without nationality is a body without a soul, which can only undergo the law of decay and be destroyed in other bodies that have retained their originality.”

Nationality should be the basis of education for any nation as its general pattern, as the initial principle of any pedagogical idea and educational goals.

At the heart of the idea public education lie the concepts of man, what he should be according to the concepts of one or another people in a certain period of its development. “Each nation has its own special ideal of a person and requires from its education the reproduction of this ideal in individual individuals. This ideal for every people corresponds to its character, is determined by its social life, develops along with its development, and clarifying it is the main task of every folk literature.”

K.D. Ushinsky was deeply right in noting the dynamism of the educational ideal of the people, its development associated with the course of the history of the people. The ideal cannot be sought only in the past; it includes the present and the aspirations of the people for the future. The people's ideal always expresses the degree of self-awareness of the people, their conscience, views on good and evil, vices and virtues. This ideal reflects the character of the people and the changes taking place in society. As the ideal changes over time, its revaluation also occurs. It is not static, something remains in it from the old and something new always appears, reflecting best sides new time. What seemed flawless in the past is in the eyes modern humanity completely different price. K. D. Ushinsky pointed out, for example, that ideals in France and Germany are changing faster than in England. As for the North Americans, they “develop” their own special ideal of a person who is almost completely unaccustomed to English manners and is an unusually original being.”

K. D. Ushinsky, of course, was far from revealing the class understanding of the essence of the ideal. But he went far in understanding it in comparison with many of his contemporaries, arguing that the ideal, including the educational one, is historically determined, that it contains national elements, that “the people’s ideal of man is modified in each nation by class.” The people develop their ideal of a person and strive to realize it in their offspring, for which education is used primarily. At the same time, he noted that “school education does not constitute the entire education of the people. Religion, nature, family, legends, poetry, laws, industry, literature - everything that makes up the historical life of a people - constitutes its real school...”

According to K. D. Ushinsky, school education, no matter how hard you try, cannot be separated from life. It influences the beliefs of both teachers and students, shapes their aspirations, and determines their choice educational material. Public education, he emphasized, does not lead history, but follows it. Moral ideal society is also an educational ideal. It is determined by specific, socio-historical conditions.

The educational ideal is one of the forms of understanding life, and its implementation is one of the forms of changing it. “There is only one innate inclination common to all, which education can always count on: this is what we call nationality. Just as there is no man without self-love, so there is no man without love for the fatherland, and this love will give the educator the sure key to a person’s heart and a powerful support for the fight against his bad natural, personal, family and tribal inclinations.

Turning to the people, education will always find an answer and assistance in a person’s living and strong feeling, which acts much more stronger than conviction adopted by the mind alone, or a habit ingrained by fear of punishment. This is the basis of the conviction... that education, if it does not want to be powerless, must be popular.”

Ushinsky believed that the ideal of man develops on the basis of the development of the entire life of the people. In connection with this, the very essence of nationality develops and changes, and the principle of nationality in education changes. However, this principle, according to Ushinsky, will always accompany the entire course of development of the people. The ideal of man, created by the people, develops historically and is more or less personified in every son of the people.

Education will be truly popular both in its focus and in its content as a whole, if it is led by the people themselves, if the system of public education itself depends on the people themselves, on their opinions and practical guide.

Thus, common system national education for all nations does not exist not only in practice, but also in theory, and German pedagogy is nothing more than a theory of German education, each nation has its own special national education system, and therefore borrowing by one nation from another educational systems is impossible. The experience of other people and the matter of education is a precious heritage of all days, but in exactly the same sense in which the experiences world history belong to all peoples. Just as you cannot live according to the model of another people, no matter how tempting this model may be, in the same way you cannot be brought up according to someone else’s pedagogical system, no matter how harmonious and well thought out it is. Each nation must try its own strength in this regard.

This is the general spirit of Ushinsky’s teaching on the principle of national education.

From all that has been said, it is not difficult to conclude that Ushinsky’s principle of nationality contains the following elements:

1. Education should be popular. This first of all means that, through a widely deployed school network, it must cover the entire younger generation of the people through compulsory education and form these generations in the spirit of the economic, socio-political, cultural and educational interests of the people; the matter of education must be in charge and led by the people themselves.

2. Education should give children a real education and at the same time develop their mental abilities so that this knowledge is connected with life and aimed at the public good. Hence the most important importance of labor as a factor and as one of the basic principles of education.

3. The central place in the formation of a person should be occupied by the native language as a language of instruction and as a source of knowledge, as a treasury of the people, as “the best, never fading and ever-blooming flower of all spiritual life.”

4. Education should be imbued with the goal of forming a highly moral person, a person for whom work is a matter of honor and happiness, a patriotic person, with strong will and character, a fighter for the cause of the homeland, the people, for their happiness, for their progress.

5. A woman should be provided with upbringing and education on an equal basis with a man, since “a man and a woman are equal individuals, equally independent and equally responsible,” wrote Ushinsky.

6. Any borrowing and introduction into the practice of education of foreign systems and experiences that are alien to the people without critical processing in accordance with the spirit of the idea of ​​nationality is unacceptable.

These demands of Ushinsky, which permeate his entire pedagogical teaching, are progressive not only for the time when Ushinsky lived, but they largely retain their vitality and relevance for our days. True, Ushinsky, as a result of his idealistic understanding of the laws of development of society, encounters, as we will see below when considering individual parts of his pedagogical system, backward and outdated thoughts, such as, for example, his recognition in his early works religion as the main factor in education, in some cases an idealistic explanation of the nationality itself, etc., for which Ushinsky was rightly criticized on the pages of Sovremennik, but this does not obscure the best thing that gives a progressive-democratic character to the principle of national education put forward by Ushinsky.

3. Didactic concept of K.D. Ushinsky as a system of developmental education

In the middle of the 19th century, led by K.D. Ushinsky actively comprehensively studied and developed the theory of developmental learning. Ideas by K.D. Ushinsky were developed by his followers: N.A. Korf, V.P. Vakhterov, N.F. Bunakov, V.I. Vodovozov, D.D. Semenov, D.I. Tikhomirov, V.Ya. Stoyunin and others. Developmental learning theory had great importance in the development of pedagogy primary education and naturally had a great influence on progressive teachers of the second half of the 19th century- the beginning of the 20th century, which not only adopted, but also significantly advanced the advanced ideas of developmental education, both in theory and in practice, the advanced ideas of developmental education by K.D. Ushinsky.

Goals and objectives of training K.D. Ushinsky considered it in the context of personality development. He identified the following factors in personal development:

deliberate, i.e. those goals and objectives that are set in advance by upbringing;

unintentional, i.e. those that influence the child directly in the environment in which he is located.

Criticizing both the theory of material education and the theory of formal education, noting their one-sidedness, K.D. Ushinsky argued that the purpose of education should be to enrich the child’s mind necessary knowledge while simultaneously developing his mental abilities.

Thus, K.D. Ushinsky essentially postulated the inseparability of the goals of formal and material education. At the same time, in order to build the learning process in accordance with the laws of the child’s mental development, it is necessary to use the best aspects of both formal and material education, since only such an approach can ensure the mental development of the child in the process of assimilation of knowledge and its processing.

In other words, the goal of learning, according to K.D. Ushinsky - the development of thinking, abilities, on a certain amount of knowledge that is necessary in life, and the task of teaching is to create conditions for the child’s varied activities in the classroom.

In accordance with the educational goals of K.D. Ushinsky also solved the problems of the content of education, considering it necessary to leave “in our schools and in our textbooks only what is really necessary and useful for humans...” K.D. Ushinsky noted that “scientific and pedagogical presentation of science are two different things.” The material of a particular science selected for school must be processed and adapted to the characteristics of childhood. A careful examination of the principles indicates that they are dominated by the idea of ​​developmental education. “It is not the sciences that should fit scholastically into the student’s head, but the knowledge and ideas conveyed by any sciences should be organically built into a bright and, if possible, broad view of the world and its life,” argued K.D. Ushinsky.

K.D. Ushinsky proposed subjecting “a major revision to the educational material and completely redoing the training programs.” One of the main disadvantages school curriculum K.D. Ushinsky considered the separation of content from life, from the needs of society: “... it’s time to subject all sciences and all information to a general revision... in pedagogical terms, the same as Bacon once subjected them to in philosophy...” Ushinsky believed that scientific knowledge is constantly growing, and that these enormous scientific values cannot be mechanically transferred to school, they need to be reviewed and ordered, logically simplified in accordance with the age of the child. Credit to K.D. Ushinsky was that he was engaged in processing scientific knowledge in accordance with the age and psychological characteristics of students, i.e. processing of the scientific system into a didactic one.

Usha nationality universal idea

4. Psychological foundations of the didactic system K.D. Ushinsky

K.D. Ushinsky developed a complete didactic system. In this system, the most important place was given to the position that a person’s mental qualities are formed in unity with their neurophysiological basis. It reveals the fundamental issues of selecting the content of education and its adaptation to the characteristics of childhood. Based on materialistic epistemology, achievements of psychology and physiology, K.D. Ushinsky revealed the peculiarities of the child’s mental development. He investigated the psychophysical nature of learning, gave an analysis of the psychological mechanisms of attention, interest, memory, imagination, emotions, will, thinking, and substantiated the need to take them into account and develop in the learning process.

Pedagogy, believed K.D. Ushinsky is not science, but art, and “the highest of the arts,” because it is designed to improve the most complex thing - human nature, “his soul and body.” Man is a part of nature and, like any living organism, develops. It is necessary to study the causes of human development. It is necessary to study the nature and essence of man in all its complex aspects. This opportunity is provided by the human sciences, “in which the physical and mental nature of man is studied.”

In his didactic system, K.D. Ushinsky started from a psychological interpretation of the age periods of a child’s development. Ushinsky characterized individual age periods in connection with the consideration of the “history of various mental processes” in which consciousness is manifested.

In its psychological component of its didactic system, K.D. Ushinsky considered “semi-reflexes” to be a fundamental category, which included all the variety of skills and habits. Appeal to this category made it possible to consider the activity of consciousness (soul) as a factor acting in accordance with the capabilities of the organism transformed under its influence. Ushinsky considered habits to be learned reflexes as a result of upbringing. Thanks to them, the child acquires abilities that he did not have by nature. At the same time, Ushinsky brought to the fore moral meaning habits, in contrast to simple skills that arise through exercise: “a good habit is moral capital placed by a person in his nervous system.” Thus, moral determination, set by the general foundations of the life of the people, acted as the most important factor in building a specifically human level of neuropsychic activity of an individual, the basis for its full formation.

Much attention K.D. Ushinsky paid attention to the development of the psyche in different age periods, correlating the specific characteristics of this development with the solution of problems of didactics, the construction of the educational process and the organization of educational influences on the child in the unity of physical, moral and mental “parameters” of his life.

Conclusion

K.D. Ushinsky attached great importance to the choice of methods and their diversity, trying to free learning from mechanical rote learning, introduce into it the beginnings of personal interest and initiative of students, and give it a developmental character.

K.D. Ushinsky considered it necessary to base the theory of learning on the basic and fundamental desire of man - free and expedient creative activity, which should be carried out under the guidance of a teacher.

He made a valuable contribution to the development of world pedagogical thought. Ushinsky deeply analyzed the theory and practice of upbringing and education abroad, showed achievements and shortcomings in this area, and thereby summed up the development of pedagogy of other peoples.

He substantiated the idea of ​​public education, which served as the basis for the creation of original Russian pedagogy. His teaching on the role of the native language in the mental and moral education and training of children, on the public school, his theory of preschool education of children had a huge influence not only on modern and subsequent generations of teachers in multinational Russia.

Many of Ushinsky’s pedagogical statements were responses to pressing issues of our time, criticism of the unsatisfied state of educational educational work at school, in the family and practical proposals for their improvement. Ushinsky's creativity fully met the urgent needs of transforming the educational system in Russia and was subordinated to solving the most important social and pedagogical problems of the era.

His ideas are still relevant today.

First of all, K.D. Ushinsky sought to understand, based on the achievements of psychology, the mechanism of mental development of the child, to use his innate aspirations for active work. He assigned, one might say, a central role to the activities of students, especially mental ones, in the learning process; he believed that the teacher should not impose his will, ready-made thoughts, conclusions on the child, since he cannot be sure that the student will perceive all this correctly and consciously. Moreover, the teacher is obliged to satisfy the student’s need for conscious, creative, personality-developing mental activity.

K.D. Ushinsky believed that the independent activity of students in the learning process corresponds to the needs of the mental nature of man and the laws of its development; it is necessary to combine the developing influence of scientific knowledge and the cognitive independence of students. And the didactic method of K.D. Ushinsky allows us to provide such a combination.

Bibliography

1.Goncharov N.N. Pedagogical system K.D. Ushinsky. - M., 1974

2.Grevtseva G.Ya. K.D. Ushinsky about public education / Ushinsky K.D. and development of modern science and practice: materials of the regional interuniversity conference. - Chel., 2004

3.Saltanov E.N. Labor and moral education in pedagogy K.D. Ushinsky//Pedagogy. No. 4. 2004

.Usova A.V. K.D. Ushinsky and problems of modern education: materials scientific-practical conference. Oct 26 1999 - Chelyabinsk, 2000

5.Ushinsky K.D. On the benefits of pedagogical literature / K.D. Ushinsky. - M.: Pedagogy, 1996.

6.Ushinsky K.D. Man as a subject of education. Experience in pedagogical anthropology / K.D. Ushinsky. - Leningrad: Publishing House of the Academy of Pedagogical Sciences, 1948.

Tutoring

Need help studying a topic?

Our specialists will advise or provide tutoring services on topics that interest you.
Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

MINISTRY OF GENERAL AND PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION

BRANCH OF KOSTROMA STATE UNIVERSITY

Topic: "Life and teaching activities

K. D. Ushinsky"

Pedagogical activity and theory of K.D. Ushinsky.

Life and pedagogical activity of K.D. Ushinsky.

Konstantin Dmitrievich Ushinsky (1824-1870) was born in Tula, into the family of a small nobleman, and spent his childhood and adolescence on his father’s estate near the city of Novgorod-Seversk.

He received his general education at the Novgorod-Severskaya gymnasium.

In 1840, K.D. Ushinsky entered the law faculty of Moscow University, where he attended lectures by prominent professors. During his student years, Ushinsky was seriously interested in literature, theater, and dreamed of spreading literacy among the people. He sought to independently understand the debates that were going on among leading Russian people about the paths of historical development of Russia, about the nationality of national culture.

After graduating from the university, 22-year-old K.D. Ushinsky was appointed acting professor at the Yaroslavl Law Lyceum. In his lectures, which made a deep impression on students, Ushinsky, criticizing scientists for their isolation from people's life, said that science should help improve it. He encouraged students to study life, the needs of the people, and help them.

But the young scientist’s professorship did not last very long. The authorities considered this direction of his activity to have a harmful influence on young people, inciting them to protest against the existing order, and he was soon fired. For Ushinsky, difficult years of hardship and struggle for existence began. For several years he served as an official, doing random, minor literary work in magazines. All this did not satisfy him, who dreamed of broad social activities for the benefit of his homeland.

“To do as much good as possible for my fatherland is the only goal of my life; I must direct all my abilities to her“- said young Ushinsky.

The social and pedagogical movement of the 60s contributed to the formation of K.D. Ushinsky’s pedagogical vocation. Working in 1854-1859. a senior teacher of the Russian language, and then an inspector of classes at the Gatchina Orphan Institute, he carried out a number of measures to improve educational work there.

From 1859 to 1862, K.D. Ushinsky worked as an inspector of classes at the Smolny Institute of Noble Maidens, in which he also carried out fundamental reforms: he united the independently existing departments for noble and bourgeois maidens, introduced the teaching of academic subjects in Russian, opened a pedagogical class, in which students received training to work as teachers, invited talented teachers to the institute, and introduced meetings and conferences of teachers into practice; pupils received the right to spend vacations and holidays with their parents.

The progressive activities of K.D. Ushinsky at the Smolny Institute caused great dissatisfaction among the courtiers who led the institution. Ushinsky began to be accused of atheism, of the fact that he was going to educate “peasants” from noblewomen. In 1862 he was dismissed from the institute. At the same time, he was asked to go abroad under the pretext of studying the organization of primary and female education and compiling a textbook on pedagogy. This business trip was actually a disguised exile.

Everything he suffered in Russia had a serious impact on Ushinsky’s health and aggravated a long-standing lung disease. But, despite a serious illness, he worked intensively abroad: he carefully and critically studied women's educational institutions, kindergartens, orphanages and schools in Germany and Switzerland, wrote and published in 1864 a wonderful educational book “Native Word” and “Guide to Teaching on “Native Word” for teachers and parents. (“Native Word” had 146 editions until October 1917.) In 1867, Ushinsky wrote his main work, “Man as a Subject of Education,” which was a most valuable contribution to pedagogical science.

A serious illness and intense social and pedagogical work, which evoked a sharply negative attitude from the ruling circles, undermined the strength of the talented teacher and accelerated his death. On the eve of it, having found himself in the south, he received some satisfaction when he saw how highly his teaching was valued.

K. D. Ushinsky died on December 22, 1870. He was buried on the territory of the Vydubetsky Monastery in Kyiv.

The idea of ​​national education.

The idea of ​​national education was the most important in the pedagogical theory of K.D. Ushinsky. The system of raising children in each country, he emphasized, is connected with the conditions of the historical development of the people, with their needs and requirements. “ There is only one innate inclination common to all, which education can always count on: this is what we call nationality. Education, created by the people themselves and based on popular principles, has that educational power that is not found in the best systems based on abstract ideas or borrowed from another people.”- wrote Ushinsky.

Ushinsky proved that the education system, built in accordance with the interests of the people, develops and strengthens the most valuable psychological traits and moral qualities in children - patriotism and national pride, love of work. He demanded that children starting from early age assimilated elements of folk culture, mastered their native language, became familiar with the works of oral folk art.

The place of the native language in the upbringing and education of children

K.D. Ushinsky stubbornly fought for the education and training of children in the family, kindergarten and school in their native language. This was an advanced democratic demand.

He argued that a school teaching in a foreign language retards the natural development of children's strengths and abilities, that it is powerless and useless for the development of children and the people.

According to Ushinsky, the native language “ is the greatest national teacher who taught the people when there were no books or schools yet”, and continued to teach him even when civilization appeared.

Based on the fact that the native language “ is the only instrument through which we assimilate ideas, knowledge, and then transfer them”, K.D. Ushinsky considered the main task of elementary education to be mastery of the native language. “ This work of gradual awareness of the native language should begin from the very first days of learning and, due to its paramount importance for the entire development of a person, should constitute one of the main concerns of education.”

The native language in a public school, according to Ushinsky, should be “ main, central subject, included in all other subjects and collecting their results ”.

Ushinsky worked hard to determine the main direction and content of the primary education course and improve the methods of initial teaching of the native language in public schools in order to turn it into an academic subject that contributes to the mental, moral and aesthetic education of children.

Ushinsky’s statements about a public school teaching children in their native language were of great importance for the construction of a Russian public school and the school affairs of non-Russian peoples who struggled in the conditions Tsarist Russia for teaching children in their native language, for the development of national culture.

A child, Ushinsky believed, begins to assimilate elements of folk culture at an early age, and primarily through knowledge of his native language: “ A child enters into the spiritual life of the people around him solely through the medium of his native language, and, conversely, the world surrounding the child is reflected in him with its spiritual side only through the same medium - the native language.”. Therefore, all educational and cognitive work in the family, in kindergarten, and at school should be conducted in the mother’s native language.

Ushinsky gave the most valuable advice on the development of speech and thinking of children from an early age; These tips have not lost their meaning in our time. He proved that the development of speech in children is closely related to the development of thinking, and pointed out that thought and language are in inextricable unity: language is the expression of thought in words. “ Language,- Ushinsky wrote, - is not something detached from thought, but, on the contrary, its organic creation, rooted in it and constantly growing out of it" The main thing in the development of children’s speech is to develop their thinking abilities, to teach them to correctly express their thoughts. “ It is impossible to develop language separately from thought, but even developing it primarily before thought is positively harmful ”.

K.D. Ushinsky argued that independent thoughts arise only from independently acquired knowledge about those objects and phenomena that surround the child. Therefore, a necessary condition for a child’s independent understanding of this or that thought is clarity. Ushinsky showed a close connection between the clarity of learning and the development of children’s speech and thinking. He wrote: “ Children's nature clearly requires clarity ”; “A child thinks in forms, images, colors, sounds, sensations in general, and that teacher would be in vain and harmfully raping the child’s nature who would want to force her to think differently" He advised educators, through simple exercises, to develop in children the ability to observe various objects and phenomena, to enrich children with the most complete, true, vivid images possible, which then become elements of their thought process. ” Necessary,- he wrote, - so that the object is directly reflected in the soul of the child and, so to speak, in the eyes of the teacher and under his guidance, the child’s sensations are transformed into concepts, from concepts a thought is composed and the thought is clothed in words.”

In the development of speech of children of preschool and early school age, Ushinsky attached great importance to storytelling from pictures.

He pointed out the great importance of works of folk art in the upbringing and education of children. He put Russian folk tales in first place, emphasizing that, due to the peculiarities of the development of their imagination, children are very fond of fairy tales. IN folk tales they like the dynamism of the action, repetition of the same turns, simplicity and imagery folk expressions. K.D. Ushinsky’s speech in defense of fairy tales as some teachers of the 60s of the 19th century denied fairy tales because they lack “ objective realistic content ”.

In the initial teaching of his native language, K.D. Ushinsky also attached great importance to other works of Russian folk art - proverbs, jokes and riddles. He considered Russian proverbs to be simple in form and expression and deep in content, works that reflected the views and ideas of the people - folk wisdom. Riddles, in his opinion, provide a useful exercise for the child’s mind and give rise to an interesting, lively conversation. Sayings, jokes and tongue twisters help children develop a sense of the sound colors of their native language.

Psychological foundations of education and training

In his work “Man as a Subject of Education” K.D. Ushinsky put forward and substantiated the most important requirement that every teacher must fulfill - to build educational work taking into account age and psychological characteristics children, systematically study children in the process of education. “If pedagogy wants to educate a person in all respects, then it must first get to know him in all respects... The educator must strive to get to know a person as he really is, with all his weaknesses and in all his greatness, with all his everyday life, small needs and with all its great spiritual demands.”

In full accordance with the teachings of Russian materialist physiologists, Ushinsky expressed his firm belief that through purposeful education, based on the study of man, it is possible to “ push far the limits of human strength: physical, mental and moral" And this, in his opinion, is the most important task of real, humanistic pedagogy.

Among the sciences that study man, K.D. Ushinsky singled out physiology and especially psychology, which give the teacher systematic knowledge about the human body and its mental manifestations, enriching them with the knowledge necessary for the practice of educational work with children. A teacher-educator who knows psychology must creatively use its laws and the rules arising from them in a variety of specific conditions of his educational activities with children of different ages.

The historical merit of K.D. Ushinsky lies in the fact that he outlined, in accordance with the scientific achievements of that time, the psychological foundations of didactics - the theory of learning. He gave the most valuable instructions on how to develop children’s active attention through exercises during the learning process, how to cultivate conscious memory, and consolidate educational material in students’ memory through repetition, which is an organic part of the learning process. Repetition, Ushinsky believed, is not necessary in order to “to resume what has been forgotten (it’s bad if something is forgotten), but in order to prevent the possibility of oblivion”; Every step forward in learning must be based on the knowledge of what has been learned.

From the point of view of psychology, Ushinsky substantiated the most important didactic principles of educational teaching: clarity, systematicity and consistency, thoroughness and strength of students’ assimilation of educational material, variety of teaching methods.

Ways and means of moral education of children

The goal of education, Ushinsky believed, should be education moral person, a useful member of society. Moral education occupies the main place in Ushinsky’s pedagogy; in his opinion, it should be inextricably linked with the mental and labor education of children.

Ushinsky considered education to be the most important means of moral education. He asserted the need for the closest connections between education and training, and argued for the most important importance of educational training. All educational subjects have, he argued, the richest educational potential, and everyone involved in the matter of education must remember this in all their actions, in all direct relations with students and pupils. Among the subjects of the public school, he especially valued the native language in this regard and very convincingly showed that by mastering their native language, children not only gain knowledge, but also become familiar with the national consciousness of the people, their spiritual life, moral concepts and ideas.

Ushinsky considered persuasion to be one of the means of moral education, while he warned against annoying instructions and persuasion, which often do not reach the consciousness of children.

K.D. Ushinsky attached great importance to the formation of habits in children. He established an important pattern in the matter of developing habits: what younger man, the sooner a habit takes root in it and the sooner it is eradicated, and the older the habits, the more difficult it is to eradicate them. Ushinsky put forward a number of valuable tips for instilling healthy habits in children. He said that habits are ingrained by the repetition of an action; that one should not rush when establishing habits, because to consolidate many habits at once means to drown out one skill with another; that you should use the valuable habits you have acquired as often as possible. Ushinsky argued that in the formation of habits nothing is as powerful as the example of adults, and that frequent changes of educators are harmful.

To eradicate any habit, you need to use two means at the same time:

1) if possible, remove any reason for actions stemming from a bad habit;

2) at the same time direct the children’s activities in a different direction.

When eradicating a bad habit, you need to understand why it appeared and act against the cause, and not against its consequences.

These tips and instructions from Ushinsky on developing habits have not lost their significance for Soviet teachers.

A necessary condition for moral education, Ushinsky pointed out, is the formation in children of correct ideas about the role and significance of labor in the history of society and in human development. He expressed remarkable thoughts about the role of work in human life in his article “Labor in its mental and educational meaning”: “ Education itself, if it desires happiness for a person, should educate him not for happiness, but prepare him for the work of life...”; “Education should develop in a person the habit and love of work; it should give him the opportunity to find work for himself in life.”

Ushinsky strongly condemned the system of noble education with its disdain for work and working people, education that formed the habit of idleness, empty chatter, and doing nothing. In this regard, he spoke out against those teachers who considered the task of pedagogy to facilitate the learning process in every possible way with irrelevant embellishments, creating the idea that it was easy and entertaining. He sarcastically called this practice of school work “ humorous pedagogy”, causing “ such a pastime when a person is left without work in his hands, without a thought in his head" With such an organization of training, students gradually acquire “ the vile habit of staying for whole hours, doing nothing and thinking nothing ”.

He countered the desires of teachers to facilitate the learning process in every possible way with the firm conviction that learning is work, and serious work. “ At school, seriousness should reign, allowing for jokes, but not turning the whole thing into a joke... Learning is work and should remain work, full of thought...” Ushinsky wanted all the teaching and life of his students to be organized rationally: “ The teaching of any subject must necessarily proceed in such a way that the pupil’s share of work remains exactly as much work as his young strength can overcome." There is no need to strain the student’s strength in mental work, it is necessary not to let him fall asleep, it is necessary to gradually accustom him to mental work. “ The human body must get used to mental work little by little, carefully, but by acting in this way, you can give it the habit of enduring prolonged mental work easily and without any harm to health...” The teacher “by accustoming the pupil to mental work, accustoms him to overcome the severity of such work and experience the pleasures that come to them.” “A person accustomed to working mentally gets bored without such work, looks for it and, of course, finds it at every step. ”.

Based on this understanding of the educational nature of teaching, Ushinsky exalted the teacher and highly appreciated the influence of his personality on students. He put this influence in first place among other means and argued that it could not be replaced by any other didactic and methodological means.

K.D. Ushinsky attached great importance to the replacement of mental labor with physical labor, which is not only pleasant, but also useful rest after mental work. He considered it useful to introduce physical labor in his free time from studying, especially in closed educational institutions, where students can engage in gardening, carpentry and turning, book binding, self-service, etc. From this point of view, Ushinsky also valued children's games. "...But, he wrote, For a game to be a real game, the child must never get fed up with it and get used to, little by little, without difficulty or coercion, leaving it to work ”.

Pedagogical statements by K.D. Ushinsky about the moral and educational role of labor, about the combination of physical and mental labor, about the proper organization of study and recreation are valuable in our time.

Fundamentals of the theory of preschool education.

K.D. Ushinsky based the theory of preschool education on the idea of ​​national education

He considered the main characteristic of preschool children to be a thirst for activity and a desire to understand the world around them and recommended that educators and parents encourage children in their impulses for independent activity, thoughtfully and skillfully guide them, avoiding either excessive relief of children’s strength or excessive relief, since these extremes can contribute to the appearance of laziness and passivity in them.

Ushinsky attached great educational importance to children's games. He created an original theory of children's play, confirming it with scientific and psychological data.

He noted that imagination plays a large role in the mental life of a preschool child. This is explained by the fact that he has insufficient experience and knowledge, and logical thinking is not developed. But Ushinsky correctly pointed out that a child’s imagination is poorer, weaker, and more monotonous than that of an adult. A characteristic feature of childhood is the fragmentation of chains of ideas, the speed of transition from one order of thought to another. “ The movement of a child's imagination resembles the whimsical flutter of a butterfly, but not the mighty flight of an eagle. ”.

The vividness of children's imagination and children's faith in the reality of their own ideas and created images is the psychological basis of children's play. “ The child lives in the game, and the traces of this life remain deeper in him than the traces of real life, which he could not yet enter due to the complexity of its phenomena and interests... In the game, the child, already a maturing person, tries his strength and independently manages his same creatures ”.

K.D. Ushinsky emphasized the influence on the content of children's play: it provides material for play activity children. Games change as children age, depending on childhood experience, mental development, and adult guidance. Children’s experiences in play do not disappear without a trace, but find their manifestation in the future in a person’s social behavior.

Social games and their direction are of great importance in shaping the behavior of children, Ushinsky pointed out: “ In social games, in which many children take part, the first associations of social relations are established. ”.

K.D. Ushinsky, unlike Froebel and his followers, objected to the teacher’s excessive interference in children’s play. He considered play to be an independent, free children’s activity that is important in the development of personality: “ Play is the free activity of a child... In it all aspects of the human soul are formed, his mind, his heart, his will" The teacher must provide material for the game and ensure that this material contributes to the fulfillment of the assigned educational tasks. Time for children's games in kindergarten should be allocated according to age: than smaller child, the more time he should spend in the game. And in preschool age, we must strive to ensure that the child never gets fed up with play and can easily interrupt it to work. Preschoolers also have to work.

K.D. Ushinsky recommended widely using folk games in educational work with preschool children; “ Paying attention to these folk games, developing this rich source, organizing them and creating from them an excellent and powerful educational tool is the task of future pedagogy“, he wrote. Leading Russian figures in preschool education sought to fulfill this behest of Ushinsky.

Ushinsky pointed out that toys have great educational significance. “ Children do not like immovable toys... well-finished ones, which they cannot change according to their imagination...- he wrote . - Best toy for a child, one that he can make change in the most varied ways.” “The child becomes sincerely attached to his toys,- Ushinsky noted , - loves them tenderly and fervently, and loves in them not their beauty, but those pictures of the imagination that he himself has attached to them. A new doll, no matter how good it is, will never immediately become a girl’s favorite, and she will continue to love the old one, although she has long lost her nose and her face has been wiped clean. ”

The theory of children's play, developed by K.D. Ushinsky, was a valuable contribution not only to Russian, but also to world preschool pedagogy. It is free from religious and mystical interpretations, so characteristic of Froebel. Ushinsky showed the social character and significance of children's play, gave valuable guidelines on the use of games in working with preschool children.

In the education of preschool children, K.D. Ushinsky gave a prominent place to nature - “ one of the most powerful agents in human education ”. Natural phenomena and objects early begin to occupy the child's mind. Communication between children and nature helps develop their mental abilities. Observation and study native nature contributes to the development of a sense of patriotism and aesthetic education. From an early age it is necessary to instill in children a caring attitude towards preserving the natural environment.

Ushinsky placed aesthetic education in direct connection with the moral education of preschool children. Children's feelings must be guided without violating them, he pointed out; care must be taken to create an environment that satisfies aesthetic and pedagogical requirements. ” Decorate,- said Ushinsky, - the child's room with beautiful things, but only the beauty of which is accessible to the child .”

Ushinsky highly appreciated the importance good singing as one of the means of aesthetic education of children, at the same time refreshing their lives, helping to unite them into a friendly team.

He also considered drawing to be a valuable activity from the point of view of aesthetic education and the general mental development of children.

Children are raised aesthetically and instilled in them with love for their homeland, also works of folk and literary creativity. Simple in presentation, easy to understand, fiction stories, poems, articles given by K.D. Ushinsky in “Native Word” served as a valuable means of mental, moral and aesthetic education for millions of Russian children.

Considering the specific conditions of Russia in the 60s, when even a real public school had not yet been created, Ushinsky believed that kindergartens were still “ a desirable but hard-to-find luxury” that they are only available to the rich. And yet in the capitals and big cities, “where such a garden can be built, it should be built there as soon as possible" In kindergarten, children will learn to be social, play with their peers, give in and help each other, and will love “ order, harmony, harmony in sounds, colors, figures, movements, words and actions ”.

K.D. Ushinsky gave valuable instructions on improving the educational work of kindergartens, which were included in the foundation of Russian preschool pedagogy of the second half of the 19th century. While children are in kindergarten, there is no need to overtire them.” sedentary activities” and formally systematized didactic games, it is necessary to give them more free time for independent activities; The child in kindergarten should be given the opportunity to temporarily retire so that he can demonstrate his independence in one or another type of activity.

K.D. Ushinsky believed that premature learning, as well as delay in learning, has its bad sides. Premature learning overtires children's brains, instills in them self-doubt, and discourages them from learning; the delay in learning causes a lag in the development of children, their acquisition of habits and inclinations that teachers have to struggle with hard. Ushinsky distinguished, firstly, methodical, systematic education, starting at the age of seven, and, secondly, preparatory teaching, carried out in preschool age. He considered it necessary to develop: educational activities for children, “ pre-book learning”, and the rules of learning and development before children acquire literacy; non-educational activities that are adjacent to children's play (sewing dresses for dolls, weaving, planting flowers).

K.D. Ushinsky’s statements about the relationship between preparatory teaching and methodological teaching of children, about the nature and characteristics of preparatory teaching in preschool age were a valuable contribution to Russian pedagogy. They helped to more accurately determine the content and methodology of educational work. kindergarten as a preparatory institution for school, to establish lines of communication and continuity of work between kindergarten and school, creative nature activities of the teacher when teaching children.

Ushinsky made high demands on the child’s personality “ gardeners”; he represented her “ possessing pedagogical talent, kind, meek, but at the same time with a strong character, who would passionately devote herself to children of this age and, perhaps, would study everything there is to know in order to keep them occupied ”.

The teacher, in his opinion, should come from among the people, have the best moral qualities, comprehensive knowledge, love her job and children, serve as an example for them, study the laws of mental development of children, implement individual approach to every child.

ABOUT family education.

For the majority of the country's population, Ushinsky still considered the family to be the most natural environment for raising and educating preschoolers. In it, children get their first impressions, acquire basic knowledge, skills and habits, and develop their inclinations. Parents and educators and the example of their life and behavior play a huge role in the development and upbringing of a child’s personality. “One of the first duties of every citizen and father of a family is wrote Ushinsky, - prepare your children to be useful citizens for society; one of the sacred rights of a person born into the world is the right to a correct and kind upbringing ”.

To fulfill this responsible responsibility and civic duty to society, parents must be inspired to combine their private well-being with public benefit. They must have pedagogical knowledge, why study pedagogical literature; consciously approach the educational work, the choice of educators and teachers, and the determination of future paths of life for their children.

Ushinsky assigned an extremely important role to the mother in family education and education of preschool and early school age. The mother stands closer to the children, shows constant concern for them from the day they are born, and better understands their individual characteristics; if she is not busy at work outside the home, she has more opportunities in the process of everyday life to influence children in the desired direction.

Ushinsky attached social significance to his mother’s educational activities. Being the educator of her children, she thereby becomes the educator of the people. From this, Ushinsky said, “ It follows by itself that the need for a complete all-round education for women is no longer, so to speak, for family life alone, but with a high goal in mind - to implement the results of science, art and poetry in the life of the people ”.

In the conditions of Tsarist Russia, when there were few elementary schools, Ushinsky wanted to see in his mother not only an educator, but also a teacher of his children. Tutorial He considered it possible to use “Native Word” (year I) and “Guide to teaching on “Native Word” in family education and training of children up to 8-10 years of age.

The importance of Ushinsky in the development of pedagogy

K.D. Ushinsky is the founder of original Russian pedagogy, in particular preschool pedagogy; he made a most valuable contribution to the development of world pedagogical thought. Ushinsky deeply analyzed the theory and practice of education, including preschool, and education abroad, showed achievements and shortcomings in this area and thereby summed up the development of pedagogy of other peoples.

He substantiated the idea of ​​public education, which served as the basis for the creation of original Russian pedagogy. His teaching on the role of the native language in the mental and moral education and training of children, on the public school, his theory of preschool education of children had a huge influence not only on modern and subsequent generations of teachers in multinational Russia.

Many of Ushinsky’s pedagogical statements were responses to pressing issues of our time, criticism of the unsatisfied state of educational work at school, in the family, in preschool institutions of that time and practical proposals for their improvement, and they are of not only historical and pedagogical interest. M.I. Kalinin at a meeting of public education workers in 1941, pointing to a number of Ushinsky’s advice on raising and educating children, highly appreciated his ideas, which only in our socialist society can be fully appreciated.

The short human life that fell to flash among millions of earthly existences in the middle of the nineteenth century has ended. But this was at the same time the beginning of a new, already endless, immortal life- in the memory of human generations who never forget the worthy. It is not for nothing that there is such an inscription on his monument: “Let the dead honor their labors; their deeds go after them.”

And people of different generations, different eras talk about him...

I. P. Derkachev, Simferopol teacher:

"This educator erected a monument to himself not only in the hearts and minds of Russian children - many workers of public education will remember his fruitful work for a long time and with love.”

D. D. Semenov, teacher, friend of Ushinsky:

"If all Slavic world is proud of I. A. Comenius, Switzerland is proud of Pestalozzi, Germany is proud of Diesterweg, then we Russians will not forget that Konstantin Dmitrievich Ushinsky lived and taught among us.”

N. F. Bunakov, outstanding Russian teacher:

“And to this day, despite the fact that more than thirty years have passed since the time of Ushinsky, his works have not lost their significance.”

V. N. Stoletov, President of the USSR Academy of Pedagogical Sciences:

“According to the calendar, Konstantin Dmitrievich Ushinsky is a man of the nineteenth century. But thanks to socially useful activities, he lives in our century.”

Monuments to Ushinsky stand on the streets of our cities; institutes, schools, and libraries bear his name. His bronze bust is installed in the conference hall of the Academy of Pedagogical Sciences, and portraits hang in almost every school. Students receive scholarships in his name, and prizes and medals in his name are awarded to scientists.

His books are published in dozens of languages ​​both here and abroad.

As a wise adviser, he is always close to those who teach and to everyone who learns.

May his kind, sincere, pure voice continue to ring for us today...

“Man is born to work... Conscious and free labor alone is capable of making a person’s happiness... Pleasures are only accompanying phenomena... Wealth grows harmlessly for a person only when the spiritual needs of a person grow along with wealth... Labor is the best guardian of human morality, and work should be the educator of man...

But work is work because it is difficult, and therefore the road to happiness is difficult..."

Bibliography:

1. A. G. Khripkova “The Wisdom of Education”, Moscow, “Pedagogy”, 1989.

2. A. A. Radugin “Psychology and Pedagogy”, Moscow, “Center”, 1999.

3. B. P. Esipov “Pedagogical Encyclopedia”, Moscow, “Soviet Encyclopedia”, 1968.

4. Yu Salnikov “Persuasion”, Moscow, “Young Guard”, 1977.

5. L. N. Litvinov “History of preschool pedagogy”, Moscow, “Prosveshchenie”, 1989.

Philosophical and natural science foundations of the pedagogical system of K. D. Ushinsky. In his philosophical development, Ushinsky moved from idealism to materialism, but this path remained incomplete. Having thoroughly studied various philosophical systems, critically using the positive elements of these systems, he sought to develop his own, independent, original worldview.
In his views on nature, Ushinsky followed the evolutionary teachings of Darwin. In the theory of knowledge and in psychology he has many materialistic elements. In contrast to the metaphysical speculative abstract systems of psychology, such as Herbart, Ushinsky tried to build psychology on the foundations of physiology. But in sociological questions, he took an idealistic position, like most educators, recognizing the driving force social development mind, ideas.
Even in his earliest work, in his speech “On Cameral Education,” Ushinsky, taking the position of materialist sensationalism, wrote: “The only criterion for a thing is the thing itself, and not our concept of it.”
In the second half of the 60s, when, with the onset of reaction, any positive mention of materialism, the slightest expression of sympathy for it was met with hostility and persecution by government circles, Ushinsky courageously declared that materialist philosophy “has contributed and continues to contribute a lot of positive things to science and thinking; the art of education in particular owes extremely much to the materialist direction of research that has prevailed in recent times.”
K. D. Ushinsky criticizes Kant and Hegel on a number of issues, and notes the abstractness and far-fetchedness of Herbart’s psychological theory. He, however, did not find a materialist philosophy that satisfied him and believed that materialism was “still awaiting its Hegel.” Ushinsky had a sharply negative attitude towards vulgar materialism, which was quite widespread at that time. He also objected to those philosophers (in particular Spencer) who believed that as a result of man’s adaptation to environment and the development of the human body, a person will grow wings in the future. He wrote: “Man’s strength is his steam engines, his speed is steam locomotives and steamships, and man’s wings are already growing and will unfold when he learns to control the arbitrary movement of balloons.” This was said more than half a century before the first airplanes appeared.
In his article “Labor in its mental and educational significance,” Ushinsky even went so far as to state social contradictions: “the need for large and large capital for any independent production is increasing; the number of independent productions is decreasing; one huge factory absorbs thousands of small ones and turns independent owners into day laborers; one goes crazy from fat; another is driven wild by poverty; wealth destroys one, extreme poverty turns another into a machine...” But, having drawn in such strong terms a terrifying picture social contradictions, having correctly noted the facts of the concentration of capital and the collapse of small industries that cannot withstand competition with large ones, Ushinsky, due to the class limitations of his worldview, was unable to reveal the cause of these contradictions, did not rise to an understanding of the class structure of society and the class struggle and could not, therefore, see the real ways to eliminate these social contradictions.
In the same article, Ushinsky castigates idleness and highly values ​​labor, points out that it is labor that creates values, but in assessing labor in the development of society and man, he still adheres to an idealistic point of view.
Ushinsky warmly welcomed the fall of serfdom, dreamed of the free development of Russia, but believed that this development should be achieved not by revolutionary, but by peaceful means. In his political views, Ushinsky was a bourgeois democrat. He recognized the right of the people to govern the state.
At the beginning of Ushinsky’s activity, religion occupied a much larger place in his worldview than in last years his life. At first, he considered the Christian (in particular, Orthodox) religion the basis of morality and education, recommended placing priests as heads and teachers of public schools, and considered the school “the threshold of the church.”
At the end of his life, Ushinsky, still remaining a believer, already clearly distinguished between science and religion. He wrote at this time: “every factual science - and we don’t know any other science - stands outside of any religion, because it is based on facts, and not on beliefs...”
In their later works, for example, in the mentioned materials for the third volume of the essay “Man as a Subject of Education,” Ushinsky considers the main feature of a person to be love for people and even claims that an atheist who treats people humanely is more Christian than a believer who is not sufficiently imbued with a feeling of love for his neighbor.
In his dying article (1870) “A General View of the Emergence of Our Public Schools,” Ushinsky, refuting his early views that the best teachers of public schools are priests, wrote quite boldly for that time: “The idea of ​​a church school has not taken root in our country at all.” among the people, nor among the clergy... in the desire to establish schools at churches... there was something feigned and did not produce positive results... the peasants themselves speak out, and sometimes quite decisively, against the appointment of parish clergy as teachers in peasant schools " .

K. D. Ushinsky about pedagogical science and the art of education.
Ushinsky approached the development of the theory of pedagogy as a widely educated thinker, armed with deep scientific knowledge about man as a subject of education. Ushinsky pointed out that the theory of pedagogy should be based on the use of the laws of anatomy, physiology, psychology, philosophy, history and other sciences. It must discover the laws of education, and not be limited to pedagogical recipes. He was well acquainted with the pedagogy of his time.
Rejecting the speculative, armchair construction of pedagogical theory, Ushinsky also warned against empiricism in pedagogy, rightly pointing out that it is not enough to be based only on personal, even successful, experience of educational work. He demanded the unity of theory and practice. “An empty theory, based on nothing, turns out to be the same worthless thing as a fact or experience, from which no thought can be derived, which is not preceded or followed by an idea. Theory cannot abandon reality, fact cannot abandon thought,” wrote Ushinsky. Teaching practice without theory he likened it to witchcraft in medicine.
Ushinsky quite correctly argued that it is not enough for a teacher to master the principles and specific rules of educational work; he also needs to arm himself with knowledge of the basic laws of human nature and be able to apply them in each specific case. “If pedagogy wants to educate a person in all respects, then it must first get to know him in all respects,” he declared. Carrying out this requirement, Ushinsky wrote a major work “Man as a Subject of Education” in two volumes and, intending to give a third volume, collected and prepared materials for it, but early death interrupted his fruitful work.
At that time, two directions were fighting in the field of psychology: metaphysical psychology, whose representatives tried to build psychology speculatively, a priori, starting with the definition of the “soul,” and a new direction - empirical psychology, whose supporters sought to rely on experience, study facts and individual aspects of mental life , starting with its simplest manifestations.
Ushinsky sought to proceed from experience and attached great importance to observation. There are many materialistic elements in his psychological views. He considers mental life in its development.
Ushinsky correctly reproached Herbart for being metaphysical and one-sided, and pointed out the limitations of the psychological views of another German psychologist, Beneke, who was very famous at that time. He sought to consider the psyche not of an abstract person located outside of time and space, but of someone living, acting, developing in a certain environment.
Ushinsky correctly believed that education depends on the historical development of the people. The people themselves pave the way to the future, and education only follows this road and, acting in concert with other social forces, will help both individuals and new generations to follow it. Therefore, one cannot invent a system of education or borrow it from other peoples; it is necessary to create it creatively.

The idea of ​​national education in the pedagogy of K. D. Ushinsky.
At the heart of Ushinsky’s pedagogical system is the idea of ​​nationality. “There is only one innate inclination common to all, which education can always count on: this is what we call nationality... education, created by the people themselves and based on popular principles, has that educational power that is not found in the best systems, based on abstract ideas or borrowed from another people... Every living historical nation is the most beautiful creation of God on earth, and education can only draw from this rich and pure source,” wrote Ushinsky in the article “On Nationality in Public Education” ( 1857).
By nationality, Ushinsky understood the uniqueness of each nation, determined by its historical development, geographical and natural conditions.
In the article “On Nationality in Public Education,” he therefore begins an analysis of education in the spirit of nationality by characterizing those features that have historically developed among various peoples. Ushinsky gives an apt description and in-depth analysis of French, English, German and American education. He dwells in particular detail on the criticism of the reactionary German pedagogy of that time, which tsarism was guided by. Ushinsky argued for the extreme inexpediency of mechanically transferring this pedagogy to Russian soil.
K. D. Ushinsky emphasizes that one of characteristic features The upbringing of the Russian people is the development in children of patriotism and deep love for their homeland. Because the the best expression nationality, in his opinion, is the native language, the Russian language should be the basis for teaching Russian children; Primary school education should also familiarize children well with Russian history, the geography of Russia, and its nature.
K. D. Ushinsky pointed out that the Russian people showed and show great love for their homeland, proving it by their exploits in the fight against Polish invaders at the beginning of the 17th century, in the Patriotic War of 1812, and in the Crimean campaign of 1853-1855. However, this feeling, “awakening from time to time with truly lion’s strength,” according to Ushinsky, flares up in some people only in impulses when the homeland is in danger. Education based on nationality should teach one to demonstrate this patriotism always, every day, when citizens perform their public duty.
This education is designed to develop in children a sense of national pride, which is, however, alien to chauvinism and combined with respect for other peoples. It should instill in children a sense of duty to their homeland, teach them to always put common interests above personal ones.
Ushinsky was characterized by inexhaustible faith in the creative powers of the Russian people. Thanks to their power, courage, and resilience, the Russian people withstood the Mongol-Tatar yoke and saved Western Europe from the invasion of the Mongol-Tatar hordes; He repeatedly saved the independence of his homeland from the encroachments of foreign enemies. Ushinsky wrote that the people themselves created “that deep language, the depths of which we have not yet been able to measure; that these simple people created the poetry that saved us from the amusing baby talk in which we imitated foreigners; that it was from popular sources that we updated all our literature and made it worthy of this name.”
Russian music and painting, Russian philosophy also drew much from folk art: from the “gray, ignorant, rough mass flows a wonderful folk song, from which both the poet, the artist, and the musician draw their inspiration; an apt, deep word is heard, into which... the philologist and philosopher ponder and are amazed at the depth and truth of this word...”
Being deeply confident in the powerful creative forces of the Russian people, Ushinsky put forward the demand that the matter of public education be left to the people themselves and that it be freed from government tutelage that is burdensome and slows down its development. “Whoever is well acquainted with the history of Russia will not for a minute think about entrusting public education to the people themselves,” wrote Ushinsky.
In close connection with nationality as the basis of education in Ushinsky’s pedagogical system, there is a question about the educational and educational significance of the native language.
In his remarkable article “Native Word,” Ushinsky wrote: “The language of the people is the best, never fading and ever-blooming flower of their entire spiritual life, which begins far beyond the boundaries of history. The entire people and their entire homeland are spiritualized in language; in it the creative power of the people's spirit transforms into thought, into picture and sound the sky of the fatherland, its air, its physical phenomena, its climate, its fields, mountains and valleys, its forests and rivers, its storms and thunderstorms - all that deep, full of thought and feelings are the voice of native nature, which speaks so loudly about a person’s love for his sometimes harsh homeland, which expresses itself so clearly in native songs and native tunes, in the mouth folk poets. But in the bright, transparent depths of the folk language, not only the nature of the native country is reflected, but also the entire history of the spiritual life of the people... Language is the most living, most abundant and lasting connection, connecting the obsolete, living and future generations of the people into one great, historical living whole. It not only expresses the vitality of the people, but is precisely this life itself. When a people’s language disappears, there are no more people!” The native language, as Ushinsky pointed out, is not only the best exponent of the spiritual properties of the people, but also the best national teacher, who taught the people even when there were no books or schools. By mastering his native language, a child perceives not only sounds, their combinations and modifications, but also an infinite variety of concepts, views, feelings, and artistic images.

Goals and means of moral education.
K. D. Ushinsky believed that a person should be perfect physically, mentally and morally, harmoniously developed. Therefore, he defined education as a purposeful, conscious process of forming a harmoniously developed personality. Among various sides Ushinsky gave the main place to the education of morality. He wrote: “...we boldly express the conviction that moral influence is the main task of education, much more important than the development of the mind in general, filling the head with knowledge.”
Moral education, according to Ushinsky, should develop in a child humanity, honesty and truthfulness, hard work, discipline and a sense of responsibility, self-esteem combined with modesty. Education should develop in a child a strong character and will, perseverance, and a sense of duty.
The education of patriotism, selfless, active love for the motherland occupies the main place in the system of moral education recommended by Ushinsky in accordance with the basis of his entire pedagogical system - nationality. Love for the homeland, wrote Ushinsky, is the most strong feeling a person who, with the general destruction of everything holy and noble, perishes last in a bad person.
Moral education should develop in children respect and love for people, a sincere, friendly and fair attitude towards them.
Protesting against blind, cane discipline, Ushinsky wrote: “In the old school, discipline was based on the most unnatural principle - on fear of the teacher distributing rewards and punishments. This fear forced children not only into a position that was unusual, but also harmful for them: immobility, classroom boredom and hypocrisy.” Ushinsky demanded a humane attitude towards children, alien, however, to effeminacy and caressing. In relation to children, the teacher must show reasonable demands, instilling in them a sense of duty and responsibility.
Ushinsky castigates selfishness, careerism, idleness, greed, hypocrisy and other vices. Celebrating positive features ethical views of Ushinsky and his theory of moral education, we must at the same time keep in mind that his morality is combined with religion.
However, it would be wrong not to note that his views on religion changed. In his dying article, Ushinsky said that although the school should not contradict the church, it should not be built on the same foundations as it, being called upon to satisfy the needs of real life, and that religious education is in itself, and secular education is in itself.
If at first the religious element prevailed in Ushinsky’s views on moral education, then he gave the main place in moral education to civic tasks - the preparation of an active citizen of his fatherland, imbued with a sense of public duty.
The means of moral education, according to Ushinsky, are: 1) education (in this regard, his educational books are remarkable, which skillfully combine the development of speech, the communication of knowledge and the moral education of students); 2) personal example of the teacher (according to him figuratively, “this is a fruitful ray of sunshine for a young soul, which cannot be replaced by anything”); 3) a conviction to which he attached great importance; 4) skillful handling of students (pedagogical tact); 5) preventive measures and 6) incentives and penalties.

Activities and activities of the child. Labor and its educational significance. K. D. Ushinsky quite correctly considers the activity and activity of a child to be one of the most important conditions for his upbringing and education. In accordance with this, he attaches great importance to the children’s lifestyle, which should teach them to be organized and develop a desire for activity. Both in the process of moral education and in teaching, he always emphasizes the importance of exercises and demands that education transform children’s positive beliefs into deeds and actions.
In his psychological statements, Ushinsky emphasizes the great importance of will. He understands learning as an active, volitional process, warning against amusing pedagogy and teaching children the ability to overcome difficulties. During the learning process, not everything will be interesting to a child, but let him, through exertion of will and awareness of his duty, learn to overcome both the uninteresting and the difficult. His views on the importance of the child’s activity and activity are clearly expressed in his statements about work.
Ushinsky believed that labor is a necessary condition for the proper development of man. In an extensive article “Labor in its mental and educational significance,” he noted that labor is the main factor in the creation of material values ​​and is necessary for the physical, mental and moral improvement of man, for human dignity, for human freedom and his happiness. To work a person owes moments of high pleasure. Work strengthens family life.
According to Ushinsky, “education, if it wishes a person happiness, should educate him not for happiness, but prepare him for the work of life.” Education should develop in a person love and the habit of work.
Ushinsky attached great importance to physical labor, considered it very useful for a person to combine physical and mental labor in his activities, and emphasized the great educational importance of agricultural labor (especially in rural schools). Speaking about work, he pointed out that “teaching is work and must remain work, but work full of thought.” He strongly objected to entertaining, amusing learning, to the desire of some teachers to make learning as easy as possible for children. In the process of learning, children should be accustomed to work and to overcoming difficulties. Ushinsky wrote that only small children can learn by playing. Mental work is hard and quickly tires the unaccustomed. Children must be accustomed to this hard work gradually, without overloading them with overwhelming tasks.
Ushinsky’s indications of the great educational importance of labor, his idea that “learning is work and serious work...” are of great value for pedagogy even today.

Didactics by K. D. Ushinsky. Ushinsky's didactic views are distinguished by great depth and originality. He demanded that education be built on the basis of taking into account the age stages of children’s development and their psychological characteristics. In particular, he provided valuable guidance on using children's attention during learning. Noting that there are two types of attention: active, i.e. voluntary, and passive, i.e. involuntary, Ushinsky believed that, taking into account the characteristics of childhood, it is necessary to give food to passive attention, while at the same time developing in every possible way active attention as the main thing , which a person will have to use in the future.
Speaking about memory and memorization, Ushinsky pointed out that by frequent repetition, which prevents forgetting, it is necessary to strengthen the student’s confidence in his memory. Education, as Ushinsky said, should be built on the principles of its feasibility for the child and consistency.
To avoid overwork, children should not be overloaded with academic activities in the first years of education.
Based on the psychological characteristics of childhood, Ushinsky attached great importance to the principle of clarity. “A child thinks in forms, colors, sounds, sensations, in general...”; hence the need for children to have visual learning, “which is built not on abstract ideas and words, but on concrete images directly perceived by the child,” he wrote.
Justifying the principle of visual teaching from the epistemological side, Ushinsky pointed out that the only source our knowledge may be “experience communicated to us through the external senses.” “The images directly perceived by us from the external world are, therefore, the only materials on which and through which our thinking faculty works.”
According to Ushinsky, “this course of teaching, from the concrete to the abstract, abstract, from ideas to thoughts, is so natural and based on such clear psychological laws that only those who generally reject the need to conform in training to the requirement can reject its necessity.” human nature in general and for children in particular.”
Ushinsky contributed a lot of valuable things to the theoretical development and application of the principle of visibility: he gave a materialist justification for the principle of visibility. In Ushinsky’s understanding of visibility, there is no overestimation and some fetishization of visibility, which is characteristic of Comenius, and no formalism and pedantry in introducing children to the world around them, which are characteristic of Pestalozzi. Ushinsky gave visibility its place in the learning process; he saw in it one of the conditions that ensures that students receive complete knowledge and develop their logical thinking.
Rejecting the formal exercises of Pestalozzi, Ushinsky sought to introduce children comprehensively to objects, he wanted them to understand the real connections that exist between these objects. He wrote that a wonderful or even great mind is “the ability to see objects in their reality, comprehensively, with all the relationships in which they are placed.”
etc.................

Dear………………!

We present to your attention a report on the topic: “Pedagogical activity and scientific creativity of K.D. Ushinsky"

Konstantin Dmitrievich Ushinsky... The fate of this great man, scientist, teacher is amazing and tragic.

From school until the last days of his life, he was accompanied by extraordinary successes and bitter disappointments. One of the brightest students at the gymnasium, he “fails” the final exam and does not receive a certificate; At the age of twenty, having graduated as the first candidate from the Faculty of Law of Moscow University, he was appointed professor at the Lyceum, and three years later he was deprived of his professorial chair. Arriving in St. Petersburg, he searches in vain for a teaching position - not even in a gymnasium, but in some provincial school, and a few years later the Russian Empress talks with Ushinsky as an authoritative teacher. A career as a scientist opened before him. He proved himself to be a talented journalist and discovered extraordinary literary talents. But he made the final choice in favor of the profession of a teacher, and in fact, in the time of Ushinsky, the position of a teacher was extremely degraded: a people's teacher was looked upon as a simple artisan.

Ushinsky's life was subordinated to a noble and humane goal - the enlightenment of the people, enlightenment as a necessary condition for the prosperity and good, development and progress of his homeland. But most of his speeches in literature and every step in the pedagogical field divided those around him into two hostile camps: some saw in Ushinsky a great teacher, scientist, patriot, others persecuted him, not disdaining denunciations, provocations, demanding the banning of his books as harmful and dangerous for Russians. people. Infinitely loving his homeland, Ushinsky was forced long years wander through the cities and towns of Germany and Switzerland, France and England, Italy and Belgium.

He didn’t like talking about himself, about his life, or drawing attention to his personality. He considered himself an ordinary worker in the field of education. But many of his contemporaries already understood that in the person of K. D. Ushinsky, the science of education has one of its most brilliant representatives.

Outstanding Role Ushinsky as the creator of the Russian folk school and the founder of pedagogical science became especially clearly recognized after his death, when interest in his pedagogical system, and at the same time in the personality of Ushinsky himself, increased every year.

K.D. Ushinsky made a special contribution to the development of domestic pedagogy, laying its scientific foundations and creating an integral pedagogical system.

As Ushinsky’s contemporaries noted, “his works made a complete revolution in Russian pedagogy,” and he himself was called the father of this science.

Ushinsky is universal as a teacher, as a teacher of promising vision. First of all, he acts as a teacher-philosopher, clearly understanding that pedagogy can only be based on a solid philosophical and natural science foundation, on the concept of national education, reflecting the development of this science and the specifics of national culture and education.

Ushinsky is a theorist of education, he is distinguished by the depth of penetration into the essence pedagogical phenomena, the desire to identify the patterns of education as a means of managing human development.

Ushinsky, as a methodologist, developed issues of the content of education, the essence of the learning process, principles, and private teaching methods; he created the wonderful textbooks “Native Word” and “Children’s World,” which, according to researcher Belyavsky, constituted an era in children’s pedagogical literature.

As an educational psychologist, he developed the psychological foundations of learning, outlined a system of psychological ideas (characterized thinking, memory, attention, imagination, feelings, will).

Ushinsky also acted as a school scholar. He put forward a program for transforming the Russian school, especially the Russian public school, in order to bring it into line with the needs of the country's development and the democratization of education.

And, finally, Ushinsky is a historian of pedagogy, studied the works of representatives of world pedagogy D. Locke, J.-J. Rousseau, I. Pestalozzi, Spencer and others. Based on the analysis and selection of all reasonable, critical consideration of the data of his observations and pedagogical experience, Ushinsky creates his major work, the psychological and pedagogical treatise “Man as a subject of education” (I part - 1867 , II part - 1869).

Ushinsky is called the great teacher of Russian folk teachers, who created full program training of a national teacher.

Ushinsky is a democrat educator, his slogan is to awaken the people’s thirst for knowledge, to bring the light of knowledge into the depths popular thought, to see people happy.

Based on his progressive views, Ushinsky took a new look at pedagogy as a science. He was deeply convinced that it needed a solid scientific basis. Without it, pedagogy can turn into a collection of recipes and folk teachings. First of all, according to Ushinsky, pedagogy should be based on scientific knowledge about man, on a wide range of anthropological sciences, to which he included anatomy, physiology, psychology, logic, philology, geography, political economy, statistics, literature, art, etc., among of which psychology and physiology occupy a special place.

Ushinsky understood the need for a comprehensive study of man. He argued: “If pedagogy wants to educate a person in all respects, then it must first get to know him in all respects.” (On the benefits of pedagogical literature).

Thus, Ushinsky carried out a pedagogical synthesis of scientific knowledge about man and raised pedagogy to a qualitatively new level. The famous scientist Ananyev, assessing Ushinsky’s holistic approach to the human personality, rightly notes the strength of his theoretical thinking and pedagogical conviction, which a century ago managed to substantiate the problem that modern science considers it the most fundamental problem of philosophy, natural science and psychology

Another leading idea underlying Ushinsky’s pedagogical system was the concept of national education put forward by him. Domestic pedagogical science should be built, in the opinion of the teacher, taking into account the national characteristics of the Russian people, reflecting the specifics of national culture and education. In the article “On Nationality in Public Education,” Ushinsky gives a deep analysis of education in the spirit of nationality. By nationality he understands education that was created by the people themselves and based on popular principles. The history of a people, its character and characteristics, culture, geographical and natural conditions determine the direction of education with its own values ​​and ideals.

When creating Russian pedagogy, Ushinsky considered it impossible to imitate or mechanically transfer into it the principles of education of other peoples. Each nation creates its own system of education and upbringing with its own national traits And creative manifestations. At the same time, the teacher did not deny the opportunity to use the achievements in the field of pedagogy of other peoples, intelligently refracting them to his own. national characteristics.

The nationality of education in Ushinsky’s interpretation is revealed as the principle of transforming the entire education system based on connection with the life of the people. Hence the requirements:

Education must be original, national;

The matter of public education should be in the hands of the people themselves, who would organize it, lead and manage the school;

The people determine the content and nature of education;

The entire population must be covered by education and public education;

Raising women on an equal basis with men;

True nationality is expressed primarily in the native language. A hymn to the native language is Ushinsky’s article “Native Word”, written with inspiration and emotion. In it, he compares the language of the people with the blossoming flower of the entire spiritual life of the nation, arguing that in the language the people and their homeland are spiritualized, that language is the most living connection connecting the outdated, the living and the future. Mother tongue is the best remedy education, which teaches naturally and successfully, from where spiritual, moral and mental development comes.

The principle of nationality is associated with the tasks of personality formation, and with instilling in children love for their homeland, their fatherland, humanity, truthfulness, hard work, responsibility, a sense of duty, will, a sense of pride in its correct understanding, and an aesthetic attitude to life. All these qualities come from the people and correlate with their character and traditions, helping to form the national identity of the people.

The principle of nationality should be implemented through the teaching of national studies in school: the history of one’s country, geography, the study of Russian writers and poets (literature), the nature of Russia, etc.

In conclusion, I would like to note the following.

In general, the pedagogical system of K.D. Ushinsky had a beneficial influence on the further development of pedagogical thought in Russia: His pedagogical legacy at all stages modern development acted as a guide for many areas of domestic and world pedagogical science. K.D. Ushinsky is a great Russian teacher, the founder of the public school in Russia, the creator of a deep pedagogical system, the author of remarkable educational books. Pedagogical genius K.D. Ushinsky contributed to the emergence of a galaxy of wonderful teachers of the 60-70s - followers of K.D. Ushinsky: N.F. Bunakova, V.I. Vodovozova, N.A. Korfa, L.N. Modzalevsky, D.D. Semenov and others.

That's all I wanted to say.

Thank you for attention!