ORGANISATION FEATURES OF THE STUDENTS’ INDEPENDENT WORK IN THE COURSE “METHODS OF TEACHING THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE”

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (97) ◽  
pp. 251-260
Author(s):  
MARINA A. SKVORTSOVA ◽  
IRINA A. SMIRNOVA

The article considers the process of training bachelors in the field “Methods of teaching the Russian language and literature”. The article presents the results of a study aimed at identifying the formation level of competencies assigned to this discipline. The study was organized in several stages. An ascertaining stage presupposes determining the level of academic performance, skills and abilities formed before the beginning of the course; the second is a forming stage: implementation of independent work within the framework of the discipline; the third stage is a control one that requires repeated assessment of the competence formation level.

2015 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 163-168
Author(s):  
A.V. Shmeleva

This article assesses the third international competition "The best teacher of Russian literature abroad". The competition involved the teachers of Russian language and literature from a variety of countries - The Commonwealth of Independent States, Baltic States, Europe, Asia, USA and Africa. At the final stage, which was held in Moscow, past competitive selection of teachers shared their techniques and revealed features of its implementation.


2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (5) ◽  
pp. 40-45
Author(s):  
Хотько ◽  
E. Khotko

The paper considers the fair culture as being the element of the Russian vernacular and festive folklore, which for the whole existence of domestic education has always used to be a means of upbringing the youth. Acquaintance of schoolchildren with the national folklore helps to aspire their interest in the national traditions and history; to engage them with the origins of the Russian culture. As the author proves, the folklore material can easily be used within the modern primary education to stage mass cultural events and also in the course of after-school activities.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 43-46
Author(s):  
E. Mihaylova

The article reveals the methodology of teaching younger students the ability to write narrative-narratives: building an algorithm for writing an exposition, mastering the features of textual activity as a prerequisite for a written retelling of a text. An example of an integrated lesson of the Russian language and literary reading in the third grade is given, which includes both the mastering of knowledge of the Russian language by students and the work with author's texts.


Author(s):  
K. Klymova

The article is devoted to the problem of formation of creativity of students in the process of studying the Ukrainian language and literature. The purpose of this article is based on research of Ukrainian and foreign scientists to determine the place and value of literature as an art form in the development of creative giftedness in terms of classroom and individual students' independent work. As the material for study the complex creative projects were initiated by teachers of the Ukrainian language and literature training and the research Institute of pedagogy of the University. The author cites the example of the most effective methods and forms of collaboration with gifted students (a competition of reciters of poetry, public presentation of student essays, literal works dramatisation, literal festival of the online readers). Describing the literary art work of the staff of the Department of linguamethodical and culture of professional speech, the researcher insists on the leading role of a teacher of Russian language and literature in the development of creative giftedness of future specialists, which are not just passively performs consultative and coordinating role while students work on artwork, and is also a generator of ideas, literary and linguistic authority and creative personality. As a conclusion we would like to say that the classroom work with students has the goal to be bright, exciting resulting in creative projects. The openness of the educational environment of the University is to become a centre of science, culture and art in cities, regions, country and beyond.


Slovene ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 232-260
Author(s):  
Ulla Birgegård

The paper seeks to contribute to the discussion among historians about the value, as historical sources, of foreign diplomats stationed in Russia. Two young men, Hildebrand von Horn, an envoy extraordinaire of the Danish king, and the Swede Johan Gabriel Sparwenfeld, a student of the Russian language and Russian affairs on a scholarship granted by the Swedish king, met in the Russian capital during the summer of 1684. They had met before—in1682 inCopenhagen—but this time their roles were quite different, as they were in Moscow as representatives of countries with opposite political aims vis-à-vis Russia. Von Horn was inRussiafor the third time, knew many influential people at court and mastered the Russian language. He kept Sparwenfeld informed about what was going on behind the scenes at court. This information was written down by Sparwenfeld in his diary of the Russian journey, published by the author of this paper in 2002. In July 1684 von Horn told Sparwenfeld about the execution of “a noble and learned Pole, Negrebetskii”. This person, Pavel Negrebetskii, had had an important position at court during the reign of Fyodor Alekseevich but lost his influence after the death of the Tsar. In August the two friends once more discussed Negrebetskii, his torture, and the role of I. M. Miloslavskii in his fate. Negrebetskii was accused of having taken part in a conspiracy against Sof’ia and her supporters in the aftermath of the streltsy uprising in May 1682. The torture was stopped by Vasilii Vasil’evich Golitsyn, and Negrebetskii was hastily and secretly taken to theRed Squareand executed. Why was Negrebetskii executed in this way two years after his stated crime? After discussing various aspects of the question, this paper gives a possible answer. It seems that the real reason was that Negrebetskii did not stop trying to make the Polish king intervene on Naryshkina’s side in the struggle for power between the Miloslavskii and Naryshkin clans. In connection with the arrival of an Austrian embassy in Moscow in May–June1684, anew possibility for Negrebetskii to get in contact with Poland offered itself in the person of the Habsburg resident in Warsaw, I. Zierowsky. Negrebetskii, it seems, took advantage of the opportunity and tried to send a letter with Zierowsky to the Polish king, begging the king for help and support of Naryshkina and her son. The letter was intercepted, and Sof’ia and Miloslavskii decided to get rid of the irritating Pole once and for all. His execution also gave a clear signal to Peter’s supporters that their previous plans were known and that their activities were under surveillance. It was not possible to touch the main actors in the unrealized conspiracy for political reasons; the most active among them was Vasilii Vasil’evich’s cousin, Boris Alekseevich Golitsyn. So, the entries in Sparwenfeld´s diary about nightly conversations between two foreigners in the Russian capital help to shed light on how and when Pavel Negrebetskii died, and, hopefully, also why.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (11D) ◽  
pp. 9-19
Author(s):  
Elena I. Tsymbalyuk ◽  
Nadezhda M. Romanenko ◽  
Anastasyia V. Romanenko ◽  
Marina A. Volkova

2019 ◽  
pp. 117-132
Author(s):  
Elena K. Chkhaidze

One of the last interviews given by Andrey Bitov, often considered a founder of Russian Postmodernism, before his death. His books are a symbiosis of knowledge (of history, culture, and literature) and play, which is perceived as the driver of alternating meanings constantly undergoing a transformation. The idea behind the conversation was not only to clarify the questions left unanswered upon the reading of Bitov’s epic Empire in Four Dimensions [ Imperiya v chetyryokh izmereniyakh ] and other books, but also to identify the foundations of the writer’s views. In one of his last interviews, Bitov discussed his vision of Russia’s imperial identity and Russian mentality, the Soviet regime and the Soviet period, Stalin’s role in history, his attitude to the West, the Russian language, secrets of his books and his favorite authors. Bitov reminisced about his trips to the Soviet republics of Georgia and Armenia, as well as his friendship with R. Gabriadze and G. Matevosyan. The writer offered his original vision of the development of Russian literature in the 19th c. in light of his fascination with astrology.


Rusin ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 76-98
Author(s):  
S.G. Sulyak ◽  

Pyotr Danilovich Draganov (February 1 (13), 1857 – February 7, 1928), a native of Bessarabia, Russian philologist, historian, ethnographer, bibliographer, and teacher. Born into a family of Bulgarian colonists in the village Comrat of Bessarabian region, he graduated from the Bulgarian Central School in Comrat (1875), then studied at the Chișinău progymnasium, the provincial gymnasium (1875–1877) and the Kharkov gymnasium (1877–1880). After graduating from the gymnasium, he entered the Faculty of History and Philology of the Imperial Kharkov University (1880–1882), then continued his studies at the Imperial St. Petersburg University, graduating in 1885 with a candidate’s degree. In 1885–1887, he taught general history and Church Slavonic language at the St. Cyril and Methodius Male Gymnasium (Thessaloniki, Macedonia). In 1888, he was appointed teacher of the Russian language and literature of the Comrat real school. Since 1893, he taught Russian at the Chișinău Women’s Gymnasium. In 1896, he became a junior assistant librarian at the Imperial Public Library in St. Petersburg, in charge of the category of Slavs and Galician-Russian books of the Manuscript Department of the library. Due to the difficult financial situation, he had to resign from the library and return to teach Russian at the Comrat real school. In 1906–1912, P.D. Draganov worked as an inspector of a real school in Astrakhan, director of a teacher’s seminary in the village Rovnoe of the Samara province. In 1913, he returned to Bessarabia and was appointed director of the male gymnasium in Cahul. When Bessarabia was occupied by Romania, the Romanian authorities issued a decree on the preservation of the gymnasium and proposed to P.D. Draganov to remain its director. However, he decided to return to his native Comrat, where he taught Bulgarian at the Comrat real school until retirement. P.D. Draganov is the author of over 100 historical, literary, ethnographic, philological, bibliographic and critical works. His articles were published in the “Journal of the Ministry of Public Education”, “Historical Bulletin”, “Izvestia of the Imperial Academy of Sciences in the Department of Russian Language and Literature”, “Russian Philological Bulletin” and others. Some of his works have remained unpublished. Most of P.D. Draganov’s studies focus on Bessarabian and Balkan themes. He wrote many works about A.S. Pushkin. Draganov was the founder of Macedonian studies in Russia. One ofhis most important works is “The Macedonian-Slavic Collection” (Issue 1. St. Petersburg, 1894), which received many reviews. Another well-known work of his is the compilation “A.S. Pushkin in Fifty Languages, i.e. Translations from A.S. Pushkin into 50 languages and dialects of the world. A Bibliographic Wreath on the Monument to A.S. Pushkin, Woven for the Centenary of His Birth, May 26, 1799 – May 26, 1899 with a Portrait of the Poet” (St. Petersburg, 1899). Draganov also participated in the compilation of the Bulgarian-Russian Dictionary, published the first universal index Bessarabiana, where he listed the sources and literature published over 100 years since the annexation of Bessarabia to Russia. Among the numerous works by P.D. Draganov, there are studies about Rusins.


2021 ◽  
Vol 82 (2) ◽  
pp. 7-15
Author(s):  
M. I. Shutan

This article aims to investigate and characterise types of literary text analysis in Russian language lessons by reviewing the scientific and practical experience accumulated in the methodology of teaching the Russian language and literature at school. The first type of analysis is a combination of assignments aimed at both understanding the content of a literary work as an art phenomenon and identifying its structural features, which actualizes the methodological principles of school literature teaching. This model also includes linguistic-stylistic assignments covering various levels of the language system. Such an analysis can be called complex. The second type involves focused analysis organized within the framework of working with a linguistic concept. The main purpose of students in this case is to identify meanings, i.e., substitutes for the lexical meaning of a concept word. The types of analysis described in this article can be used to help students understand the literary text in its semantic integrity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document