CYBERNETICS AND GEOGRAPHICAL EDUCATION: CYBERNETICS OF LEARNING AND LEARNING OF CYBERNETICS

https://doi.org/10.24057/2414-9179-2017-3-23-210-224

View or download the article (Rus)

About the Author

M. R. Arpentieva

Tsiolkovskiy Kaluga State University
Russian Federation
248023, Kaluga, Razina st, 22/48, 1 build, 809 aud.

Abstract

Modern geographical education implies a broad implementation of innovative technologies, allowing students to fully and deeply understand the subject and methods of professional activity, and effectively and productively act upon this understanding. Therefore, in the work of modern geographer computer and media technologies occupy a significant place, and geographic education occupies an important place in learning cybernetic disciplines: computer technologies act as an important condition for obtaining high quality professional education, as well as an important tool of professional activity of modern specialist-geographer. The article is devoted to comparing three modern approaches to the study and optimization of training Cybernetics and programming in the framework of geographical education: an approach devoted to the study of “learning styles”; the metacognitive approach to learning computer science and programming; and intersubjective, evergetic or actually cybernetic, approach. It describes their advantages and limitations in the context of geographical education, as well as the internal unity as different forms of study of productivity and conditions of the dialogical interaction between teacher and student in the context of obtaining high-quality geographical education.

Keywords

geographical education, Cybernetics, contextual learning, intersubjective learning, metacognitive training.

References

  1. Arpent’eva M.R. Evergeticheskie strategii i upravlenie razvitiem soobshchestv [Evergetical strategies and communities development management], Materialy XVII Mezhdunarodnoy konferentsii “Problemy upravleniya i modelirovaniya v slozhnykh sistemakh”, 22-25 iyunya 2015 g., Samara, Samara: IPUSS RAN, 2015a, pp.174–180.
  2. Arpent’eva M.R. Modusy didakticheskoy kommunikatsii i ponimanie [The Moduses of didactic communication and understanding], Vestnik Kostromskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, Seriya “Pedagogika. Psikhologiya. Sotsial’nye nauki”, 2015b, No 1, pp. 33–42.
  3. Arpent’eva M.R. Nravstvennye problemy mediatizatsii i kognitivnye sposobnosti lichnosti [Moral issues of publicity and cognitive abilities of the person], Tsifrovoe obshchestvo kak kul’turno-istoricheskiy kontekst razvitiya cheloveka: sbornik nauchnykh statey i materialov Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii, 11–13 fevralya 2016 g., Pod red. R.V. Ershova, Kolomna: GSGU, 2016, pp. 28–37.
  4. Beytson G. Ekologiya razuma [Ecology of mind]. Moscow: Smysl, 2000, 500 р.
  5. Bogdanova E.A. Stil’ ucheniya kak proyavlenie personal’nogo poznavatel’nogo stilya uchenika [The learning style as a manifestation of the personal cognitive style of the student], Izvestiya RGPU im. A.I. Gertsena, 2008, No 7, pp. 3–12.
  6. Vakulenko Р. Predskazanie temnogo budushchego [Prediction of a dark future], Mir fantastiki : zhurnal, Moscow: TekhnoMir, 2004, Vyp. 2, pp. 91–93.
  7. Vittikh V.A., Moiseeva T.V., Skobelev P.O. Prinyatie resheniy na osnove konsensusa s primeneniem mul’tiagentnykh tekhnologiy [A decision-making based on consensus with the use of multi-agent technology], Ontologiya proektirovaniya, 2013, No 2 (8), pp. 20–25.
  8. Karpov A.V., Skityaeva I.M. Psikhologiya metakognitivnykh protsessov lichnosti [Psychology of metacognitive processes of the personality], Moscow: Izd-vo “Institut psikhologii RAN”, 2005, 352 р.
  9. Klaus G. Vvedenie v differentsial’nuyu psikhologiyu ucheniya [Introduction to differential psychology teaching], Moscow: Pedagogika, 1987, 176 р.
  10. Lepskiy V.E. Filosofiya i metodologiya upravleniya v kontekste razvitiya nauchnoy ratsional’nosti [Philosophy and methodology of management in the context of the development of scientific rationality], Trudy XII Vserossiyskogo soveshchaniya po problemam upravleniya, Moscow: IPUSS RAN, 2014, pp. 7785–7796.
  11. Men’shikov P.V. Psikhologiya uchebnogo vzaimodeystviya [Psychology of educational interaction], Kaluga: KGU im. K.E. Tsiolkovskii, 2014, 172 р.
  12. Minigalieva M.R. Izuchenie psikhologii i samopoznanie studentov. Psikhoterapevticheskaya model’ pedagogicheskogo obshcheniya L.A. Petrovskoy [the study of psychology and self-knowledge students. L.A. Petrovskaya psychotherapeutic model of pedagogical communication]. Saarbrucken: Lambert Academic, 2012, 632 р.
  13. Minigalieva M.R. Obrazovatel’no-vospitatel’noe vzaimodeystvie: umenie uchit’sya i umenie uchit’ [Education, but educational networking: the ability to learn and the ability to teach]. Kaluga: KGU im. K.E, Tsiolkovskogo, 2014. – 32 р.
  14. Nichiporenko N. P. Razvitie predstavleniy studentov-pedagogov ob umenii uchit’sya. Diss. ... kand. psikhol. nauk [The Development of students’ ideas of teachers about the ability to learn. Diss. PhD psychol. sciences], Kaluga: KGU, 2000, 190 p.
  15. Novikov D.A. Kibernetika: Navigator: Istoriya kibernetiki, sovremennoe sostoyanie, perspektivy razvitiya [Cybernetics: the Navigator: a History of Cybernetics, the current state and prospects of development]. Moscow: LENAND, 2016, 160 р.
  16. Oleynikova E.V. Vliyanie podkhoda k ucheniyu u shkol’nikov na ponimanie uchebnykh tekstov. Avtoref. diss. kand. psikhol. nauk [Influence of the approach to the teaching of pupils on the understanding of academic texts. Abstract. Diss. PhD of psychol. sciences]. Moscow: MGU im. M.V. Lomonosova, 2012, 20 р.
  17. Popov M. Kiberpank 1980: model’ dlya sborki [Cyberpunk 1980: a model for the Assembly], Mir fantastiki: zhurnal, Moscow: TekhnoMir, 2004, Vyp. 2, pp. 46–52.
  18. Tarabanov D. Kiberpank [Cyberpunk], Mir fantastiki: zhurnal, Moscow: TekhnoMir, 2004, Vyp. 2, pp. 22–25.
  19. Fomin A.E. Metakognitivnyy monitoring resheniya uchebnykh zadach: mekhanizmy i iskazheniya [Metacognitive monitoring of training solution: mechanisms and distortion]. Kaluga: KGU 2015, 252 р.
  20. Kharitonov VA., Alekseev A.O. Kontseptsiya sub”ektno- orientirovannogo upravleniya v sotsial’nykh i ekonomicheskikh sistemakh [The Concept of subject-oriented management in social and economic systems], Nauchnyy zhurnal KubGAU [Electronic resource], Krasnodar: KubGAU, 2015, No 05(109), IDA [article ID]: 1091505043. URL: http://ej.kubagro.ru/2015/05/pdf/43.pdf.
  21. Allport G.W. The Nature of Prejudice, N.Y., Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1979, 537 p.
  22. Beni G., Wang J. Swarm Intelligence in Cellular Robotic Systems, Proceed, NATO Advanced Workshop on Robots and Biological Systems. Tuscany, Italy, June 26–30, 1989, N.-Y.: NATO, 1989.
  23. Blankenship L. (The Mentor). The Conscience of a Hacker, Phrack, 1986, No 1 (7), p. 3.
  24. Cavallaro D. Cyberpunk and Cyberculture: Science Fiction and the Work. NewYork: Continuum International Publishing Group, 2000, 258 p.
  25. Entwistle N., Ramsden P. Understanding student learning. London, Croom Helm, 1983, 330 p.
  26. Flavel J.H. Speculations about the nature and development of metacognition, Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1987.
  27. Hafner K., Markoff J. Cyberpunk: Outlaws and Hackers on the Computer Frontier, revised, Simon & Schuster, 1995, 396 p.
  28. Haraway D. A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, technology and socialist feminism in the late twentieth century, Cybercultures Reader, Ed. Bell D., Kennedy B.M., London & New York: Routledge, 2002, pp. 291–325.
  29. Kenny V. There’s Nothing Like the Real Thing. Revisiting the Need for a Third-Order Cybernetics, Constructivist Foundations, 2009, No 4 (2), pp. 100–111.
  30. Kirtchev Ch.As. Cyberpunk Manifesto v 2.0. – 2003. Электронный адрес: http://www.cyberpunkreview.com/wiki/index.php?title=Cyberpunk_Manifesto.
  31. Mancilla R. Introduction to Sociocybernetics (Part 1,3), Journal of Sociocybernetics, 2011, Vol. 42, No 9, pp. 35–56; 2013, Vol. 44, No 11, pp. 47–73.
  32. Marton F., Säljö R. Approaches to learning, The Experience of Learning, F. Marton, D. Hounsell, N.J. Entwistle (Eds.), Edinburgh, Scottish Academic Press, 1997, pp. 39–58.
  33. Rzevski G., Skobelev P. Emergent Intelligence in Large Scale Multi-Agent Systems, International journal of education and information technologies, 2007, Issue 2, Vol. 1, pp. 64–71.
  34. Sterling Br. The Hacker Crackdown, Law and Disorder on the Electronic Frontier, Bantam Books, 1992, 328 p.
  35. Storming the Reality Studio: A Casebook of Cyberpunk & Postmodern Science Fiction, ed. by L. McCaffery, Duke: Duke University Press, 1991, 387 p.
  36. Tochon F.V. Deep Education, Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers, 2010, Vol. 1, pp. 1–12.
  37. Umpleby S.A Brief History of Cybernetics in the United States, Austrian Journal of Contemporary History, 2008, Vol. 19, No 4, pp. 28–40.
  38. Vittikh V.A. Evolution of ideas on management processes in the society: from cybernetics to evergetics, Group Decision and Negotiation, September 2015, Vol. 24, Issue 5, pp. 825–832.
  39. Vittikh V.A. Heterogeneous Actor and Everyday Life as Key Concepts of Evergetics, Group Decision and Negotiation, November 2015, Vol. 24, Issue 6, pp. 949–956.
  40. Vittikh V.A. Introduction to the Theory of Intersubjective Management, Group Decision and Negotiation, January 2015, Vol. 24, Issue 1, pp. 67–95.
  41. Weinberg G. The psychology of computer programming, Silver anniversary ed., New York: Dorset House Publ., 2001, 384 р.
  42. Wooldridge M. An Introduction to MultiAgent Systems, N.-Y., John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2002, 366 p.

For citation: Arpentieva M.R. CYBERNETICS AND GEOGRAPHICAL EDUCATION: CYBERNETICS OF LEARNING AND LEARNING OF CYBERNETICS. Proceedings of the International conference “InterCarto. InterGIS”. 2017;23(3):210-224. https://doi.org/10.24057/2414-9179-2017-3-23-210-224