УЧЕБНО-ИССЛЕДОВАТЕЛЬСКАЯ ДЕЯТЕЛЬНОСТЬ: ПРЕДПОСЫЛКИ ПОЯВЛЕНИЯ МЕТОДИКИ

Any science being accurate and systematized knowledge cares for its historical research. The teaching methodology of Russian language is not an exception.

A number of factors contributes to the necessity for historical research in the field of methodology: first of all - scientific interest and second - the importance of understanding the role of historical knowledge in the formation of a modern professional teacher, (no doubt that knowledge in the history of teaching methodology is a component of professional competence of a Russian-language-teacher). In addition, the dissemination of knowledge about the achievements of Russian science is urgent today when foreign methodological concepts and language-teaching experiences are popularized which causes the lack of local methods overview. Finally, the knowledge of history allows assembling a complete overview in the field of language teaching, organize, and systematize the existing knowledge.

The origin of teaching methodology of Russian language dates back to 1844, and associates with the publication «О преподавании отечественного языка» by F. I. Buslayev [1]. It should be noted that long before that research there were publications which were in fact teacher editions: «Азбука» by Ivan Fedorov (1574), «Грамматика словенская» by Lavrentiy Zizaniy (1596), «Грамматика словенского языка» by Meletiy Smotritskiy (1619), «Букварь» by Karion Istomin (1694); «Российская грамматика» by M. V. Lomonosov (1757); «Руководство учителям 1 и 2 разряда народных училищ Российской Империи» by F.I. Yankovich de Mirievo (1783).

However, the teaching methodology of Russian language in the full sense of the word began to emerge when Russian language entered the schools of Russia as academic discipline. From the late eighteenth century, and by the 40s of the XIX century, a rich methodological material in native Russian language has accumulated which allowed F. I. Buslaev to author a synthesized research based on native and foreign teaching experiences - «О преподавании отечественного языка».

The research «О преподавании отечественного языка» was the first in the history of Russian language teaching methodology where scientifically based system of methods was stated. «One should distinguish scientific and learning methods, - says F. I. Buslayev. – A scientist presenting the science focuses on that and only not paying any attention to the identity of the reader or listener, he offers his science only to those who understand it. The teacher, on the contrary, has to develop, educate and train students' ability: his science only has the value when it is appropriate for those whom is taught to. » Accordingly, in the first place Buslayev puts conscious assimilation of the material as well as the ability to use the knowledge in their own speech. By Buslaev, teaching a language means to develop the students spiritually, which is impossible without a method.

He distinguished the research and training methods. The objective of latter – to analyze the outcome of learning, to commute teaching experience, teach the learning activity ; study a student’s identity ; ensure scientific validity of the studied material , to raise the desire for serious pursuits and awaken the love for science» [2]. Speaking of teaching methods, two ways of teaching were emphasized:

•          With the help of teacher a student himself finds the truth;

•          Student receives information about language as a finished product;

Wherein the first method is preferred: F. I. Buslaev was a supporter of heuristic methods and wanted the students themselves "to discover the unknown by means of the known" [1, p. 67]. Among the followers of  F. I. Buslaev best known is K. D. Ushinsky, and the task he put in front of a a teacher was “to teach the student to learn”. «...A student should not simply be given a certain knowledge but should be encouraged to develop the ability to acquire knowledge without teacher’s help» [3, p. 501]. K. D. Ushinskiy supported the systematic study of grammar considering it as the base for the development of children’s logical thinking and the base for the development of students’ speech. He proposed a system of summaries and compositions, the importance of which in the development of speech is highly appreciated. K. D. Ushinskiy introduced a new method of teaching reading and writing - based on the hearing and the combination of analytical and synthetic work of students.

A mark in the history of the native language method has left Leo Tolstoy, who created the auditory method of teaching reading and writing and composed «Азбука» in 4 books (1873). Writer and teacher devoted much attention to the theory of learning and teaching and expressed a number of original didactic solutions that have enriched teaching science with great ideas. Referring to the texts 2 and 3 of «Азбука» [4] , we can see that their study involves such mental operations as comparing , identifying the relationship of cause and effect and evaluation. Moreover, in the text it is only implied to student so he has the chance (perhaps under the teacher’s guidance) to conduct his own reasoning.

The end of XIX - early XX century – the renaissance period of methodology. That was the time of V. I. Vodovozov, S. Y. Stoyunin, N. F. Bunakov and others. The synthesizing work «Родной язык в средней школе. Опыт методики» (1911) by A. D. Alfyerov tops it off. Paying the tribute to the literary language as a model of school study, A.D. Alfyerov warns, «Not a single sample should ever be considered as a complete perfection. It must be the starting point for one’s own reasoning» [5].

At the same time, and after the revolution, A. M. Peshkovskiy (1878-1933) was actively involved in the study of methodology. His largest linguistic work «Русский синтаксис в научном освещении» was conceived as a high school textbook. His work «Школьная и научная грамматика» (1914) talks about the gap between the linguistic science and the studies of language at school criticizing the situation in the school, where grammar was «a servant of spelling. » In Peshkovskiy’s opinion - grammar has special value because «the main difference between the literary speaking from the natural is <...> the conscious use of language means <...> while the grammar (in its narrative part) just translates the unconscious into the conscious linguistic phenomena» [6, p. 12].

Thus, we can draw the following conclusions:

1)         Virtually since its inception, the scientific methods of teaching Russian language professed the idea of conscious, creative approach to teaching;

2)         However, so far these ideas (with all the evidence and repeatedly proven effectiveness) have not acquired wide popularity, it turns out that simply common understanding of the approach is not sufficient for its practical application;

3)         Therefore, a specific, step by step procedure is needed in order to apply the ideas (adopted to today's reality) of outstanding teachers of the past in the modern classroom