Сборник IV Республиканской научно-практической online конференции «Образование XXI века: проблемы, тенденции и перспективы», создан на базе Дистанционного образовательного портала «Евразийская наука». Дистанционный образовательный портал «Евразийская наука» – сетевая многофункциональная открытая площадка, созданная для педагогов, воспитателей, школьников, студентов и магистрантов.

Миссия портала – повышение профессионального мастерства педагогов и обучающихся, доступности удовлетворения их запросов и ожиданий на основе использования разнообразных форм и технологий сетевых изданий.

Дистанционный образовательный портал «Евразийская наука» является средством массовой информации в сфере образования (Свидетельство о постановке на учет, переучет периодического печатного издания, информационного агентства и сетевого издания №17367-СИ выдано 22.11.2018 г. Комитетом информации Министерства информации и коммуникаций Республики Казахстан).

Abadildayeva Shyryn, Kaldybek Meruert

Accommodating learning disabilities in the English language classroom

(Қорқыт Ата атындағы Қызыдорда университеті, Қызылорда қ.)

One of the greatest treasures of humankind lies in the diversity of its different personalities with different abilities. Acceptance and recognition of differences is one of the key principles of building mutual respect. In the world of education many people find it difficult to find their place and adapt to system requirements. The idea of inclusive education and acceptance children with special educational needs, so the «educational imperative» in today’s modern age.

The purpose of this article is to provide English teachers with basic tools to help English learners with learning difficulties excel in English class. Article one defines a learning disability and difficulty in determining certain difficulties are the result learning disability or struggle with language acquisition. He then describes the following learning methods that help support students with learning disabilities: (1) the Inclusive Classroom, (2) Universal Design for Learning (UDL), (3) Scaffolding, and (4) Peer-assisted Learning Strategies (PALS).

Historically, there has been a certain degree of complexity in the definition of learning disability and specific a common definition has not yet been agreed; however, as a broad conceptual construct, learning disabilities can be understood as «unexpected dissatisfaction», where «The severity of failure… is unexpectedly, because the person is not adequately responded to the instruction, which effective for most people» (Fletcher etet al. 2019, 4). under wide cover underachievement, Burr, Haas and Ferrier (2015, 3) specifically define learning disabilities as «a neurological condition that interferes with the ability of a person to store, process, or produce information. learning disabilities may affect a student’s ability to read, write, speak, spell, calculate math or reason attention, memory, coordination of students, social skills and emotional maturity. All learning disabilities are characterized by difficulty in at least one area of academic performance. Problems with literacy skills constitute the most common form of education disability (Klingner and Eppolito, 2014). Other factors that may appear as scholastic the inefficiency must be eliminated. American Association for Learning Disabilities (2020) states that «People with learning disabilities should not to be confused with learning problems, which are primarily the result of visual, auditory or motor deficiencies; mental retardation; from emotional disorder; or environmental, cultural or economic disadvantages.» [1]

Every child has the fundamental right to education and should be able to achieve and maintain an acceptable level learning. Persons with special educational needs should have access to ordinary schools, which should place them in child-centered pedagogy that can meet these needs. The main problem of modern society and many education systems there is a significant number of students who are not «adjusted for school». When in fact the school is an institution that must adapt the persons who were present.

Needless to say, in addition to the benefits of knowing the language than their native language, the benefits of learning English for students children with learning disabilities are numerous. Learning any foreign language can help student with learning disabilities to develop useful skills such as cooperation with their classmates, improve listening and reading skills, help them learn to express yourself or, in the end, just to work on your creativity. Like European The Commission concluded that social and personal development are goals which can be achieved by learning a foreign language, and success is achieved beyond the scope of communication. In addition, the reason for studying language can be not only for the sake of actual mastery of the language, but can serve as a tool for personal development. [2]

Obviously, the teaching staff and their attitude towards students with special educational needs play an important role in promoting inclusion.

The processes of change in education cannot start with a negative attitude and resistance to it. By definition, relationships are an important part of our daily lives, since they have a great influence on our behavior, making certain actions are predictable. To accept ideas of inclusiveness, it is necessary to initially change the prevailing attitude towards students and people with disabilities in society, as well as to take differences and individual differences beyond mere respect or tolerance.

Teaching children with learning disabilities opens the doors of regular classrooms for the learners from different backgrounds.. This gives students with special needs the opportunity to learn on an equal basis with other students. They also need to learn English as they foreign language. However, teaching in an inclusive classroom is not easy. The number of problems that English teachers face during their teaching learning process. As teachers, they must be aware of their problems and find ways to overcome it, especially when working with students with special needs.

The purpose of this article is to identify the problems faced by the English teachers. It also gives some ideas on how to overcome the problems. This uses qualitative research. This article claims that English teachers some difficulties in teaching students with special needs. Thus, they need concern about identifying the problems they face and finding ways to solve them. [3]

There are eight principles of inclusive education:

– The value of a person does not depend on his abilities and achievements;

– Every person is capable of feeling and thinking;

– Everyone has the right to communicate and to be heard;

– All people need each other;

– Genuine education can only take place in the context of real relationships;

– All people need the support and friendship of their peers;

– For all learners, progress may be more in what they can do than in what they cannot;

– Diversity enhances all aspects of human life.

Teachers are the main characters who spends most of the time with the children. Their work includes conducting training sessions, holidays, excursions.

Any form of pedagogical communication should have clearly defined goals:

– Educational should solve the problem of working out the program material.

– Educational should solve the problem of working out a model of behavior.

– Correction-developing – should clearly orient the teacher to the development of the abilities and capabilities of all children and to correct existing shortcomings with special pedagogical and psychological techniques. [4]

Teachers should create an appropriate lesson plan for them. Lesson Plan

should be planned based on some criteria:

a) the methodology used in teaching English should be made

suitable for students with learning disabilities

b) educational material should be catchy and attractive, but also corresponding

c) the teacher should plan extra working time with the child

d) the curriculum must be adapted for students with learning disabilities (namely, eliminate the need to cover the entire curriculum and attention should be directed to the development of several skills)

e) the teacher, together with a specialist in inclusive education, must create an individual study plan for students with learning disabilities. The lesson should be very interactive, emphasis should be placed on sing, play, dance, draw.

The movements are useful for students with learning disabilities as they are difficult to stay focused or sit down. The atmosphere should also be pleasant for students as students feel uncomfortable working under pressure, in stressful situations or in a boring activity.

Abstract concepts, rules, grammar rules should be avoided they cause tension. Better to avoid fixing bugs too often because it can demotivate students. Foreign language is studied directly exposure, so students with learning disabilities should be made aware of English through listening and reading. Students have different learning styles, even healthy ones. For this reason, teachers are advised familiar with the learning style of a child with a learning disability. [5]

Conclusion

In the course of the study, the following tasks were solved:

The concept of «student with disabilities» has been studied.

The specifics of teaching English in middle and high school are considered.

The methods of teaching English to children with disabilities in middle and high school have been identified.

Students with disabilities are students who have deficiencies in physical and (or) psychological development, confirmed by the psychological-medical-pedagogical commission and preventing education without creating special conditions.The personal development of a child depends on biological and sociocultural factors. The implementation of the doctor’s recommendations is one of the stages in the successful development of a disabled person.

All students with disabilities experience to some extent pronounced difficulties in mastering curricula due to insufficient cognitive abilities, specific disorders of school skills or speech, and sometimes with violations in the organization of activities and behavior. The training program for children with disabilities is based on providing disabled people with all the necessary devices to overcome psychophysical barriers during education. Teachers motivate children to be active in the classroom, the joint work of psychologists and parents contributes to the achievement of good results. The high quality of inclusive education depends on the interaction of school infrastructures.

References:

1.Jimalee Sowell And Larry Sugisaki / Accommodating Learning Disabilities in the English Language Classroom/2—3 p.

2.Rina Benko, Anna Martinović,/ Inclusive education in English foreign language classrooms/January 2021, 113,114 p.3

3. Desi Puspitasari, Vol. 11 No. 1, January – June 2019/English Language Teaching in Inclusive Class: a Challenge/37 p.

4. Adapted basic educational program of basic general education for students with disabilities, December,17,2010./ A.V.Torkunova-A.A.Vigasina-O.S.Soroko-Tsyupy/)

5.Desi Puspitasari, Vol. 11 No. 1, January – June 2019/English Language Teaching in Inclusive Class: a Challenge/40 p.

Birleskyzy Meruyert

The Conceptual Framework of Teacher Personality in Relation to Student Engagement in Foreign Language Learning and Teaching

(Suleyman Demirel University)

Abstract. This review explores the relationship between teacher personality and student engagement, drawing on advancements in personality theory to understand how teacher personality affects education. It highlights certain characteristics that lead to more student engagement and others that cause anxiety and insecurity, leading to poor academic performance. The findings suggest the need for more empirical research to improve teacher effectiveness. Keywords: student engagement, teacher personality, review, personality theory.

Introduction. This paper discusses the relationship between teacher personality and student engagement, which has been understudied compared to the attention given to student engagement alone. Teacher personality is an important factor in teacher effectiveness and can influence student engagement, which in turn affects academic performance. Addressing disengagement requires understanding the reasons behind it, and the teacher-student relationship plays a crucial role in this. Personality traits should be considered when recruiting teachers, and the Five-Factor Model of personality is a useful framework for understanding teacher personality. Multiple scales are available to measure the Big Five domains.

1.Studies of personality traits. This passage examines different definitions of personality and their fundamental aspects. Roberts and DelVecchio (2000) define personality as distinctive psychological traits that direct people’s actions, beliefs, and emotions in various contexts. Mayer (2007) combines four mostly accepted definitions to create a consensus definition, describing personality as «a system of parts that is organized, develops, and is expressed in a person’s actions.» Guthrie et al. (1998) and Larsen and Buss (2008) view personality as an individual’s response to the environment based on organized and consistent psychological traits and mechanisms. Buss (1989) attributes traits as defining and distinctive features of personality, while Snow (1984) reports that traits are hereditary, permanent, and physically based. Recent research (Roberts et al., 2017) has shown that personality can be changed with clinical intervention and nonclinical methods (Hudson & Fraley, 2015). Jackson et al. (2012), Lüdtke et al. (2011), Specht et al. (2011), and Roberts et al (2006) argue against the idea of traits being immutable and permanent over a lifetime.

3.Studies of teacher personality and students (BFI related). According to Stronge et al. (2004), a teacher’s personality refers to their inner qualities reflected through values, beliefs, behavior, and attitude that impacts teaching performance, practice, and effectiveness (Curtis & Liying, 2001). Teacher personalities influence material choices, strategy, classroom management, and student relationships. Hashim et al. (2014) suggest that administrators should consider humanistic factors alongside educational qualifications when hiring teachers. Assessments of a teacher’s personality by students are influenced by the personality traits of the assessors (Göncz et al., 2014). Desired teacher traits include moderate extraversion, openness to new experiences, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. Students prefer teachers who demonstrate respect, understanding. openness to cooperation, and good lecturing skills (Sánchez et al., 2011).

4.Studies of correlation between student engagement and teacher personality. The amount of time students allocate to learning activities was the first definition of student engagement in its infant stage (Brophy, 1983; Fisher et al., 1980; McIntyre et al.,1983). Although student engagement has long been solely associated with students; involvement in educational processes, the new perspective on the term’s definition also includes cognitive and affective components. Astin (1984) referred to student engagement as «the amount of physical and psychological energy that the student devotes to the academic experience», and highlighted that for an effort to be considered as engagement along with investing time, students must actively invest in intellectual capacities and their attention. In general, researchers (Kuh, 2003; Handelsman et al., 2005; Chapman, 2003) seem to concur on three major components in defining student engagement, which are cognitive, affective and behavioral efforts put by the students. Talking separately about each of these aspects, according to Chapman (2003) cognitive criteria indicates the focus devoted and the mental involvement when doing the tasks, second behavioral criteria indicates contributed responses to the offered tasks, third, affective criteria indicates the students’ investment level in the task and their emotional reactions to those tasks.

There are visible behavior patterns that assess student engagement possible. Franklin (2005) described some of these patterns as students’ «tendency to listen, respond to questions, collaborate with peers, and actively participate in class.» Mentioned behavior models are likely to indicate student engagement in the classroom when monitoring. Not surprisingly, a high level of engagement is linked to high-quality learning outcomes (Krause & Coates, 2008).

The research conducted by Kiefer and Pennington (2017) intended to find out if there is a correlation between teachers perceived as supporters of autonomous learning and the engagement level that students show. The researchers concluded that not only teachers influence but «directly shapes» student engagement, and is crucial when examining the perspectives of school students. Cinches et al., (2017) highlighted the impossibility of accurate student engagement studies without counting the teacher’s impact.

Another study on teacher support and students’ well-being, conducted by Suldo et al. (2009), intended to explore the relationship between teacher support and student success, revealing that supportive teacher-student interaction is likely to result in students’ academic engagement. Apart from studies on the significance of teacher-student relationships, there is more research on factors that influence these relationships. Aiming to get a deeper understanding of the factors that matter in teacher-learner interactions, Split et al., (2012) surveyed 657 students. They revealed that a lack of good relationship between educators and their learners causes student anxiety and insecurity which intervenes their social and educational growth. In a Zepke et al., (2010) survey, where 1200 students took part, it was identified that 4 of the 10 factors that enhance student engagement were directly connected to teacher-learner relationships, and in fact, supportive teacher behavior plays a crucial role in building positive teacher-student relationships.

Federici and Skaalvik (2014) described that emotional support from teachers is manifested when they show their warmth, respect, love, and level of trust to their students. According to Tennant et al. (2015), when learners receive positive emotional support from their teachers they tend to score higher on standardized tests. Strati et al. (2017) state that when students face emotional obstruction such as, teacher’s disrespect, sarcasm, or negative attitude towards specific students, the level of student engagement declines. Suldo et al. (2009) emphasized the overwhelming impact of negative teacher behaviors by claiming that negative emotional obstruction is «easily recalled» compared to emotional support. Moreover, Mayer and Turner (2002) argued that a lack of support in an academic setting might lead to loss of motivation and decreased engagement. They suggested that the behavior displayed by the teacher might influence not only students’ behavior but also their educational and emotional success.

According to Sandlin’s (2019) case study, students believed that teachers’ personalities have a significant impact on their engagement. Most students identified agreeableness and extraversion as important traits for building classroom engagement. Tennent et al. (2015) also emphasized the importance of positive relationships between teachers and students in achieving desirable outcomes.

Conclusion. This paper highlights the importance of teacher personality and student engagement in academic performance. Positive teacher traits, such as friendliness, openness, agreeableness, competence, and responsibility, can lead to better engagement and academic outcomes. Negative traits, such as neuroticism and introversion, can have the opposite effect. Supportive attitudes and emotional support from teachers can improve engagement, while negativity can harm it. Further research should observe teachers and students in authentic environments to provide empirical evidence.

Reference

1. Roberts, B. W., & DelVecchio, W. F. The rank-order consistency of personality traits from childhood to old age: A quantitative review of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 2000, Vol. 126. No. 1, P. 3—25. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.126.1.3

2. Roberts, B. W., & Jackson, J. J. Sociogenomic personality psychology. Journal of Personality, 2008, Vol. 76, No. 6, P. 1523—1544. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2008.00530.x

3. Funder, D. C. The personality puzzle (3rd ed.). New York: Norton, 2004.

20. Larsen, R. J., & Buss, D. M. Personality psychology: Domains of knowledge about human nature (2nd ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2005

4. McAdams, D. P. The person: A new introduction to personality psychology (4th ed.). New York: Wiley, 2006.

5. Pervin, L.A., Cervone, D. & John, O.P. Personality: theory and research. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2005.

6. Mayer, J. D. Personality Function and Personality Change. In J. Ciarrochi & J. D. Mayer (Eds.), Applying emotional intelligence: A practitioner’s guide. Psychology Press, 2007, P. 125—143.

7. Hogan, R. Personality and personality measurement. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1991, Vol. 2, P. 873—919.

8. Burger J. M. Personality (9. ed.). Cengage Learning, 2015.

9. Guthrie, J.P., Coate, C.J., & Schwoerer, C.E. Career management strategies: the role of personality. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 1998. No. 13, P. 371—386.

10. Larsen, R. J., & Buss, D. M. Personality psychology: Domains of knowledge about human nature (3rd edition). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education. 2008.

11. Buss, A. H. Personality as traits. American Psychologist, 1989, Vol. 44, No. 11, P. 1378—1388. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.44.11.1378

12. Snow, R.E and Stemberg. Education and Intelligence. Handbook of human intelligence, New York Cambridge University Press. 1984.

13. Gregoire, C.Seven habits of natural leaders. 2014. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/20/traits‐that‐make‐a-leader_n_5959298.html

14. Heckman, J. J., & Kautz, T. Achievement tests and the role of character in American life. In J. J. Heckman, J. E. Humphries, & T. Kautz (Eds.), The myth of achievement tests: The GED and the role of character in American life. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. 2014. P.23—54

15. Jackson, J. J., Hill, P. L., Payne, B. R., Roberts, B. W., & Stine‐Morrow, E. A. L. Can an old dog learn (and want to experience) new tricks? Cognitive training increases openness to experience in older adults. Psychology and Aging, 2012, No. 27, P. 286— 292. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025918

16. Lüdtke, O., Roberts, B. W., Trautwein, U., & Nagy, G. A random walk down university avenue: Life paths, life events, and personality trait change at the transition to university life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2011, No. 101, P. 620— 637. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023743

17. Specht, J., Egloff, B., & Schmukle, S. C. Stability and change of personality across the life course: The impact of age and major life events on mean‐level and rank‐order stability of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2011, No. 101, P. 862— 882. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024950

18. Roberts, B. W., Walton, K. E., & Viechtbauer, W. Patterns of mean‐level change in personality traits across the life course: A meta‐analysis of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 2006, No. 132, P. 1— 25. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033‐2909.132.1.1

19. Roberts, B. W., Luo, J., Briley, D. A., Chow, P. I., Su, R., & Hill, P. L. A systematic review of personality trait change through intervention. Psychological Bulletin, 2017, No. 143, P. 117— 141. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000088

20. Hudson, N. W., & Fraley, R. C. Volitional personality trait change: Can people choose to change their personality traits? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2015, No. 109, P. 490— 507. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000021

21. Sronge, J. H., Tucker, P. D. & Hindman, J. L. Handbook for Qualities of Effective Teachers. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD). 2004.

22. Curtis, & Cheng, Liying. Teachers’ Self-evaluation of Knowledge, Skills and Personality Characteristics Needed to Manage Change. Asia-pacific Journal of Teacher Education – ASIA-PAC J TEACH EDUC. 2001, No. 29, P. 139—152. 10.1080/13598660120061327.

23. Hashim, Nik Mohd Hazrul & Alam, Syed & Yusoff, Norazlina. Relationship between Teacher’s Personality, Monitoring, Learning Environment, and Students’ EFL Performance. Gema Online Journal of Language Studies. 2014, No. 14. P. 101—116. 10.17576/GEMA-2014-1401-07.

24. Göncz, A., Göncz, L., & Pekić, J. The influence of students’ personality traits on their perception of a good teacher within the five-factor model of personality. Acta Polytechnica Hungarica, 2014, No. 11, P. 65— 86. doi:10.12700/APH.11.03.2014.03.5

25. Göncz, L. Teacher personality: a review of psychological research and guidelines for a more comprehensive theory in educational psychology, Open Review of Educational Research, 2017, No. 4, P. 75—95, DOI: 10.1080/23265507.2017.1339572

26. Suplicz, S. What makes a teacher bad? Trait and learnt factors of teachers’ competencies. Acta Polytechnica Hungarica, 2009, No. 6, P. 125—138.

27. Sánchez, M. M., Pecino, R. M., Rodríguez, Y. T., & Melero, P. T. Student perspectives on the university professor role. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 2011, No. 39, P. 491—496. doi:10. 2224/sbp.2011.39.4.491

28. Brophy, J. Conceptualizing student motivation. Educational Psychologist, 1983, No. 18, P. 200—215.

29. Fisher, C., Berliner, D., Filby, N., Marliave, R., Cahen, L., & Dishaw, M. Teaching behaviors, academic learning time, and student achievement: An overview. In C. Denham

& A. Lieberman (Eds.), Time to Learn. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Education. 1980.

30. McIntyre, D.J., Copenhaver, R.W., Byrd, D.M., & Norris, W.R. A study of engaged student behaviour within classroom activities during mathematics class. Journal of Educational Research, 1983, No. 77 (1), P. 55—59.

31. Astin, A. Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Development. 1984, No. 25, P.297—308.

32. Kuh, G. D. What we’re learning about student engagement from NSSE: Benchmarks for effective educational practices. Change, 2003, No. 35 (2)..

33. Handelsman, M. M., Briggs, W. L., Sullivan, N., & Towler, A. A measure of college student course engagement. Journal of Educational Research, 2005, No. 98, P. 184—191.

34. Chapman E. Alternative approaches to assessing student engagement rates. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 2003, No. 8. Retrieved from http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=8&n=13

35. Franklin, E.E. Assessing teaching artists through classroom observation. Teaching Artist Journal, 2005, No. 3, P. 148—157

36. Krause, K.L. and Coates, H. Students’ Engagement in First-Year University. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 2008, No. 33, P. 493—505. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930701698892

37. Kiefer, S., and Pennington, S. Associations of teacher autonomy support and structure with young adolescents’ motivation, engagement, belonging, and achievement. Middle Grades Res. J. 2017, No. 11, P. 29.

38. Cinches, Ma. Florecilla & Russell, Ruth Love & Chavez, Judith & Ortiz, Rosella. Student engagement: Defining teacher effectiveness and teacher engagement. Journal of Institutional Research South East Asia. 2017, No. 15. P. 5—19.

39. Suldo, Shannon & Friedrich, Allison & White, Tiffany & Farmer, Jennie & Minch, Devon & Michalowski, Jessica. Teacher Support and Adolescents’ Subjective Well-Being: A Mixed-Methods Investigation. School Psychology Review. 2009, No. 38, P. 67—85. 10.1080/02796015.2009.12087850.

40. Spilt, Jantine & Hughes, Jan & Wu, Jiun-yu & Kwok, Oi-Man. Dynamics of Teacher—Student Relationships: Stability and Change Across Elementary School and the Influence on Children’s Academic Success. Child development. 2012, No. 83. P. 1180—95.

10.1111/j.1467—8624.2012.01761.x.

41. Zepke, N., L. Leach, & P. Butler. Student engagement: What is it and what influences it? Wellington, Teaching and Learning Research Initiative. 2010. http://www.tlri.org.nz/sites/default/files/projects/9261-Introduction.pdf

42. Federici, R. A., & Skaalvik, E. M. Students’ perception of instrumental support and

effort in mathematics: The mediating role of subjective task values. Social Psychology of Education: An International Journal, 2014, No. 17 (3), P. 527—540. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-014-9264-8

43. Tennant B, Stellefson M, Dodd V, Chaney B, Chaney D, Paige S, Alber J. eHealth Literacy and Web 2.0 Health Information Seeking Behaviors Among Baby Boomers and Older Adults J Med Internet Res. 2015, 17 (3):e70