The child’s learning ability, that is, to observe how he uses a rule that he has never encountered before to solve problems. The difficulty of the proposed tasks gradually increases due to the introduction of objects in relation to which the learned rule can be applied only after the necessary generalization process has been carried out. The problems used in the methodology are constructed in such a way that their solution requires an empirical or theoretical generalization. Empirical generalization is understood as the ability to classify objects according to essential characteristics, or to bring them under a general concept. Theoretical generalization is understood as a generalization based on meaningful abstraction, when the guideline is not a specific distinctive feature, but the fact of the presence or absence of a distinctive feature, regardless of the form of its manifestation. Thus, the “Boots” technique makes it possible to study children’s learning ability, as well as the features of the development of the generalization process. The technique is clinical in nature and does not involve obtaining standard indicators.
The experimental task involves teaching the subject to digitally encode color pictures (horse, girl, stork) based on the presence or absence of one feature - boots on their feet. There are boots - the picture is designated “1” (one), no boots – “0” (zero). Color pictures are offered to the subject in the form of a table containing: 1) a coding rule; 2) the stage of consolidating the rule; 3) so-called “riddles” that the subject must solve by coding. In addition to a table of colored pictures, the experiment uses a white sheet of paper with images of geometric figures representing two more riddles.
First instruction to the subject: Now I will teach you a game in which the color pictures drawn in this table will need to be designated by the numbers “0” and “1”. Look at the pictures (the first row of the table is shown), who is drawn here? (The subject names the pictures; in case of difficulty, the experimenter helps him.) Correct, now pay attention: in the first line, the figures of a horse, a girl and a stork are drawn without boots, and opposite them there is a number “0”, and in the second line the figures are drawn with boots , and opposite them is the number “1”. To correctly designate pictures with numbers, you need to remember: if the figure in the picture is shown without boots, then it must be designated with the number “0”, and if with boots, then with the number “1”. Remember? Please repeat". (The subject repeats the rule.) Then the child is asked to place the numbers in the next three rows of the table. This stage is considered as consolidation of the learned rule. If the child makes mistakes, the experimenter again asks to repeat his rule for naming the figures and points to the sample (the first two lines of the table). For each answer, the subject must explain why he answered the way he did. The consolidating stage shows how quickly and easily the child learns a new rule and can apply it when solving problems. At this stage, the experimenter records all the subject’s erroneous answers, since the nature of the errors can show whether the child simply did not remember the rule firmly and is confused where to put “0” and where “1”, or whether he does not apply the necessary rule in his work at all. So, for example, there are mistakes when a horse is designated by the number “4”, a girl by the number “2”, and a stork by the number “1” and such answers are explained based on the number of legs these characters have. After the experimenter is confident that the child has learned to apply the rule he was taught, the subject is given a second instruction.
Second instruction to the subject: You have already learned to label pictures with numbers, and now, using this skill, try to guess the riddles drawn here. “Guessing a riddle” means correctly labeling the figures drawn in it with the numbers “0” and “1”.
Notes on the procedure. If at the consolidation stage the child makes mistakes, then the experimenter immediately analyzes the nature of the mistakes made and, through leading questions, as well as by repeatedly referring to the example of designating figures with numbers, contained in the first two lines of the table, tries to achieve error-free work by the subject. When the experimenter is confident that the subject has learned to apply the given rule well, he can proceed to solving the riddles.
If the subject cannot “guess the riddle,” then the experimenter should ask him leading questions to find out whether the child can solve this problem with the help of an adult. If, even with the help of an adult, the child cannot cope with the task, then move on to the next riddle. If you correctly solve a new riddle, you should return to the previous one again to find out whether the subsequent riddle played the role of a hint for the previous one. Such repeated returns can be made several times. So, for example, you can return from riddle IV to III, and then from III to II.
To clarify the nature of the generalization when “guessing riddles,” it is necessary to ask children in detail about why the figures are designated this way. If the child correctly “guessed the riddle” but cannot give an explanation, then move on to the next riddle. If the answer to the new riddle is correctly explained to the test subjects, you should return to the previous one and again ask the child to explain the answer in it.
15. Methodology “Graphic dictation” by D. B. Elkonin
Designed to study orientation in space. Listen carefully and accurately follow the instructions of an adult, correctly reproduce the given direction of the line, independently act as directed by an adult. To carry out the technique, the child is given a notebook sheet in a box with four dots marked on it one below the other. First, the child is given a preliminary explanation: “Now you and I will draw different patterns. We must try to make them beautiful and neat. To do this, you need to listen carefully to me, I will tell you how many cells and in which direction you should draw the line. Only the line that I say is drawn. The next line must begin where the previous one ends, without lifting the pencil from the paper.” After this, the researcher and the child find out where his right hand is and where his left hand is, and show on a sample how to draw lines to the right and left. Then the drawing of the training pattern begins.
“We begin to draw the first pattern. Place the pencil at the highest point. Attention! Draw a line: one cell down. Do not lift the pencil from the paper. Now one cell to the right. One cell up. One cell to the right. One cell down. One cell to the right. One cell up. One cell to the right. One cell down. Then continue drawing the pattern yourself.”
When dictating, there are quite long pauses. The child is given 1-1.5 minutes to independently continue the pattern. While performing the training pattern, the researcher helps the child correct mistakes. In the future, such control is removed.
“Now put your pencil on the next point. Attention! One cell up. One cell to the right. One cell up. One cell to the right. One cell down. One cell to the right. One cell down. One cell to the right. Now continue to draw this pattern yourself.”
“Put your pencil on the next point. Attention! Three squares up. Two cells to the right. One cell down. One cell to the left (the word “left is highlighted in voice”). Two cells down. Two cells to the right. Three squares up. Two cells to the right. One cell down. One cell to the left. Two cells down. Two cells to the right. Three squares up. Now continue on your own."
“Now place the pencil at the lowest point. Attention! Three cells to the right. One cell up. One cell to the left. Two squares up. Three cells to the right. Two cells down. One cell to the left. One cell down. Three cells to the right. One cell up. One cell to the left. Two squares up. Now continue drawing the pattern yourself.”
Evaluation of results. The results of the training pattern are not evaluated. In the main patterns, dictation and independent drawing are assessed separately:
4 points – exact reproduction of the pattern (line unevenness, “dirt” are not taken into account);
3 points – reproduction containing an error in one line;
2 points – reproduction containing several errors;
1 point – reproduction in which there is only a similarity of individual elements with the pattern;
0 points – no similarity.
0-3 points – low;
3-6 points – below average;
7-10 points – average;
11-13 points – above average;
14-16 points – high.
Diagnostics to determine the intellectual readiness of children for school.
A modern school, focused on the development of diversified personality development, taking into account the individualization of the educational process, needs a competent diagnosis of the child’s psychological readiness for schooling. The results of various long-term studies of school readiness have shown that the factor of intellectual development, although insufficient, is undoubtedly a necessary condition for a child’s successful transition to school. It was the request for research into intellectual readiness that necessitated the development of various methods for diagnosing this aspect of school maturity. 1.1. Methodology for diagnosing intellectual development by L. A. Wenger. Doctor of Psychological Sciences, Professor L.A. Venger, who headed the laboratory of the Research Institute of Preschool Education, and his colleagues worked on the problem of diagnosing mental development. Mental development is considered by the authors of the methods as a process of the child’s appropriation of certain forms of social experience, material and spiritual culture created by humanity. The central link. As the authors of the study showed, this is precisely what lies with children of early and preschool age. The main guideline for the authors of the methods when creating the methods was the cognitive orienting action as the main structural unit of cognition. In their opinion, the basis of mental development is the mastery of different types of cognitive orienting actions (perceptual and mental). Wenger identified 5 types of cognitive actions: 3 types of perceptual actions - perceptual modeling - identification actions - equating to a standard 2 types of mental actions - visually -creative thinking
- logical thinking
Instructions: “Please answer me a few questions.”
| Questions | Correct answer | Incorrect answer | Other answers | |
| Which animal is bigger - a horse or a dog? | 0 | -5 | ||
| In the morning people have breakfast. And in the evening? | 0 | -3 | ||
| It's light outside during the day, but at night? | 0 | -4 | ||
| The sky is blue, and the grass? | 0 | -4 | ||
| Apples, pears, plums, peaches - what are they? | +1 | -1 | ||
| What are Moscow, St. Petersburg, Khabarovsk? | Cities +1 | -1 | Stations 0 | |
| Football, swimming, hockey, volleyball are... | Sports, physical education +3 | 0 | Games, exercise +2 | |
| Is the little cow a calf? A small dog is...? Small horse? | Puppy, foal +4 | - 1 | Someone one puppy or foal 0 | |
| Why do all cars have brakes? | 2 reasons from: braking downhill, on a turn, stopping in case of danger of collision, after finishing driving +1 | -1 | One reason given0 | |
| How are a hammer and an ax similar to each other? | 2 common features +3 | 0 | One sign +2 is named | |
| What is the difference between a nail and a screw? | The screw has a +3 thread | 0 | The screw is screwed in and the nail is driven in; the screw has a nut +2 | |
| Is a dog more like a cat or a chicken? How? What do they have the same? | For a cat (with similarity features highlighted) 0 | For chicken - 3 | Per cat (without highlighting similarity features) – 1 | |
| How are squirrels and cats similar to each other? | 2 signs +3 | 0 | 1 sign +2 | |
| What vehicles do you know? | 3 means: land, water, air, etc. +4 | Nothing named or incorrect 0 | 3 ground assets | |
| What is the difference between a young man and an old one? | 3 signs +4 | 0 | 1-2 signs +2 | |
| TOTAL: |
- generalization based on essential characteristics – 2 points; use of a generalizing word – 1 point.
Trolleybus, bus, tram -
Wardrobe, bedside table, bed -
Wolf, bear, hare -
Blue, red, green -
Porridge, bread, sweets -
Rose, carnation, lily of the valley -
Oak, birch, linden –
Russula, fly agaric, boletus -
Catfish, crucian carp, perch -
Cabbage, potatoes, onions -
Pen, pencil, felt-tip pen –
Arm, leg, head -
LITERATURE
- Zaporozhets A.V. Preparing children for school. Fundamentals of preschool pedagogy (Edited by A.V. Zaporozhets, G.A. Markova) M. 1980 Child psychodiagnostics: Practical. classes: Method. instructions / Institute "Open Island"; Comp. Yu.V. Filippova. - Yaroslavl, 2003. N.I.Gutkina Psychological readiness for school. (4th edition) Publishing house St. Petersburg, 2004. Koneva O.B. Psychological readiness of children for school: Textbook. Chelyabinsk: SUSU Publishing House, 2000. Handbook of a preschool psychologist. under. Edited by G.A. Shirokova Rostov-on-Don, Phoenix, 2007. Bezrukikh M.M. “Steps to school” Moscow, Bustard, 2002. Glenn Doman “Harmonious development of the child” Moscow, Aquarium LTD, 1996
6. Methodology “Sequence of events”.
The technique was proposed by A.N. Bernstein, but the instructions and procedure for its implementation were slightly changed by N.I. Gutkina.
The technique is intended to study the development of logical thinking, speech and the ability to generalize.
As experimental material, we use three pictures that depict a flood in a village (see stimulus material). First picture(1): people are sitting on the roof of a flooded house. Second picture(2); People came by boat to pick up the victims. Third picture (3): a boat with people floats from a sunken house to the shore.
Pictures are placed in front of the subject in the following order (from left to right): 2-3-1.
Before starting the experiment, you need to make sure that the child understands all the details of the drawing in each of the pictures. To do this, the experimenter alternately shows him in pictures a house, people, water, trees, a shore, a boat, the roof of a flooded house and asks what it is. If the child correctly understands all the components of the pictures, then you can proceed to the experiment. If the subject does not understand this or that detail of the picture, for example, cannot understand that in picture No. 3 the roof of a flooded house sticks out, then he should be explained what it is, and only after that can the experiment begin.
Instructions to the subject: “Look, there are pictures in front of you that depict some event. The order of the pictures is mixed up, and you have to figure out how to swap them in order to make it clear what the artist drew. Think, rearrange the pictures as you see fit, and then use them to compose a story about the event depicted here.”
The task consists of two parts: 1) laying out a sequence of pictures; 2) an oral story about them.
A correctly found sequence of pictures (1-2-3) indicates that the child understands the meaning of the plot, and an oral story shows whether he can express his understanding in verbal form.
There are cases when, with an incorrectly laid out sequence of drawings, the subject nevertheless composes a logical version of the story (see Appendix to Practice). This performance of the task is considered good.
It should be noted that not all children are familiar with the phenomenon of “flooding”, this especially applies to six-year-old subjects. Therefore, the main thing in this task is the child’s understanding of the main meaning of the plot: the house is flooded; people, fleeing the water, climbed onto the roof, other people swam to their aid and saved them.
Well-developed children understand what is shown in the pictures, because if they have not encountered this phenomenon in life, then they read about it in books, they saw it on TV and found out what it is. It is acceptable if the guys think that the cause of the flood may be heavy rains, spring floods, hurricanes, etc. Accordingly, they can associate what is happening in the pictures with both spring and autumn, but not with summer, since the people in the pictures are wearing warm clothes. Children often use the word “flood” to refer to events in the pictures.
If the subject correctly laid out the sequence of pictures, but could not compose a good story, then it is advisable to ask him several questions to clarify what his knowledge is about the depicted natural phenomenon (see Appendix to Practice). Compiling a story with the help of leading questions is rated as performing the task at an average level for seven-year-old children and as quite good for six-year-olds. If the subject correctly laid out the sequence of pictures, but could not compose a story even with the help of leading questions, then such completion of the task is considered unsatisfactory (see Appendix to practice). Particular consideration should be given to cases where the child’s silence is due to personal reasons: fear of communicating with strangers, fear of making a mistake, pronounced lack of self-confidence, etc.
The subject is considered to have failed the task if:
1) could not restore the sequence of pictures and abandoned the story;
2) based on the sequence of pictures he himself laid out, he composed an illogical story;
3) the sequence of pictures laid out by the subject does not correspond to the story (except for those cases when the child, after a leading question from an adult, changes the sequence to one that corresponds to the story (Appendix to Practice).
4) each picture is told separately, on its own, without connection with the others - as a result, the story does not work out (Appendix to practice).
5) each picture simply lists individual items.
A well-completed task is indicated by a “+” sign. The average completed task is indicated by the sign “±”. A poorly completed task is indicated by a “-” sign. The development of a child’s speech is judged by how he constructs phrases, whether he is fluent in the language, what his vocabulary is, etc.
^ 7. “Sound hide and seek” technique.
The technique is intended to test phonemic hearing.
The experimenter tells the child that all words are made up of sounds that we pronounce, and that is why people can hear and pronounce words. For example, an adult pronounces several vowels and consonants. Then the child is asked to play “hide and seek” with sounds. The conditions of the game are as follows: each time they agree on what sound to look for, after which the experimenter calls the subject various words, and he must say whether or not the sound being sought is in the word (see stimulus material) .
It is suggested to look for the sound “O”, the sound “A”, the sound “Sh” and the sound “S”.
All words must be pronounced very clearly, highlighting each sound, and vowel sounds must even be drawn out (the vowel sound being searched must be under stress). It is necessary to invite the subject to pronounce the word after the experimenter and listen to it. You can repeat the word several times.
Correct and incorrect answers are recorded on the form, and then the method of completing the task is analyzed. So, for example, there are children who answer all words in a row that they contain the sound they are looking for. In this case, the correct answers should be considered random. The same is true if the child believes that the sound he is looking for is nowhere to be found.
If the subject did not make a single mistake, then the task is considered to have been completed well (+).
If one mistake is made, then the task is considered to be completed averagely (±).
If more than one mistake is made, then the task was completed poorly (-).
^ Words for the “Sound Hide and Seek” technique.
Full name, age_______________________________________
^ Interpretation of results (sample)
Among the examined six- to seven-year-old children (19 people), only 70% were ready for school; accordingly, 30% of the children who were about to start studying were not yet ready for school. Let us consider the level of development of these children separately for each area of mental development studied.
^ Affective-need sphere:
The technique, which allows us to identify the dominance of gaming or cognitive motives, showed that the dominance of the cognitive motive is observed in 15 (78.9%) children, and the dominance of the gaming motive in 4 (21%). As for the “internal position of a schoolchild,” this psychological new formation can only be spoken of in relation to 15 (78.9%) future first-graders; in 4 (21%) subjects, the “internal position of a schoolchild” does not manifest itself. It is interesting to note that only a few people directly talk about their reluctance to go to school. The majority of children want to go there, but not at all to study. Among the answers to the question why they want to study, there are, for example, the following: “I’m tired of kindergarten, it will be better at school,” “I want to go to school, because then they won’t force me to sleep during the day,” “There are a lot of children at school, I’ll have friends”, “If I go to school, it means I’m already big and they’ll let me go everywhere alone”, etc. These answers show that children strive to go to school not to study, but to change their lives. in their life that which does not suit them. The results of examination of such children, as a rule, confirm their lack of educational motivation. When performing the technique "House" only 57.8% of the subjects completed the task, that is, they redrew the sample in the form of a picture of a house without errors. But teaching in the first grade is mainly based on copying samples. Poor results (42.2%) using this method indicate not only weak educational motivation, which is manifested in a lack of diligence in completing the task, but also the weak development of the child’s sensorimotor coordination, associated with the maturation of brain structures. Thus, many children, even at the psychophysiological level, are not yet ready for school.
Results according to the method "Yes and no" at first glance it is significantly better. Here, only 40% of the subjects failed the task, while 60% succeeded. But if you remember what this task is, which is nothing more than an ordinary verbal game with rules (one of the variants of the game of forfeits), and even in a lighter version, then it becomes clear that 40% of those who failed is not so few. These are, apparently, those children who either have not yet encountered games according to the rules, or have not learned to play them.
^ Intellectual and speech sphere
The “Boots” technique, which makes it possible to study the features of the development of the generalization process in a child, shows that 57% of the subjects completed the task completely, 25% partially, and 18% of the children studied did not cope at all. Thus, a little more than half of the children cope with the tasks on generalization, and, as noted above, the ability to generalize is necessary for starting school.
With the technique "Sequence of Events" 5 people (30%) of the subjects did it, i.e. these children were able to correctly reconstruct the sequence of events in the drawings and compose a story based on them. Good performance of this task is possible with a normally developed generalization process, a sufficiently broad outlook and developed speech of the child. 70% have unsatisfactory results.
More favorable results were obtained using the “Sound Hide and Seek” method, which tests the development of phonemic hearing of the subjects. 47.2% of children correctly found the required sounds in words, respectively, 52.6% were unable to do this. But it should be noted that these 52.6% of future first-graders are most likely doomed to academic failure, since modern methods of teaching reading are based on phonemic analysis of words. In addition, it is known that students with poorly developed phonemic awareness often make mistakes when writing. From the above, it is clear that the test subjects have a negative result using this method cannot but worry the psychologist and teachers at school.
The survey allows us to give the following characteristics to modern six- and seven-year-old children. The survey shows that the majority of children do not have those psychological developments that form the basis of the concept of “psychological readiness for school.” First of all, it should be noted that the majority at this time do not yet have educational motivation, although one of its components is a cognitive need -expressed quite clearly. But cognitive need alone is not enough for successful learning at school according to existing programs; social motives for learning are also necessary. When characterizing the intellectual sphere, one can highlight the weak development of the generalization process. For many children, speech development leaves much to be desired. From all of the above, one can to conclude that developmental work should be carried out in a form adequate for the psychological characteristics of this age.In addition, the children’s expressed cognitive interest should be skillfully used.
^ Examples of children's responses with formed and unformed readiness for schooling.
A. “Experimental conversation to determine the “internal position of the student”
Examples of answers with the “internal position of the student” formed
Philip (5 years 7 months)
2. Why waste a year?
3. Write because it is very interesting. I want to gain a lot of knowledge.
5. No, I read it myself.
6. Only about robots. I'm very civilized.
7. I want to have many friends and a lot of knowledge.
8. I try very hard to finish it to the end.
9. I like everything.
10. It won’t suit me, because at school I have to write, and I love it.
11.A student because I have no knowledge.
12.Lesson. They run around during recess, but I like to work.
Misha (6 years 0 months)
2. No, I can’t do it anymore.
3. Sculpt from plasticine, draw.
6. “Well, just wait!”, “Leopold the Cat”, “Uncle Styopa”, “Doctor Aibolit”.
7. I really want to learn to write.
8. I peel off one, glue the other - and everything works out.
10.No. I like it at school. Good: you sit and listen, you will learn something.
11.A student. Students sit and listen and learn something.
12.Lesson. This is the best thing.
Bepa (6 years 0 months)
1. Want.
3. Modeling. You get beautiful figures.
6. “The Adventures of Dunno”, “Mashenka and the Bear”, “Tsar Saltan”.
7. I want to write.
8. I try to fulfill.
10. No, because there is no teacher at home.
11.A student, because I don’t know everything yet.
Examples of answers for an unformed “internal position of a student”
Natasha (5 years 7 months)
3. Musical. I do not know why.
6. “Little Red Riding Hood”, “Three Bears”, “Kolobok”.
7. It’s no longer interesting to go to kindergarten.
8. I'm trying to finish it.
10.Yes. (Can’t explain why).
11.Teacher. (Doesn't know why).
12. Change (Doesn’t know why).
Lena (5 years 9 months)
1. I really want to.
3. Modeling. My favorite thing is to sculpt.
6. “About Shoes”, “Donald Biset”, “The Three Little Pigs”.
7. Mom said: “You need to go to school.”
8. If there are any difficulties, I quit.
10.No. Everyone should go to school. They will ask at the institute, but you don’t know.
11.A student. I would rather be a student, I’m still little.
12. Change. During recess you can talk with friends.
Olya (6 years 3 months.)
2. Yes (at home).
3. At home, I like playing Cinderella most of all, because I am Cinderella, and grandmother plays all the other roles.
4. I don’t really like it.
5. Sometimes I want it myself, and sometimes they offer it.
6. I don’t have favorite books; there are favorite dolls.
7. Mom says that there will be many friends.
8. I quit and start over.
10. Yes, because school at home is interesting.
11. A student, no, most likely a teacher, because the teacher teaches.
12. Recess, because they are playing during recess.
B. To the “Sequence of Events” technique(examples of children's stories based on pictures)
Examples of a task well done
^ 2.1. Masha (6 years 2 months)
People were sailing on a boat and saw a house. They sailed to the house, and there the uncle gave them a girl so that they could transport her to the shore. The boat sailed away with the girl, and those people on the house began to wait for the boat to come for them.
E.: - Look, in the first picture, there is no one on the roof, but in the second there are a lot of people, why?
M.: - Because these people are now getting out of the house from the side that is not visible in the picture.
E.: - Why is the house flooded?
M.: - Because the ice floes melted, and there was water under them, and the house began to sink.
E.: - Where was the house?
M.: - On the ice floes.
E.: - Does this mean that he stood on a frozen river?
M.: - No, he stood on the ground, but the ground was covered in ice.
E.: - What time of year is shown in the pictures?
M.: - Autumn.
E.: - Does it happen in the fall that a lot of ice melts?
E.: - When does this happen?
M.: - In the spring.
In this example, the girl laid out the sequence of pictures incorrectly, but logically explained why the sequence should be exactly that way. The story corresponds to this sequence of pictures. The completed task is assessed positively (+).
^ 2.2. Rita (6 years 6 months)
Residents of the house climbed onto the roof and began to wait for them to be rescued. Then a boat came and took them away, and they sailed far, far away.
E.: - Why did they climb onto the roof?
R.: - The snow melted, the flood began.
E.: - What time of year is it in the pictures?
R.: - May, spring.
An example of a story from which it is clear that the child does not understand
what's happening in the pictures
^ 2.3. Tanya (6 years 4 months)
I.: (laughs) - It’s drawn here, they built a house in the water,
On snow. Their house fell into the river. They swam to another island.
E.: - What did they use?
T.: -On a boat.
E.: - Where did the boat come from?
T.; - They built it.
E.; - Sitting on the roof?
T.: - We bought it.
E.: - Why did the house end up in the water?
T.: - They built it there.
T.: - Winter.
Example of a story with leading questions
^ 2.4.Tanya (5 years 10 months)
T.; - I don’t understand why the hut is on the water?
E.: - What time of year is it in the pictures?
T.: - Spring.
E.: - What happens in the spring?
T.: - Ice floes melt and turn into water.
E.: - Where do the ice floes melt?
T.: - On the water.
E.: - On the river too?
E.: - At the same time, there is more water in the river?
E.; -Where does she go?
T.: - It’s flowing onto the shore.
E.: - What could be standing on the shore?
T.: - House. And it was flooded.
(Starts story)
Spring came, water flooded the banks and the house. A boat sailed past, picked up people and took them to shore.
E.: - Look, in the second picture there is no one on the roof, then who is being rescued in the third picture?
T.: (swaps pictures); 1-2-3
In this example, the girl laid out the wrong sequence of pictures, but with the help of leading questions she composed the correct story that did not correspond to her sequence of pictures. After an additional question from the experimenter, she corrected the sequence to the correct one.
The task was completed at an average level (±).
An example of a story when each picture is told separately
^ 2.5. Ksenia (7 years 0 months)
I.: (wants to leave the pictures as they are, then rearranges them: 3-1-2).
Tells each picture separately:
Spring has come. The river overflowed from its banks. People cross by boat. The houses are all flooded. Streams are flowing. Bare trees.
Winter came. It is snowing. The river freezes.
Summer is coming. Snow is melting. Leaves are blooming. People change into warm clothes.
^ In this example, the child did not complete the task (-).
The technique is used to study the ability to act according to the rule.
The technique is a modification of the well-known children’s game “Don’t say yes or no, don’t wear black and white.” As the game progresses, the presenter asks the participants questions that can most easily be answered with “yes” or “no”, as well as using the names of white or black colors. But this is exactly what you cannot do according to the terms of the game.
The technique is based only on the first part of the rules of the game, namely: children are forbidden to answer questions with the words “yes” and “no”.
Instructions to the subject: “Now we will play a game in which the word “yes” and the word “no” cannot be pronounced. Please repeat, which words cannot be pronounced? (The subject repeats these words). Now be careful, I will ask you questions that cannot be answered with the words “yes” or “no.” Understood?” After the subject confirms that he understands the rules of the game, the experimenter begins to ask him questions that provoke the answers “yes” and “no” (see Stimulus material).
Only the words “yes” and “no” are considered errors. The words “yeah”, “nope” and the like are not considered errors. Also, a meaningless answer is not considered an error if it satisfies the formal rules of the game. It is quite acceptable if the child is completely silent and only limits himself to an affirmative or negative movement of his head.
If the subject, having correctly repeated the rules of the game, nevertheless begins to answer with the words “yes” and “no,” the experimenter does not interrupt him, but asks all the necessary questions to the end. After this, the child is asked whether he won or lost the game. If the child understands that he has lost and understands why, then the adult invites him to play again to win back. Before the second test, you must repeat the rule of the game again and ask the child to reproduce this rule again. If there are no errors in the second test, then it is counted as the best result. We can assume that in this case we see the child’s capabilities in the zone of proximal development.
The task was completed at a good level if no errors were made (+).
If one mistake is made, then this is an average level (±).
If more than one error is made, then it is considered that the subject failed the task (–).
III. Research of the intellectual and speech sphere
5. “Boot” technique (developed by N.I. Gutkina, 1993, 1996, 2002)
The technique allows you to study a child’s learning ability, that is, to monitor how he uses a rule that he has never encountered before to solve problems. The difficulty of the proposed tasks gradually increases due to the introduction of objects in relation to which the learned rule can be applied only after the necessary generalization process has been carried out. The problems used in the methodology are constructed in such a way that their solution requires an empirical or theoretical generalization. Empirical generalization is understood as the ability to classify objects according to essential characteristics, or to bring them under a general concept. Theoretical generalization is understood as a generalization based on meaningful abstraction, when the guideline is not a specific distinctive feature, but the fact of the presence or absence of a distinctive feature, regardless of the form of its manifestation.
Thus, the “Boots” technique makes it possible to study children’s learning ability, as well as the features of the development of the generalization process.
The technique is clinical in nature and does not involve obtaining standard indicators. In the program for the study of psychological readiness for school, the technique is used for children 6-7 years old, and in the case of special use of it to determine a child’s learning ability and the characteristics of the development of the generalization process, the age range can be expanded from 5.5 to 10 years.
The experimental task involves teaching the subject digital coding of color pictures.
(horse, girl, stork) by the presence or absence of one characteristic - boots on their feet. There are boots - the picture is designated "1", no boots - "0". Color pictures are offered to the subject in the form of a table (see Stimulus material), which contains: 1) a coding rule (1, 2 lines); 2) stage of consolidating the rule (3, 4, 5 lines); 3) so-called “riddles”, which the subject must “guess” by correctly coding the figures with the numbers “0” and “1” (6, 7 lines). Accordingly, line 6 is riddle I, and line 7 is riddle II.
In addition to the table of color pictures, the experiment uses a sheet with images of geometric figures, which represent two more riddles (see Stimulus material), which the subject also needs to “guess”, relying on the rule introduced in the first two lines of the table for encoding pictures depending on the presence or absence distinctive feature. Accordingly, the first row of geometric figures is the III riddle, and the second is the IV riddle.
All answers and statements of the subject are recorded in the protocol, and each solution to the riddle must be explained by the child, why he arranged the numbers exactly the way he did.
The first instruction to the subject: “Now I will teach you a game in which the figures drawn in this table will need to be designated by the numbers “0” and “1”. Look at the pictures (the first line of the table is shown), who is drawn here?”
(The subject names the pictures. In case of difficulty, the experimenter helps him). “That’s right, now pay attention: in the first line the figures of a horse, a girl and a stork are drawn without boots, and opposite them there is the number “0”, and in the second line the figures are drawn with boots, and opposite them there is a number “1”. For the correct designating figures with numbers, you need to remember that if the figure in the picture is shown without boots, then it must be designated with the number “0”, and if with boots, then with the number “1”. Do you remember? Repeat, please." (The subject repeats the rule). The child is then asked to place the numbers in the next three rows of the table. This stage is considered as consolidation of the learned rule. If the child makes mistakes, the experimenter again asks him to repeat the rule for naming the figures and points to the sample (the first two lines of the table). For each answer, the subject must explain why he answered exactly that way. The consolidating stage shows how quickly and easily the child learns a new rule and begins to apply it, that is, the child’s learning speed is determined. At this stage, the experimenter records all the subject’s erroneous answers, since the nature of the errors can show whether the child simply unsteadily remembered the rule and is confused where to put “0” and where “1”, or whether he does not apply the necessary rule in his work at all. So, for example, there are mistakes when a horse is designated by the number “4”, a girl by the number “2”, and a stork by the number “1” and such answers are explained based on the number of legs of these characters. After the experimenter makes sure that the child has learned to apply the rule he was taught, the subject is given a second instruction.
The second instruction to the subject: “You have already learned to designate figures with numbers, and now, using this skill, try to “guess” the riddles drawn here. “To guess” a riddle means to correctly label the figures drawn in it with the numbers “0” and “1.”
Riddle I (located in row 6 of the table) is a coding task that includes an object that has not previously been encountered by the test subject, but contains the same information as previously encountered objects. In this line, the picture “hedgehog” appears for the first time, which the child had never seen before in the table; in addition, the hedgehog is wearing blue, not red, boots. When solving this riddle, the subject must strictly follow the given rule of designating figures with numbers based on the presence or absence of their distinctive feature - boots, without being distracted by the color of this feature or the appearance of completely new objects that have not been encountered before, but also differ in this feature. The child must explain his answer, why he labeled the figures this way. If the answer is incorrect, the experimenter no longer draws the subject’s attention to the operating rule, but immediately moves on to the next riddle. Riddle I shows the child’s learning ability, which manifests itself in the fact that he must apply a given rule to a similar object (a hedgehog in blue boots). With good learning ability, the subject can easily transfer the rule to a new object and treat it in the same way as with already familiar ones (due to the process of generalization).
The mistakes children make when “guessing” this riddle are very diverse: failure to use the learned rule or incorrect application of it in those pictures on which the subject has already practiced (that is, the same type of errors as at the consolidation stage, although this particular subject there might not have been any errors at the reinforcing stage), or there might have been an error due to the fact that the subject was unable to apply the introduced rule on a new object (an error only when designating a hedgehog). Therefore, in the event of an incorrect “guessing” of the riddle, it is necessary to analyze the nature of the mistakes made in order to understand what exactly prevented the child from completing the task. Riddle II (located in the 7th line of the table) is a coding task, the solution of which depends on whether the subject sees something in common between different classes of objects that will allow him to apply the same rule to completely different objects. In the cells of this line, snowmen are drawn, that is, pictures that the child has not seen before in the table. The snowmen differ in that three of them have a headdress, and one does not. And since these are snowmen, any more or less suitable object (bucket, frying pan) is used as a headdress, in addition to a real hat. The solution to this problem involves the following reasoning. Snowmen have no legs at all, which means that the introduced rule for designating figures with numbers is either not applicable to them at all, or is applicable, but based on some other reference feature. Finding this landmark sign just means “solving” the riddle. The instructions given in the instructions for solving the riddle should help the child cope with the task. The distinctive landmark in the second riddle is headdresses, or “hats, caps,” as children usually call them. In order to highlight this landmark feature, the child must make an empirical generalization, which consists in the fact that he must classify all objects depicted on the heads of snowmen as “hats.” This generalization should be facilitated by the fact that the first snowman is wearing a real hat on his head, which gives instructions for considering other objects from this point of view. Since in the riddle with snowmen the subject is required to place the numbers “0” and “1”, he needs to assume that the presence or absence of a “hat” should serve as a guideline for this, as in the previous riddle the presence or absence of boots was such a guideline. If the child identified a distinctive landmark feature that allows him to solve the problem, and was able to transfer the learned rule for designating figures with numbers from one specific feature to another (from boots to “hats”), then he correctly “guesses” the riddle.
Children who correctly “guessed” this riddle are divided into two groups. One group consists of subjects who came to the correct decision through empirical generalization of distinctive landmark features, when boots and “hats” are considered as one class of features – “clothing”. Therefore, “1” they denote those figures that have an element of clothing that they have identified, which serves as a reference sign in this riddle (“hats”), and “0” - figures without this element of clothing. The children’s explanations sound accordingly: “We give “1” to those who have hats (hats), and “0” to those who do not have hats (hats).” Among the subjects in this group there are children who partially cope with the task. This is manifested in the fact that they designate a snowman in a hat and a snowman with a bucket on his head with the number “1”, and a snowman with a bare head and a snowman with a frying pan - with the number “0”. In explaining their answer, they refer to the fact that two snowmen have hats and two do not. They refuse to consider the frying pan on the snowman's head as a "hat", believing that the frying pan cannot be used as a headdress even for a snowman. Perhaps such answers indicate some rigidity in the child’s thinking, since it is difficult for him to think of objects that are usually not related to hats in a new meaning for them. The bucket does not cause such difficulties, since it is traditionally placed on the snowman’s head (in pictures, children’s New Year’s parties, etc.). Having encountered such an answer, the experimenter should try to convince the child that a frying pan can also be a headdress for a snowman, if there is nothing else suitable. If the child agrees with the adult’s arguments, then he is asked to once again arrange the numbers in the riddle and explain his answer again. The best answer counts.
The other group consists of subjects who found the answer based on meaningful abstraction, that is, identifying the principle for solving a whole class of problems, which consists in focusing on the very fact of the presence or absence of a distinctive feature, regardless of the form of its manifestation.
Within this group, subjects are divided into two subgroups. The first subgroup are those who, focusing on an abstract sign, find it here in the concrete - “hats”, carrying out an empirical generalization of all objects on the heads of snowmen as “hats” (headdresses). Explaining their answer, they, like the children of the first group, refer to the presence or absence of “hats” on the heads of the snowmen. The second subgroup, represented by a small number of children, are those who highlight the abstract feature of distinguishing snowmen by the presence or absence of something on their heads. At the same time, the subjects, explaining their answer, say: “We give “1” to those who have something on their head, and “0” to those who have nothing on their head.” In order to understand whether the subjects of the second subgroup can carry out empirical generalization, the experimenter must ask them the question: “Can the objects drawn on the heads of snowmen be called in one word?” If the subject answers that these are hats, or caps, or headdresses, then he has an empirical generalization, but the solution to riddle II was made on the basis of a theoretical generalization. If the subject cannot combine the drawn objects into one word, this means that empirical generalization is poorly developed in him.
There are children who correctly “guess” the riddle, but cannot explain their answer.
The most common mistake when solving riddle II is to designate all snowmen as “0”, while the subjects refer to the fact that snowmen have no legs and no boots. This error occurs due to the fact that the child does not think about how to apply the rule given at the beginning to the solution of this riddle. After all, if snowmen have no legs at all, then there is nothing to wear boots on, and, therefore, it is impossible to navigate here by boots at all. And since this is a riddle, the child must figure out (as a result of generalization) what landmark feature he should take into account instead of boots. (A detailed explanation of the process for solving riddle II has been given above). Faced with such a solution to riddle II, it is advisable to return to it after riddles III and IV if they are successfully “guessed.” At the same time, returning to riddle II, the experimenter asks the child the following question: “You have already “guessed” this riddle, and now think about whether it is possible to “guess” it differently, is it possible to arrange the numbers “0” and “1” here differently? “The protocol records the second attempt to solve the riddle with snowmen and again records the explanation of the answer given by the child. If the answer is correct, the best answer is counted.
Regardless of whether the child has solved riddle II or not, he is offered riddles III and IV.
Riddles III and IV, located on a separate sheet and representing horizontal rows of geometric shapes, allow you to find out whether the child can solve the problem at an abstract level. There are no longer any figures depicting animals or people, and accordingly there are no elements of clothing. The geometric figures depicted differ in the presence or absence of shading.
If the subject cannot “guess” these riddles, then most likely this indicates that he does not yet have a theoretical generalization, since riddles III and IV are designed for the level of meaningful abstraction, when the subject is guided not by a specific distinctive feature, but by a fact the presence or absence of a distinctive feature, regardless of the form of its manifestation. Explaining their answer, the subjects in this case say: “We put “1” to those with stripes (cells), and “0” to those without stripes (cells).” But it happens that children come to the correct answer in these riddles on the basis of empirical generalization. This becomes clear from their explanations. In this case, the explanation includes the words “clothed”, “unclothed”, “dressed”, “naked”, that is, the shading is figuratively perceived as the clothing of geometric figures. It is also possible that the children solve riddles III and IV based on a theoretical generalization, but do not yet realize their own method of action. It seems that it is in this case that the subjects who correctly “solved” these riddles cannot explain their answers. Most likely, this is explained by the fact that theoretical thinking “is first of all expressed in methods of mental activity, and then in various symbolic systems, in particular by means of artificial and natural language (a theoretical concept may already exist as a way of deducing the individual from the universal, but not yet have a terminological design)". It is no coincidence that the highest level of development of theoretical thinking is associated with reflection, that is, conscious control of one’s thinking apparatus.
When “guessing” riddles III and IV, there are often cases of chaotic arrangement of numbers without any explanation or designation of geometric figures with numbers based on the number of angles of a given figure (circle - 0, triangle - 3, square, rectangle, rhombus, trapezoid - 4). Very interesting are the errors that arise due to the fact that the presence or absence of angles in geometric shapes is selected as a feature on the basis of which coding is carried out. Then a figure without corners (a circle) is designated “0”, and figures with corners (all others) are designated “1”. It may seem that isolating this feature to solve the problem (as in the previous cases, boots and hats) is quite legitimate. But this is only at first glance, since the initially given rule, on the basis of which other riddles should or can be solved through theoretical generalization, implicitly contains the condition that when encoding pictures by the presence or absence of a distinctive feature on a figure, the figure itself should not change. If the corners of a geometric figure are considered as a distinctive feature, then when the corners disappear or appear, the geometric figure itself changes. Therefore, such a solution to riddles III and IV is illegal.
It happens that a child solves the third riddle incorrectly, but on the fourth he grasps the principle of the solution and correctly explains his answer. In this case, after the fourth riddle, the subject is again offered a third one and asked to explain its new solution. If the guess is correct, the best answer is counted.
It should be noted that there are children who cannot “guess” the second riddle (with snowmen), but “guess” the third and fourth (with geometric figures), and the answers are given the correct explanation. Among these subjects, two groups can be distinguished. The first group is children who have meaningful abstraction, but do not have empirical generalization. III and IV riddles are solved by them, since they highlight the principle of solving this class of problems, which consists in finding a sign by which the objects of the problem differ. The second riddle is beyond their ability, because, although they understand the principle of solving this class of problems, in this case they cannot identify a common landmark, without which problems of this type cannot be solved. Children belonging to this group of subjects cannot generalize the objects on the heads of snowmen with one concept of “hats” or “headdresses,” and therefore they cannot find the characteristic by which snowmen differ. This group also includes subjects who partially cope with this task, namely, they do not recognize the frying pan as a snowman’s headdress, and therefore a snowman with a frying pan on his head is designated “0” (more details about these guys are written above).
The second group are children who initially reformulate for themselves the rule presented in the first two lines of the colored table. When repeating the rule after the experimenter, they modify it as follows: “We denote the naked ones as “0”, and the clothed ones as “1”.” They solve the problem with snowmen incorrectly, since they perceive all snowmen as naked, but they solve problems with geometric figures correctly, explaining their answers by the presence or absence of clothes on the figures. “We’ll put “1” for the dressed one, and “0” for the naked one,” these subjects say, meaning by clothing the shading on geometric shapes. Here we are faced with a phenomenon when, when solving generalization problems, apparently no type of generalization is used at all, and the solution is carried out at the level of visual-figurative thinking. The assumption that these children lack empirical generalization is confirmed by the results obtained when conducting the “Exclusion of the Superfluous” technique with the same subjects.
Notes on the implementation of the technique. If at the reinforcing stage the child makes mistakes, then the experimenter immediately analyzes the nature of the mistakes made and, through leading questions, as well as by repeatedly referring to the rule for designating figures with numbers, contained in the first two lines of the table, tries to achieve error-free work by the subject. When the experimenter is confident that the subject has learned to apply the given rule well, he can proceed to “solving” the riddles. If the subject, after repeated repeated attempts, still does not master the application of a given rule, that is, cannot correctly place the numbers “0” and “1” at the consolidating stage, then they do not proceed to “solving” the riddles. In this case, a thorough examination of the child’s intellectual development for mental retardation is necessary.
In case of incorrect “guessing” of the riddle, the experimenter does not inform the subject about this, but presents him with the next riddle. If you solve a new riddle correctly, you should return to the previous one again to find out whether the subsequent riddle played the role of a clue for the previous one. Such repeated returns can be made several times. So, it is advisable after the second riddle to return to the first; after the fourth - to the third and to the second. Returning to the previous one after successfully solving a subsequent riddle can be considered as the help of an adult, and therefore the correct completion of a task in this case is the child’s zone of proximal development.
To clarify the nature of the generalization when “guessing” riddles, it is necessary to ask children in detail about why the figures are designated this way. If the child correctly “guessed” the riddle, but cannot give an explanation, then move on to the next riddle. If the answer to the new riddle is correctly explained to the test subjects, you should return to the previous one and again ask him to explain the answer in it.
At all stages of work, the rule contained in the first two lines of the table must be open.
During the entire experiment, it is necessary to keep a detailed protocol, where all the statements of the subject, the directions of his gaze, as well as all the questions and comments of the experimenter will be recorded.
Since this technique is clinical in nature and does not have normative indicators, the results obtained from it are interpreted not from the point of view of the normality-abnormality of the child’s development, but from the point of view of the peculiarities of the development of his generalization process.
“Boots” technique
The technique allows us to identify the current level of the generalization process and the zone of proximal development in children 6-9 years old.
As experimental material, a color table of drawings is used, consisting of 55 cells (7 rows of 5 cells each), and a sheet of paper depicting geometric figures. The color table looks like this:
- 1st row - the first cell is empty, in the second there is a dog, in the third - Cipollino barefoot, in the fourth - a heron standing on one leg, in the fifth - the number “0”.
- 2nd row - the first cell is empty, in the second the same dog is drawn as in the first row, but only red boots are on all four paws, in the third - Cipollino in red boots, and in the fourth - the same heron on one leg , but in a red boot, in the fifth there is the number “1”.
- Row 3 - the first, second and fifth cells are empty, in the third there is Cipollino in red boots, in the fourth there is a heron without boots.
- Row 4 - the first, second and fifth cells are empty, in the third there is Cipollino in red boots, in the fourth there is a heron in a red boot.
- Row 5 - the first and fifth cells are empty, in the second there is a dog in red boots, in the third - Cipollino barefoot, in the fourth - a barefoot heron.
- Row 6 - in the first cell there is a hedgehog in blue boots, in the second - a dog in red boots, in the third - Cipollino barefoot, in the fourth - a heron in a red boot, the fifth cell is empty.
- Row 7 - in the first cell there is a snowman with a top hat on his head, in the second there is a snowman without a hat, in the third there is a snowman with a bucket on his head, in the fourth there is a snowman with a frying pan on his head, the fifth cell is empty.
A piece of paper shows two rows of geometric shapes:
In the 1st row there are shaded squares, a circle (the shading is the same), an unshaded triangle and a rectangle; in the P row there is a rhombus, “lined in a small square, an empty” trapezoid; triangle, dis-, * drawn in a small cell; a rectangle drawn in a small checkered pattern (like a rhombus). The teacher turns to the subject: “Now I will teach you how to solve interesting riddles. Look at the pictures (the first row is shown on the color table of pictures), who is drawn here?” (The subject names the pictures; in case of difficulty, the experimenter helps him.) "" That's right, now pay attention: in the first row the little animals and Cipollino are drawn barefoot, and opposite them is the number "O", in the second row they are all wearing boots, and opposite They are marked with the number "I". To solve the riddles you need to remember that if the figure in the picture is drawn barefoot, then you must designate it with the number “O”, and if in boots, then with the number “I”. Remember? Please repeat. (The subject repeats the rule.);
Then the child is asked to place the numbers in the next three rows of cells. This stage is considered as training and consolidation of the learned rule. If he makes mistakes, the experimenter asks him to repeat his rule of work, points to the sample (the first two rows). For each answer, the subject must explain why he answered that way. The learning stage shows how quickly and easily the child learns a new rule and can apply it when solving problems. At this stage, the experimenter records all his erroneous answers not only quantitatively (an incorrect answer is scored I point), but also qualitatively, since the nature of the errors can show whether the child simply did not remember the rule firmly and is confused where to put “011” and where “I” , *or he does not apply the rule at all in his work. So, for example, there are mistakes when a dog is designated by the number “4”, Cipollino - “2”, and a heron - “I” and such answers are explained based on the number of legs the given characters. After the experimenter is sure that the child has learned to apply the rule that he was taught, the stage of “guessing riddles” begins. “Guessing the riddle” means correctly labeling the figures with the numbers “O” and “I.”
I “riddle” (located in the Y1 row) allows you to reveal the ability to apply the rule to new specific material.
In this row, for the first time, the picture “hedgehog” appears, which the child had never seen before in the table; moreover, the hedgehog is wearing boots not red, but blue. Thus, to successfully solve the problem, the learned rule for designating figures with numbers must be transferred to a new specific material (a new figure in boots of a different color).
The mistakes that children make when solving this “riddle” are very diverse. This may be failure to use a learned rule or incorrect application of it on those pictures on which the child has already practiced (i.e., the same type of errors as at the training stage, although this particular subject may not have had any errors at the training stage), or there may be an error caused by the lack of actual transfer of the introduced rule for designating figures with numbers to a new specific material. Therefore, in the event of an incorrect solution to the “riddle,” it is necessary to analyze the nature of the errors so as not to draw the wrong conclusion about the child’s inability to apply the rule on new specific material.
P "riddle" (located in the Y1 row) allows you to identify the ability to carry out empirical generalization.
Snowmen are drawn in the cells of this row, i.e. pictures not previously found in the table. The snowmen differ in that three of them have a headdress, and one does not. And since these are snowmen, any more or less suitable object (bucket, frying pan) is used as a headdress, in addition to a hat. In this case, the child is asked to label the pictures with the numbers “O” and “I”. To cope with such a task, it is necessary to compare I. and P “riddles” and see the connection between them, which consists in the fact that in both the first and second cases, three figures differ from the fourth in that “three have something , which the fourth does not have: in the first case, boots, in the second, hats. But in order to understand that the various objects on the heads of snowmen are all “hats,” the subject should make an empirical generalization. Such a generalization, from our point of view, should contribute to the fact that the first snowman is wearing a hat on his head, which sets the stage for examining other objects from the same point of view. Since in the riddle with snowmen the child also needs to place the numbers “O” and “I”, he needs to assume that the landmarks for this should serve as the presence or absence of a hat, as in the previous riddle such a reference point was the presence or absence of boots. If, when comparing the 1st and P “riddles”, he identified distinctive features - landmarks that allowed him to solve the problem, and was able to carry out the transfer of the rule for naming figures that he had learned from one specific feature to another (from boots to hats), then the subject correctly solves the “riddle”. When analyzing the results, the question arises: how does a child transfer the rule for naming figures from one feature to another (from boots to hats)? Is this transfer of the rule explained by an empirical generalization of distinctive features - both boots and hats represent details of clothing or by a meaningful abstraction, i.e. identifying the principle for solving a whole class of problems, which consists in focusing on the very fact of the presence or absence of a distinctive feature, regardless of the form of its manifestation? The following two “riddles” help answer this question.
Sh and 1U. "Riddles", located on a separate sheet of paper and representing a series of geometric shapes, allow you to find out whether the child can solve a problem that requires thinking at an abstract level. There are no longer any figures depicting animals or fairy-tale characters, and accordingly there are no clothing details. The geometric figures depicted differ in the presence or absence of shading.
If a subject in a “riddle” has discovered for himself a general principle for solving similar problems, abstracting from the specific form of a distinctive feature as an unimportant point, then he can easily cope with these new tasks. It is possible that the solution to the P “riddle” was realized as a result of an empirical generalization of the distinctive features, and in the III and 1U “riddles” he finds the principle for solving the entire class of similar problems, i.e. rises to the level of abstract thinking.
Those children who “guessed the P riddle” using an empirical generalization of distinctive features, in order to solve the Sh and 1U “riddles”, need to see the connection between them and the previous ones, which consists in the fact that both the images of specific characters and geometric figures differ from each other ( inside each “riddle”) there is one attribute that changes each time.
The next step of the subject should be to understand that to solve the problem the shape of the distinctive feature is an unimportant point, but the very fact of the presence or absence of the feature is important.
Thus, the child moves to the level of theoretical thinking, where he, abstracting from the form of a distinctive feature and focusing only on the fact of its presence or absence, comes to identify the principle of solving a whole class of problems.
Thus, solving the III and 1U “riddles” can clarify whether the subject transfers the rule for designating figures from one feature to another as a result of an empirical generalization of distinctive features or as a result of meaningful abstraction.
To clarify the nature of the generalization when “guessing riddles,” you should talk with children after each “guess,” asking them why the figures are designated this way, and after the child identifies a distinctive feature as a guide in his work, the question should follow: “Why if this feature exists (for example, hats), then do you designate the figure “I”? Such a question can allow children to be identified with an empirical generalization of distinctive features, which is more often recognized and easier to verbalize than the highlighted general principle of the decision.
Processing of the method results is carried out quantitatively and qualitatively.
It was previously noted that at the learning stage, each incorrect answer is scored 1 point. An incorrectly solved “riddle” is also scored 1 point, and a correctly solved one is scored “O”, then the total score for all four “riddles” is calculated (the training stage is not included in the total score). The worse the child did on the task, the higher his total score.
Qualitative analysis of errors allows us to better understand the reason for the test subject’s failure in a particular task and to identify what kind of training he needs to master this or that mental operation.
At the beginning of the description of the technique, we noted that it allows us to identify both the current level of the generalization process in the subject and the zone of its proximal development.
Let's explain this with an example. An examination of the child according to the method showed that he easily mastered the learning stage, can independently cope with 1 "riddle, P can overcome it with the help of an adult, and does not understand Sh and 1U even when the experimenter shows him the solution. The results obtained are interpreted as follows: the subject knows how to work according to the rule (good assimilation of the training stage), can apply the rule known to him on new specific material (he solved 1 “riddle” on his own), in his zone of proximal development lies the construction of an empirical generalization (a “riddle” solved with the help of an adult), and theoretical generalization is not yet in the zone of his proximal development, as evidenced by the test subject’s lack of understanding of the solution to III and IV “riddles” that require generalization at an abstract level. Having received such data, we can conclude that at the moment this child needs training that will contribute to the development of empirical generalization, since it is this type of generalization that is in the zone of its closest development.
