Abstract
The article notes that there is a problem of gender imbalance in the professional sphere everywhere, including in teacher training. At the same time, it is indicated that there are different indicators of the effectiveness of female teachers and male teachers. In addition, there are different ideas about the expectations of the profession for men and women. Based on this, the purpose of the article is to determine the value-semantic foundations of the pedagogical activity of a modern teacher (men and women). For this purpose, a questionnaire was used to identify the most important value orientations associated with the target objects - the child, the educational environment and the teaching profession. It is established that there are differences in the value-semantic bases of activity: female teachers are more focused on interaction with colleagues, parents and other specialists; they strive to apply various methods in the learning process, while male teachers are more interested in organizing the learning process and managing it.
Keywords
- values
- real values
- declared values
- axiological approach
- gender
- female teacher
- male teacher
Funding
Работа подготовлена в рамках государственного задания Министерства просвещения РФ на НИР «Научное обоснование и выработка методологии обеспечения преемственности ФГОС общего, среднего профессионального и высшего педагогического образования в интересах создания единого образовательного пространства подготовки педагогических кадров» (073-00109-22-02).
References
Zakirova, G.F. Gender relations: history and prospects. Alma mater (Vestnik vysshei shkoly). 2022. No. 3. P. 92-97. DOI: 10.20339/AM.03-22.092
Ledovskaya, T.V. Axiological approach to the problem of professional training of teachers. Alma mater (Vestnik vysshei shkoly). 2022. No. 8. C. 43–49. DOI: 10.20339/AM.09-22.043
Ensuring continuity of the results of continuing pedagogical education: collective monograph. I.Yu. Tarkhanova (ed.). Yaroslavl: RIO YAGPU. 2021. 320 p.
Polyvyannaya, M.T. Value orientations and lifestyle of teachers in the gender dimension. Zhenshchina v rossijskom obshchestve. 2007. No. 3. P. 28–37.
Talanov, S.L. Transformation of student youth values in the context of the dynamics of social change. Alma mater (Vestnik vysshei shkoly). 2020. No. 2. P. 32–41. DOI 10.20339/AM.02-20.032.
Fazliahmetova, E.I. The influence of femininity/masculinity on the self-actualization of personality in the teaching profession. Vestnik Bashkirskogo universiteta. 2010. No. 3. P. 848–851.
Values of pedagogical education: history and current state. A.M. Hodyrev (ed.). Yaroslavl: RIO YAGPU, 2020. 183 p.
Akyıldız, P., Aktaş, F.N., Dede, Y., Hacıömeroğlu, G. Mathematics teachers’ values about teaching mathematics. Studies in Educational Evaluation. 2021. Vol. 68. 100954. DOI: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100954
Andersen, I.G., Reimer, D. Same-gender teacher assignment, instructional strategies, and student achievement: New evidence on the mechanisms generating same-gender teacher effects. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility. 2019. Vol. 62. 100406. DOI: 10.1016/j.rssm.2019.05.001
Bullough, R.V. Differences? Similarities? Male teacher, female teacher: An instrumental case study of teaching in a Head Start classroom. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2015. Vol. 47. P. 13–21. DOI:10.1016/j.tate.2014.12.001.
Burić, I., Kim, L.E. Job satisfaction predicts teacher self-efficacy and the association is invariant: Examinations using TALIS 2018 data and longitudinal Croatian data. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2021. Vol. 105, 103406. DOI: 10.1016/j.tate.2021.103406
Bush, A., Grotjohann, N. Collaboration in teacher education: A cross-sectional study on future teachers’ attitudes towards collaboration, their intentions to collaborate and their performance of collaboration. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2020. Vol. 88. 102968. DOI: 10.1016/j.tate.2019.102968
Buurman, M., Delfgaauw J., Dur, R., Zoutenbier, R. When do teachers respond to student feedback? Evidence from a field experiment. Labour Economics. 2020. Vol. 65. 101858. DOI: 10.1016/j.labeco.2020.101858
Corcoran, S.P., Evans, W.N., Schwab, R.M. Women, the labor market, and the declining relative quality of teachers. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. 2004. Vol. 23, Iss. 3. P. 449–470. DOI: 10.1002/pam.20021
Cushman, P. Male primary school teachers: Helping or hindering a move to gender equity? Teaching and Teacher Education. 2010. Vol. 26. Iss. 5. P. 1211–1218. DOI: 10.1016/j.tate.2010.01.002.
Cushman, P. Let’s hear it from the males: Issues facing male primary school teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2005. Vol. 21. Iss. 3. P. 227-240 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2005.01.012.
Dicke, A.-L., Rubach, Ch., Safavian, N., Karabenick, S.A., Eccles, J.S. Less direct than you thought: Do teachers transmit math value to students through their cognitive support for understanding? Learning and Instruction. 2021. Vol. 75. 101521. DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2021.101521.
Dolton, P.J., Makepeace, G.H. Female labour force participation and the choice of occupation: The supply of teachers. European Economic Review. 1993. Vol. 37. Iss. 7. P. 1393–1411. DOI: 10.1016/0014-2921(93)90062-F
Eble, A., Hu, F. Child beliefs, societal beliefs, and teacher-student identity match. Economics of Education Review. 2020. Vol. 77. 101994. DOI: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2020.101994
Hadar, L.L., Benish-Weisman, M. Teachers’ agency: Do their values make a difference? British Educational Research Journal. 2019. Vol. 45. P. 137–160. DOI: 10.1002/berj.3489
Hajovsky, D.B., Chesnut, S.R., Jensen, K.M. The role of teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs in the development of teacher-student relationships. Journal of School Psychology. 2020. Vol. 82. P. 141–158. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsp.2020.09.001
Han, S.W., Borgonovi, F., Guerriero, S. Why don’t more boys want to become teachers? The effect of a gendered profession on students’ career expectations. International Journal of Educational Research. 2020. Vol. 103. 101645. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101645
Hatlevik, O.E., Bjarnø, V. Examining the relationship between resilience to digital distractions, ICT self-efficacy, motivation, approaches to studying, and time spent on individual studies. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2021. Vol. 102. 103326. DOI: 10.1016/j.tate.2021.103326
Lam, Y.H.R., Tse, S.K., Lam, J.W.I., Loh, E.K.Y. Does the gender of the teacher matter in the teaching of reading literacy? Teacher gender and pupil attainment in reading literacy in Hong Kong. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2010. Vol. 26. Iss. 4. P. 754–759. DOI: 10.1016/j.tate.2009.10.010
Majzub, R.M., Maisarah, M.R. Boys’ Underachievement: Male versus Female Teachers. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2010. Vol. 7. P. 685-690. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.10.093
Olson, R.E., McKenzie, J., Mills, K.A., Patulny, R., Bellocchi, A., Caristo, F. Gendered emotion management and teacher outcomes in secondary school teaching: A review. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2019. Vol. 80. P. 128–144. DOI: 10.1016/j.tate.2019.01.010.
Shagholi, R., Zabihi, M.R., Atefi, M., Moayedi, F. Female Teachers and Barriers of Participatory Management. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2011. Vol. 15. P. 241–245. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.03.080
Spilt, J.L., Koomen, H.M.Y., Jak, S. Are boys better off with male and girls with female teachers? A multilevel investigation of measurement invariance and gender match in teacher–student relationship quality. Journal of School Psychology. 2012. Vol. 50. Iss. 3. P. 363–378 DOI: 10.1016/j.jsp.2011.12.002.
Yamamura, E., Managi, Sh., Tsutsui, Y. Male pupils taught by female homeroom teachers show a higher preference for Corporate Social Responsibility in adulthood. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies. 2019. Vol. 54. 101048. DOI: 10.1016/j.jjie.2019.101048