Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin, 2018, vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 209–228
© Chemyakina A. V., Perevozkina Y. M., Karpov A. V., Karpov A. A., 2018
UDC: 
159.95

Structural regularities of reflexive determination of management activity in education

Chemyakina A. V. 1 (Yaroslavl, Russian Federation), Perevozkina Y. M. 2 (Novosibirsk, Russian Federation), Karpov A. V. 1 (Yaroslavl , Russian Federation), Karpov A. A. 1 (Yaroslavl, Russian Federation)
1 Demidov Yaroslavl State University
2 Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education "Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University"
Full text (Open Access) — Downloaded 4655
Abstract: 

Introduction. The paper reveals the problem of the determinants of labor activity in education, the factors which determine its effectiveness and reliability, as well as social and humanitarian effects. The purpose of the article is to identify and interpret the main structural laws of the reflexive determination of management activity in education environment.
Materials and Methods. An empirical research to identify and explain the relationship between the individual level of development of reflexivity and effectiveness of leader’s activity in an educational setting was carried out at two main and complementary levels. Firstly, it is the implementation of the analytical level of research aimed at identifying the effectiveness of management activity in educational system from the general level of reflexivity. Secondly, it is the implementation of the structural level of research aimed at identifying the features and patterns of structural organization of reflection as a complex determinant of management activity. At the second level the set of basic research and psychometric techniques developed in modern metacognitivism are applied, as well as a number of authors’ methods. The method of expert evaluation was also used.
Results. The paper presents a number of new data and laws, which have not been described in previous studies, revealing and explaining a fairly general pattern, consisting in the existence of inverted U-shaped dependence (that is, the dependence of the "optimum type") between the individual measure of reflexivity development and effectiveness of management activity in education. It is shown that the main explanatory mechanism is the natural dynamics of the structural organization of reflexivity itself in the educational setting, which consists in changing the degree of integration and differentiation of the main metacognitive processes and qualities. The main results are presented in the form of structuregrams and graphs.
Conclusions. On the basis of the results, the authors propose and substantiate general interpretation of the revealed regularities. All the effects of the "organizational" plan and structure-forming character are the result of integrative mechanisms and synergetic effects. They lead to the formation of a special category of qualities. These are system qualities. As a result, managerial activity of a leader in an educational setting and natural superadditivity effects are generated. Their meaning is to "go beyond" the simple sum of functional potential and characteristics of the integrated components.

Keywords: 

Reflexivity; Management activity; Education; Integration; Differentiation; Structural organization; Metacognitivism; Metacognitive qualities; Indices of structural organization; Effects of superadditivity

98.392 Self-Regulated Learning | Metacognition | Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning

https://www.scopus.com/record/display.uri?src=s&origin=cto&ctoId=CTODS_1...

Structural regularities of reflexive determination of management activity in education

For citation:
Chemyakina A. V., Perevozkina Y. M., Karpov A. V., Karpov A. A. Structural regularities of reflexive determination of management activity in education. Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin, 2018, vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 209–228. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15293/2226-3365.1805.13
References: 
  1. Karpov A. V., Karpov A. A., Subbotina L. Yu. Methodological and Methodical Foundations for Studying Meta-Cognitive Determinants of Activity. Russian Psychological Journal, 2017, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 149–175.  (In Russian) DOI: https://doi.org/10.21702/rpj.2017.1.10
  2. Neustroev S., Fedorchuk S. M. The formation of the personnel reserve system of school principles. Education Management: Theory and Practice, 2018, no. 1, pp. 5–13. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=34973084
  3. Chemiakina A. V.Compensatory functions of reflexivity and internality in the structure of vocational and negative personality traits.Bulletin of Demidov Yaroslavl state University. Humanities Series, 2016, no. 1, pp. 109–113. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=25638407
  4. Alhaisoni E. Metacognitive listening strategies used by Saudi Efl medical students. English Language Teaching, 2017, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 114–122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v10n2p114  
  5. Anderson L., Hibbert P., Mason K., Rivers C. Management education in turbulent times. Journal of Management Education, 2018, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 423–440. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562918779421
  6. Anderson M. L., Oates T., Chong W., Perlis D. The metacognitive loop I: Enhancing reinforcement learning with metacognitive monitoring and control for improved perturbation tolerance. Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 2006, vol. 18, issue 3, pp. 387–411. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09528130600926066
  7. Arrows F. The CAT-FAWN connection: Using metacognition and Indigenous worldview for more effective character education and human survival. Journal of Moral Education, 2016, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 261–275. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240.2016.1167026
  8. Bentley G., Pugalis L., Shutt J. Leadership and systems of governance: the constraints on the scope for leadership of place-based development in sub-national territories. Regional Studies, 2017, vol. 51, issue 2, pp. 194–209. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2016.1181261
  9. Bhangal S., Cho H., Geisler M. W., Ezequiel M. The prospective nature of voluntary action: Insights from the reflexive imagery task. Review of General Psychology, 2016, vol. 20 (1), pp. 101–117. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000071  
  10. Braem S., Liefooghe B., De Houwer J., Brass M., Abrahamse E. L. There are limits to the effects of task instructions: Making the automatic effects of task instructions context-specific takes practice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2017, vol. 43 (3), pp. 394–403. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000310
  11. Butow P., Ussher J., Kirsten L., Hobbs K., Smith K., Wain G., Sandoval M., Stenlake A. Sustaining leaders of cancer support groups. Social Work in Health Care, 2006, vol. 42, issue 2, pp. 39–55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1300/J010v42n02_03
  12. Byrne A., Crossan M., Seijts G. The development of leader character through crucible moments. Journal of Management Education, 2018, vol. 42, issue 2, pp. 265–293. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562917717292
  13. Dinan D. Leadership in the European council: An assessment of Herman Van Rompuy’s presidency. Journal of European Integration, 2017, vol. 39, issue 2, pp. 157–173. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2016.1278442
  14. Dunbar D. Widening the discussion on HE leadership – leader dispositions and talents. Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 2016, vol. 20, issue 4, pp. 129–136. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13603108.2016.1158212
  15. Flaxman P. E., Stride C. B., Söderberg M., Lloyd J., Guenole N., Bond F. W. Relationships between two dimensions of employee perfectionism, postwork cognitive processing, and work day functioning. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 2018, vol. 27, issue 1, pp. 56–69. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2017.1391792
  16. Ghiselli E. E. Intelligence and managerial success. Psychological Reports,1963,vol. 12, issue 3, pp. 898–898. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1963.12.3.898
  17. Flavell J. H. Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: a new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 1979, vol. 34 (10), pp. 906–911. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
  18. Hwang A. Online and hybrid learning. Journal of Management Education, 2018, vol. 42, issue 4, pp. 557–563. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562918777550
  19. Hamonniere T., Varescon I. Implication of metacognitive beliefs in addictive behavior: Current knowledge. Journal de Thérapie Comportementale et Cognitive, 2018, vol. 28, issue 2, pp. 80–92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcc.2017.11.001
  20. He L., Standen P., Coetzer A. The perceived personal characteristics of entrepreneurial leaders. Small Enterprise Research, 2017, vol. 24, issue 2, pp. 97–119. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13215906.2017.1334225
  21. Hillmann J., Duchek S., Meyr J., Guenther E. Educating Future Managers for Developing Resilient Organizations: The Role of Scenario Planning. Journal of Management Education, 2018, vol. 42, issue 4, pp. 461–495. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562918766350
  22. Jiang Y., Ma L., Gao L. Assessing teachers’ metacognition in teaching: The teacher metacognition inventory. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2016, vol. 59, pp. 403–413. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.07.014
  23. Kallio H., Virta K., Kallio M., Virta A., Hjardemaal F., Sandven J. The utility of the metacognitive awareness inventory for teachers among in-service teachers. Journal of Education and Learning, 2017, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 78–91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v6n4p78  
  24. Kotzé M., Nel P. Personal factor effects on authentic leadership. Journal of Psychology in Africa, 2017, vol. 27, issue 1, pp. 47–53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14330237.2016.1268291
  25. Kuechler W., Stedham Y. Management education and transformational learning: The integration of mindfulness in an MBA course. Journal of Management Education, 2018, vol. 42, issue 1, pp. 8–33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562917727797
  26. Li J., Laurence G. A., Blume B. D. How does supervisor-focused procedural justice explain the effects of person-focused leadership? The moderating role of leader-referenced relational-self. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 2018, vol. 27, issue 3, pp. 387–399. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2018.1458713
  27. Meijer J., Veenman M. V. J., van Hout-Wolters B. Multi-domain, multi-method measures of metacognitive activity: what is all the fuss about metacognition … indeed? Research Papers in Education, 2012, vol. 27, issue 5, pp. 597–627. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2010.550011
  28. Meyer B., Burtscher M. J., Jonas K., Feese S., Arnrich B., Tröster G., Schermuly C. C. What good leaders actually do: micro-level leadership behaviour, leader evaluations, and team decision quality. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 2016, vol. 25, issue 6, pp. 773–789. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2016.1189903
  29. Mkrtchian A., Roiser J. P., Robinson O. J. Threat of shock and aversive inhibition: Induced anxiety modulates Pavlovian-instrumental interactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2017, vol. 146 (12), pp. 1694–1704. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000363
  30. Nicholds A., Gibney J., Mabey C., Hart D. Making sense of variety in place leadership: the case of England’s smart cities. Regional Studies, 2017, vol. 51, issue 2, pp. 249–259. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2016.1232482
  31. Pieger E., Bannert M. Differential effects of students' self-directed metacognitive prompts. Computers in Human Behavior, 2018, vol. 86, pp. 165–173. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.04.022
  32. Ritter B. A., Small E. E., Mortimer J. W., Doll J. L. Designing management curriculum for workplace readiness: Developing students’ soft skills. Journal of Management Education, 2018, vol. 42, issue 1, pp. 80–103. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562917703679
  33. Roelle J., Nowitzki C., Berthold K. Do cognitive and metacognitive processes set the stage for each other?. Learning and Instruction, 2017, vol. 50, pp. 54–64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.11.009
  34. Spataro S. E., Bloch J. “Can You Repeat That?” Teaching active listening in management education. Journal of Management Education, 2018. vol. 42, issue 2, pp. 168–198. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562917748696
  35. Van Buskirk W., London M., Plump C. The poetic workspace. Journal of Management Education, 2018, vol. 42, issue 3, pp. 398–419. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562917739051
  36. Yudkin D. A., Rothmund T., Twardawski M., Thalla N., Van Bavel J. J. Reflexive intergroup bias in third-party punishment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2016, vol. 145 (11), pp. 1448–1459. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000190   
Date of the publication 31.10.2018