Methodological principles of the system for developing future PhD`s academic integrity culture

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

University of Customs and Finance

METHODOLOGICAL PRINCIPLES OF THE SYSTEM FOR DEVELOPING FUTURE PHD'S ACADEMIC INTEGRITY CULTURE

Anastasiia Kuzmenko PhD in Philology,

Associate Professor, Associate Professor

at the Department of Foreign Philology,

Translation, and Professional Language Training

Dnipro

Annotation

The purpose of this investigation is to characterize the methodological principles of preparing future philosophy doctors for the readiness to implement the ideas of academic integrity in their professional activities, which will further serve as the foundation for developing the concept of this preparation. The research is based on the use of robust scientific methodologies, encompassing induction, deduction, analysis, synthesis, abstraction, and concretization. A range of analytical approaches, including theoretical analysis, descriptive analysis, data processing, and interpretation, were employed. Furthermore, observational methods, classification, and systematic organization were integral components of the research procedure. The methodological foundations of the system for cultivating academic integrity culture in future philosophy doctors during their professional training has been justified. The article demonstrates a three-stage methodological structure, comprising fundamental, interdisciplinary, and specialized scientific levels. The methodological concept is based on philosophical ideas (existentialism, personalism, philosophical anthropology) and approaches of general scientific and specific scientific methodologies regarding the formation of academic integrity culture in future philosophy doctors. The existential approach supports individual uniqueness and creative realization. The axiological approach is oriented towards universal values and integrity. The systemic approach views the culture formation process as a system. The personal-subjective approach emphasizes the importance of interaction among subjects. The activity-reflective approach takes into account the phenomenon of “academic integrity culture”. The acmeological approach is directed towards self-improvement. The hermeneutic approach focuses on shaping culture through the interpretation of activity results.

Key words: method, methodology, approach, Doctor of Philosophy, academic integrity, professional training.

Анотація

МЕТОДОЛОГІЧНІ ЗАСАДИ СИСТЕМИ ФОРМУВАННЯ КУЛЬТУРИ АКАДЕМІЧНОЇ ДОБРОЧЕСНОСТІ МАЙБУТНІХ ДОКТОРІВ ФІЛОСОФІЇ

Анастасія Кузьменко кандидат філологічних наук, доцент, доцент кафедри іноземної філології, перекладу та професійної мовної підготовки Університет митної справи та фінансів, Дніпро,

Метою цієї розвідки є характеристика методологічних засад підготовки майбутніх докторів філософії до готовності реалізувати ідеї академічної доброчесності у своїй професійній діяльності, які і слугуватимуть надалі фундаментом для побудови концепції цієї підготовки. Дослідження Грунтується на застосуванні наукових методів, таких як індукція, дедукція, аналіз, синтез, абстрагування та конкретизація. Використовувалися різноманітні аналітичні методи, зокрема теоретичний аналіз, описовий аналіз, обробка даних і їх тлумачення. Крім того, спостереження, класифікація та систематична організація відігравали ключову роль у процесі дослідження. У статті вперше обгрунтовано методичні засади системи формування культури академічної доброчесності майбутніх докторів філософії у процесі професійної підготовки.

У статті продемонстровано трьохетапну методологічну структуру, яка включає фундаментальний, загальнонауковий і конкретнонауковий рівні. Методологічний концепт базується на філософських ідеях (екзистенціоналізм, персоналізм, філософська антропологія) та підходах загальнонаукової та конкретно-наукової методології щодо формування культури академічної доброчесності у майбутніх докторів філософії. Екзистенціальний підхід підтримує самобутність і творчу реалізацію особистості. Аксіологічний підхід орієнтується на загальнолюдські цінності та доброчесність. Системний підхід розглядає процес формування культури як систему. Особистісно-суб'єктний підхід підкреслює важливість взаємодії суб'єктів. Діяльнісно-рефлексивний підхід враховує феномен «культура академічної доброчесності». Акмеологічний підхід спрямований на самовдосконалення. Герменевтичний підхід націлює на формування культури через інтерпретацію результатів діяльності.

Ключові слова: метод, методологія, підхід, доктор філософії, академічна доброчесність, професійна підготовка.

Current relevance

The issue of methodology is quite debatable and complex, as the concept itself has various interpretations. Moreover, many foreign schools equate methodology with method. Methodology is traditionally understood as the study of methods, means, and techniques that enable research. According to M. Kostytskyi, methodology is a comprehensive doctrine, a worldview theory that reflects reality or its significant part [1, p. 17]. The methodology of science is a system of methodological and methodical principles and techniques, operations, and forms of constructing scientific knowledge. It incorporates teachings on the structure and functioning of knowledge, significant concepts with a general scientific sense, and the study of the logic, methods, and principles of scientific research. “The methodology of science characterizes the components of scientific research - its object, the subject of analysis, the task of the research, the set of research tools necessary to solve a task of a given type, and also forms an understanding of the sequence of the researcher's movement in the process of solving the problem” [2, p. 66]. Scientists distinguish three levels of methodology: fundamental, general scientific, and specific scientific [3, p. 70]. It is important to understand the function of the methodology in the system of preparing future philosophy doctors for the readiness to implement the ideas of academic integrity in their professional activities as there are either works in professional training of PhD's (mainly innovation-research training) or investigations in academic integrity in general. However, there is an absence of researches in preparing future philosophy doctors for the readiness to implement the ideas of academic integrity.

The purpose of this investigation is to characterize the methodological principles of preparing future philosophy doctors for the readiness to implement the ideas of academic integrity in their professional activities, which will further serve as the foundation for developing the concept of this preparation.

Materials and Results

Fundamental methodology is considered as the highest level of the methodology of science, which allows building a general strategy for shaping the cognition process. R. Shevchuk defines philosophical methodology as a set of methodological teachings that traditionally superimpose themselves on the main system-forming method [4, p. 35]. On a philosophical level, we examine the issue of the readiness of future PhDs in Philosophy to implement the ideas of academic integrity in their professional activities within the framework of an anthropological approach and the philosophy of personalism. Characteristics of the anthropological approach in education include a focus on the individual as the primary value or goal of education and an orientation towards their spirituality in the pedagogical process [5, p. 73]. The justification of the methodological basis at the philosophical level regarding the future PhD's readiness for the implementation of academic integrity ideas is based on: systematization of knowledge about the surrounding world, nature, and society; understanding the direct proportionality of the level of mastering knowledge and personal experience; knowledge as the driving force and the most powerful motivation in cognitive activity; distinction of oneself (one's Ego) as a subject of cognition in the objective world; awareness of one's moral and psychological characteristics; purposefulness and perseverance; planning of activities and behavior, forecasting, and awareness of their possible results; self-control and adjustment of one's actions, strategies, and tactics according to circumstances; objective attitude toward reality, the environment, and one's own Ego. Simultaneously, each PhD candidate has their own creative potential that needs to be directed towards the most necessary and productive sphere of realization. Thus, personalism philosophy implies that in the readiness to implement the ideas of academic integrity by future PhDs, the following principles are crucial: uniqueness, independence, and inviolability; self-awareness - differentiation of one's “self' through personal experience, self-creation; formation of uniqueness/individuality as a path to self-revelation; moral-spiritual growth, tolerance, empathy; freedom of will; manifestation of aspirations, interests, needs as components of the goal.

General scientific approaches play a special role. The general scientific level of methodological principles of the process of forming the readiness of future philosophy doctors to implement the ideas of academic integrity is based on a systemic approach. The systemic approach is one of the leading ones since the process of forming the readiness of a future philosophy doctor to implement the ideas of academic integrity is considered as a system, encompassing components such as honesty, trust, responsibility, scientific conscientiousness, transparency, decency, justice, respect, mutual respect, courage, moral integrity, consistent advocacy, openness, legal supremacy, professionalism, competence, democratization, mutual assistance, partnership, truthfulness, tolerance, self-improvement, improvement, etc. Scholars I. Kovalenko, P. Bidiuk, and O. Hozhy detail the system as “a set of elements, somehow related and interacting with each other to perform specified target functions; an object characterized by the composition of elements, the structure of their relationships, parameters and has at least one input and one output that provide communication with the external environment, characterized by laws of behavior and changes behavior upon receiving control influences; a set formed from the final set of elements, between which there are certain relations” [6, p. 11-12]. Pedagogical system in this work is considered as a kind of social systems, where the dominant is interpersonal interaction, integrated into an axiologically favourable environment and is part of a more complex order - the overall professional training of future PhDs. Thus, the preparation of future PhDs for the readiness to implement the ideas of academic integrity can be visualized as a holistic pedagogical system, which is an organized complex of interconnected elements (goal, tasks, stages, content, forms, methods, means, results), representing a subsystem of overall professional training of higher education candidates, who act as subjects of reception, production, and dissemination of knowledge. When studying the process of preparing future philosophy doctors for the readiness to implement the ideas of academic integrity as a system, it is necessary to consider a number of universal scientific principles. The principle (from Latin - foundation) is considered as "the beginning, foundation, basis" [7, p. 12]. In our research, it is perceived the principle as a guiding concept, a dominant idea that comprehensively covers the entire knowledge system and establishes its subordination based on the logical structure of cognition.

Within the framework of the specific-scientific level of methodology in modeling the process of preparing future PhDs for the readiness to implement the ideas of academic integrity, we relied on existential, axiological, personal-subjective, activity-reflective, acmeological, and hermeneutical approaches. These approaches serve as the fundamental methodological basis of pedagogical research. We define such main principles as systematicity, integrity, discreteness, modeling, which serve as the methodological basis for the theory of systems in this study.

To explore arbitrary concepts and ideas of perceiving reality and understanding the meaning of human existence in the world, existentialist philosophy is helpful [8]. The readiness to implement the ideas of academic integrity by future PhDs is grounded, from the perspective of existentialist philosophy, on the following principles: uniqueness of worldview; uniqueness of thinking and awareness of personal goals; original presentation of acquired knowledge and skills; responsibility for one's actions, their expertise and analysis, correction of behavior; humanistic attitude towards the environment, based on universal moral principles; activation of self-development and self-improvement through self-education and self-cultivation; determination of potential, primary, and secondary aspects; overcoming the negative influence of society, reflection, and stress resilience.

To create a comprehensive axiological framework for the formation of readiness to implement the ideas of academic integrity by future PhDs, the axiological approach is directed towards shaping personal values related to safe behavior, a healthy lifestyle, and health preservation during the labor process. It aims to create conditions for the formation of values contributing to career growth and self-development, facilitating the improvement and self-regulation of one's own activities [9, p. 132]. From an axiological perspective, the concept of value orientation in the process of professional preparation for implementing the ideas of academic integrity can be dual: process and result-oriented. Regarding the process, future PhDs perform a set of actions from the idea to the result, comparing them with their inclinations, motivations, intentions, and value orientations. The main ideas within the axiology of our research include: fundamentality and universality of humanistic values; unity of goals and means; priority of the idea of individual freedom. The structure of the categorical tool of the axiological approach to forming readiness to implement the ideas of academic integrity by future PhDs includes the following components: value-goals; value-means; axiological characterization of the personality of the future philosophy doctor as a subject of value relations formed in the academic environment during professional training; value prioritization. In the readiness to implement the ideas of academic integrity, personal value orientations gain significant importance, providing future PhDs with the opportunity for both realizing their authentic scientific-pedagogical thought/activity and participating in academic activities as a chance for creative self-expression and a pursuit of creating professional value that individualizes and subjectivizes them. academic integrity philosophy doctor

Furthermore, personalized learning and a person-centered approach are aimed at revealing the individual cognitive abilities and potential of each future PhD. Therefore, this approach is characterized by individualization and differentiation of the educational-scientific process. The efforts of the scientific and pedagogical team, its scientific and pedagogical activities within the framework of personalized education, aim to assist third-level education seekers in processes of self-discovery, self-actualization, self-realization, and self-determination. This is done to shape the culture of life activity, including the ideas of future PhDs' academic integrity, providing them with the opportunity to effectively build their own academic life and apply acquired professional competencies in accordance with the defined specialization. The future PhD emerges as a responsible, conscious, democratic subject of the educational-scientific process, a manager of their own educational-scientific activities. They act based on personal educational-scientific interests, motivations, needs, acquired qualities and abilities, knowledge, and experience to effectively realize themselves as academic professionals.

The use of the activity-reflective approach is driven by the phenomenon of “academic integrity culture”, which forms in an individual only during specific types of activities and active reflection on it and its results. The main principles of the activity-reflective approach include learning through action, learning productivity, unity of consciousness and activity, step-by-step mastery of activity, joint activity, integration of learning and practical activity, problem-solving, and reflection, critical self-evaluation.

The acmeological approach plays a significant role for a socialized individual in the process of professional training and the formation of ideas about the culture of academic integrity. Self-improvement throughout one's life, the formation of clear motivation for constant self-development, and projecting one's personality towards achieving success will serve as a guarantee for the continuous renewal and development of an individual's life forces. Thus, continuous education and personal development occur throughout one's life, including the development of a future philosophy doctor during their professional activity, taking into account the ideas of academic integrity [10, p. 121-124]. It is necessary to create the most comfortable conditions to enhance professional motivation, activate creative potentials, and unfold the personal active position as a subject of scientific and pedagogical activity, fostering self-realization in the set tasks for the effective implementation of the ideas of academic integrity for future PhDs.

The hermeneutic approach aims at the understanding by future philosophy doctors of the necessity to cultivate their own culture of academic integrity and comprehend the meaning in acquiring relevant knowledge, skills, and abilities through the interpretation of the results of their own scientific activities. The distinctive feature of hermeneutic pedagogical education lies in operating based on principles such as the displacement of unnecessary didacticism, replacing monologue with dialogue as the primary form of communication and as a fundamental research method, and adhering to value-content equality. This includes the promotion of equality among dialogue participants, the rejection of a monopoly on truth, and the recognition of the significance of the internal world of another person, accepting it as a value.

Conclusion

Existential approach views the individual as the highest value, upholding principles of academic integrity culture such as uniqueness, creative realization, attainment of freedom, and responsibility. Axiological approach focuses on universal values and the development of personality as the highest societal value, emphasizing the importance of virtue, including in academic circles. Systemic approach sees the formation of academic integrity culture as a system comprising various components like honesty, trust, responsibility, scientific conscientiousness, and more. Personal-subjective approach tunes into understanding the educational process as an interaction of subjects based on partnership principles and recognizing the value of each participant. The use of activity-reflective approach is driven by the phenomenon of “academic integrity culture”, which forms in an individual only during specific types of activities and active reflection on it and its results. Acmeological approach directs towards developing one's own acmeological position and the aspiration for self-improvement. Hermeneutic approach focuses on understanding the necessity of forming one's own academic integrity culture and the sense of acquiring relevant knowledge, skills, and abilities through interpreting the results of one's scientific activity.

References

1. Костицький М.В. Про діалектику як методологію юридичної науки. Філософські та методологічні проблеми права. 2012. № 1. С. 3-17.

2. Сисоєва С.О., Кристопчук Т.Є. Методологія науково-педагогічних досліджень. Київ: Волинські обереги, 2013. 360 с.

3. Гончаренко С.У Педагогічні дослідження: методологічні поради молодим науковцям. Київ ; Вінниця, 2008. 278 с.

4. Шевчук РМ. Методологія наукового пізнання: від явища до сутності. Філософські та методологічні проблеми права. № 1 (11). 2016. С. 31-44

5. Чорна О.О. Реалізація та сутність антропологічного підходу в освіті. Perspectywy rozvoju nauki. Гданськ. 2012. С. 72-74.

6. Коваленко І.І., Бідюк П.І., Гожий О.П. Система як поняття. Вступ до системного аналізу. 2004. 148 c.

7. Волошин О.Р Педагогічні принципи та їх роль у формуванні валеологічної освіти на західноукраїнських землях 1918-1939рр. Педагогіка, психологія та медико-біологічні проблеми фізичного виховання і спорту. № 4. 2010. С. 12-15.

8. Лисоколенко Т., Карпань І., Рогова О. Український екзистенціалізм: поміж філософією та літературою. Philosophy. Grani. 24 (7-8). 2021. C. 13-20.

9. Абільтарова Е.Н. Концептуальні засади формування культури безпеки професійної діяльностіу майбутніх інженерів з охорони праці. International scientific conference. Lodz. 2021 С.130-134.

10. Кузьменко А.О. Акмеологічний підхід як найефективніший сучасний філософсько-педагогічний підхід у процесі професійної підготовки докторів філософії. Всеукраїнська науково-практична конференція з нагоди 50-річчя від початку підготовки психологів у Харківському університеті. Харків, 2022. С. 121-124.

Література

1. Kostitsky, M.V. (2012). Pro dialektyku yak metodolohiyu yurydychnoyi nauky [On the dialectics as the methodology of legal science]. Philosophical and Methodological Problems of Law, 2012 (1), 3-17. [in Ukrainian]

2. Sysoyeva, S.O., & Krystopchuk, T.Y. (2013). Metodolohiya naukovo-pedahohichnykh doslidzhen [Methodology of scientific and pedagogical research]. Kyiv: Volyns'ki oberehy. 360. [in Ukrainian]

3. Honcharenko, S.U. (2008). Pedahohichni doslidzhennya: metodolohichni porady molodym naukovtsiam [Pedagogical research: methodological advice for young scientists]. Kyiv; Vinnytsia. 278 [in Ukrainian].

4. Shevchuk, R.M. (2016). Metodolohiya naukovoho piznannya: vid yavyshcha do sutnosti [Methodology of scientific cognition: from phenomenon to essence]. Philosophical and Methodological Problems of Law, (1), 31-44 [in Ukrainian].

5. Chorna, O.O. (2012). Realizatsiya ta sutnist antropolohichnoho pidkhodu v osviti [Implementation and essence of the anthropological approach in education]. Perspectives of Science Development, Gdansk, 72-74 [in Ukrainian].

6. Kovalenko, I.I., Bidiuk, P.I., & Hozhyi, O.P. (2004). Systema yak poniattya [System as a concept]. Introduction to systems analysis. 148 [in Ukrainian].

7. Voloshyn, O.R. (2010). Pedahohichni pryntsypy ta yikh rol u formuvanni valeolohichnoyi osvity na zakhidnoukrayinskykh zemlyakh 1918-1939rr [Pedagogical principles and their role in the formation of valeological education in Western Ukrainian lands 1918-1939]. Pedagogy, Psychology and Medical-Biological Problems of Physical Education and Sports, 4, 12-15 [in Ukrainian].

8. Lysokolenko, T., Karpan, I., & Rohova, O. (2021). Ukrayinskyi ekzistentsializm: pomizh filosofiyeyu ta literaturoyu [Ukrainian existentialism: between philosophy and literature]. Philosophy. Grani, 24(7-8), 13-20 [in Ukrainian].

9. Abiltarova, E.N. (2021). Kontseptualni zasady formuvannya kultury bezpeky profesiynoyi diyalnosti u maybutnikh inzheneriv z okhorony pratsi [Conceptual principles of forming safety culture of professional activity in future occupational safety engineers]. International scientific conference. Lodz, 130-134 [in Ukrainian].

10. Kuzmenko, A.O. (2022). Akmeolohichnyi pidkhid yak naieffektyvnishyi suchasnyi filosofsko-pedahohichnyi pidkhid u protsesi profesiynoyi pidhotovky doktoriv filosofiyi [Acmeological approach as the most effective modern philosophical and pedagogical approach in the training of philosophy doctors]. All-Ukrainian Scientific and Practical Conference on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the beginning of the training of psychologists at Kharkiv University, 121-124 [in Ukrainian].

Размещено на Allbest.ru