Analysis of future teachers’ individual thinking patterns and the level of basic school mathematics training

Aim. To present the results, obtained from diagnostics of individual thinking patterns and the level of basic school mathematics training of future teachers, which are significant for the formation of mathematic theory for research activities.

Methodology. The research methodology is based on implementation of a personality-oriented approach in the formation of mathematical components of research activities of future teachers. During the experimental part of the work, the diagnostic methods of J. Barrett and A. Luchins were used.

Results. The experimental study was conducted with students mastering pedagogical undergraduate programs – future foreign language teachers. The discipline “Mathematical methods of data processing” is a part of bachelor’s degree program core in the field of pedagogical education; therefore, the sample of respondents was specially carried out with an emphasis on students of humanitarian profiles. Based on control and measuring materials of the basic level of the unified state exam in mathematics, the level of school subject training of students was determined, problematic topics were identified. In addition, the use of special diagnostic techniques made it possible to establish the signs of students’ rigidity of thinking and their individual characteristics associated with orientation to imagination or facts in solving practical problems.

Research implications. The paper proposes the integrated use of special diagnostics and tests to identify individual features and the level of basic school mathematical training, which are important for the formation of students’ mathematic theory for research activities.

Conclusions. To implement personality-oriented teaching of students in the discipline “Mathematical methods of data processing” at the university, the use of various tests and diagnostic techniques was implemented; that made it possible to determine the individual features of thinking and the level of basic school mathematical training of future teachers.

1. Andreev, V. I. (2015). Pedagogical Heuristics for Creative Self-Development of Multidimensional Thinking and Wisdom. Kazan: Center for High Technologies publ. (in Russ.).

2. Bordovskaya, N. V., Kostromina, S. N. & Rozum, S. I. (2017). Student Research Potential: Content of the Construct and the Methodology of its Assessment. In: Psychological Journal, 38, 1, 52-66 (in Russ.).

3. Epanchintseva, G. A. & Kozlovskaya, T. N. (2020). The Relationship Between Motivation for Success, Achievements and Personality Rigidity. In: Vestnik of the Orenburg State University, 4 (227), 95-104. DOI: 10.25198/1814-6457-227-95 (in Russ.).

4. Kaneva, E. A. (2024). Analysis of the Special Abilities Formation of Future Teachers of Mathematics, Pedagogy, and Computer Science. In: Moscow Pedagogical Journal, 1, 137-146. DOI: 10.18384/2949-4974-2024-1-137-146 (in Russ.).

5. Kornilova, T. V. (2013). Rigidity, Tolerance to Uncertainty, and Creativity in the Systemic-Personal State of a Person. In: Moscow University Psychology Bulletin. Series 14. Psychology, 4, 36-47 (in Russ.).

6. Lobanov, A. P. & Maron, V A. (2022). Intellectual Abilities of Students: Implicit and Explicit Approach. In: BSPUBulletin. Series 1, Pedagogic. Psychology. Philology, 2, 49-54 (in Russ.).

7. Lobanov, A. P. & Pevneva, A. N. (2021). Evaluation of Rigidity-Flexibility of Students’ Research Potential. In: Voprosy Psychologii, 67, 6, 34-42 (in Russ.).

8. Nizharadze, G. A. (1987). On Two Types of Rigidity in Expanding Intellectual Tasks. In: Voprosy Psychologii, 3, 142-145 (in Russ.).

9. Pevneva, A. N. (2022). Cognitive Rigidity in the Lachins Effect Paradigm. In: BSPU Bulletin. Series 1, Pedagogic. Psychology. Philology, 3, 82-86 (in Russ.).

10. Popov, N. I. (2021). Formation of University Mathematics Education. Yelets: Bunin Yelets State University publ (in Russ.).

11. Popov, N. I. & Kalimova, A. V. (2019). Identifying Special Abilities of Future Teachers of Mathematics, Physics, and Computer Science. In: Izvestiya of Saratov University. Educational Acmeology. Developmental Psychology, 8, 1, 12-18 (in Russ.).

12. Safuanov, I. S. (2023). Current Trends in Teaching Mathematical Disciplines in Higher Education. Moscow: Sputnik+ publ. (in Russ.).

13. Bransford, J. D. & Johnson, M. K. (1972). Contextual Antecedents of Understanding: Some Studies of Understanding and Remembering. In: Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 6, 717-726. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80006-9.

14. Luchins, A. S. (1942). Mechanization Of Problem Solving: The Set Effect. In: Psychological monographs, 1942, 54, 6, 1-95. DOI: 10.1037/H0093502.

15. van Kesteren, M. T. R. , Rijpkema, M. & Fernandez, G. (2010). Retrieval of Associative Information Consistent with Prior Knowledge is Associated with Enhanced Medial Prefrontal Activity and Connections In: Journal of Neuroscience, 30, 47, 15888-15894 DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI 2674-10.2010