不同课程实习教师优先应对策略的比较分析

S. Volodina
{"title":"不同课程实习教师优先应对策略的比较分析","authors":"S. Volodina","doi":"10.15862/44psmn522","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the article, the author presents the results of an empirical study conducted as part of a master's thesis. The article is devoted to the study and comparison of the preferred coping strategies of coping behavior of students-teachers of different courses. The study involved students of the second and fourth courses in the amount of 99 people. Analysis of the study conducted by the author using the Mann-Whitney U test showed only one statistically significant difference between groups of students of different courses — in the parameter \"Taking responsibility\". The level of application of this coping strategy among fourth-year students is significantly higher than among second-year students.\nThe data obtained in the course of the study allow us to conclude that, in general, the priority coping strategies for the coping behavior of future teachers are constructive strategies that contribute to solving the problem that has arisen, namely: self-control, planning, problem solving and positive reassessment. At the same time, the \"flight-avoidance\" strategy has a rather high rate in both groups of subjects.\nRespondents of both groups least often resort to such destructive coping strategies as confrontational coping and distancing. The results obtained for the parameter \"search for social support\" have equally high data in both groups of subjects, which allows us to conclude that there is a need for psychological support and support for students.\nThe conducted comparative static analysis showed that with all the variety of coping strategies of coping behavior periodically used by all participants in the study, fourth-year students slightly, but still more often, use constructive behavior strategies in difficult and conflict situations compared to second-year students.","PeriodicalId":130356,"journal":{"name":"World of Science. Pedagogy and psychology","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative analysis of priority coping strategies of student teachers of various courses\",\"authors\":\"S. Volodina\",\"doi\":\"10.15862/44psmn522\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the article, the author presents the results of an empirical study conducted as part of a master's thesis. The article is devoted to the study and comparison of the preferred coping strategies of coping behavior of students-teachers of different courses. The study involved students of the second and fourth courses in the amount of 99 people. Analysis of the study conducted by the author using the Mann-Whitney U test showed only one statistically significant difference between groups of students of different courses — in the parameter \\\"Taking responsibility\\\". The level of application of this coping strategy among fourth-year students is significantly higher than among second-year students.\\nThe data obtained in the course of the study allow us to conclude that, in general, the priority coping strategies for the coping behavior of future teachers are constructive strategies that contribute to solving the problem that has arisen, namely: self-control, planning, problem solving and positive reassessment. At the same time, the \\\"flight-avoidance\\\" strategy has a rather high rate in both groups of subjects.\\nRespondents of both groups least often resort to such destructive coping strategies as confrontational coping and distancing. The results obtained for the parameter \\\"search for social support\\\" have equally high data in both groups of subjects, which allows us to conclude that there is a need for psychological support and support for students.\\nThe conducted comparative static analysis showed that with all the variety of coping strategies of coping behavior periodically used by all participants in the study, fourth-year students slightly, but still more often, use constructive behavior strategies in difficult and conflict situations compared to second-year students.\",\"PeriodicalId\":130356,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World of Science. Pedagogy and psychology\",\"volume\":\"37 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World of Science. Pedagogy and psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15862/44psmn522\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World of Science. Pedagogy and psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15862/44psmn522","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在文章中,作者介绍了作为硕士论文的一部分进行的实证研究的结果。本文对不同课程的师生应对行为的首选应对策略进行了研究和比较。该研究涉及第二和第四门课程的学生,共99人。作者使用Mann-Whitney U检验对研究进行分析,不同课程的学生组之间只有一个参数“Taking responsibility”有统计学意义。四年级学生使用这种应对策略的水平显著高于二年级学生。在研究过程中获得的数据使我们得出结论,总体而言,未来教师应对行为的优先应对策略是有助于解决出现的问题的建设性策略,即:自我控制、计划、问题解决和积极的重新评估。同时,“逃避”策略在两组被试中都有较高的比例。这两个群体的受访者最不经常诉诸于这种破坏性的应对策略,如对抗应对和疏远。对于参数“寻找社会支持”得到的结果在两组被试中都有同样高的数据,这可以让我们得出结论,学生需要心理支持和支持。通过静态对比分析发现,在所有研究对象周期性使用各种应对行为策略的情况下,四年级学生在困难和冲突情境中使用建设性行为策略的比例略高于二年级学生,但仍高于二年级学生。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative analysis of priority coping strategies of student teachers of various courses
In the article, the author presents the results of an empirical study conducted as part of a master's thesis. The article is devoted to the study and comparison of the preferred coping strategies of coping behavior of students-teachers of different courses. The study involved students of the second and fourth courses in the amount of 99 people. Analysis of the study conducted by the author using the Mann-Whitney U test showed only one statistically significant difference between groups of students of different courses — in the parameter "Taking responsibility". The level of application of this coping strategy among fourth-year students is significantly higher than among second-year students. The data obtained in the course of the study allow us to conclude that, in general, the priority coping strategies for the coping behavior of future teachers are constructive strategies that contribute to solving the problem that has arisen, namely: self-control, planning, problem solving and positive reassessment. At the same time, the "flight-avoidance" strategy has a rather high rate in both groups of subjects. Respondents of both groups least often resort to such destructive coping strategies as confrontational coping and distancing. The results obtained for the parameter "search for social support" have equally high data in both groups of subjects, which allows us to conclude that there is a need for psychological support and support for students. The conducted comparative static analysis showed that with all the variety of coping strategies of coping behavior periodically used by all participants in the study, fourth-year students slightly, but still more often, use constructive behavior strategies in difficult and conflict situations compared to second-year students.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信