Bolotova, A.K., Zhukov, Yu.M., Petrovskaya, L. A., Social communications: textbook. allowance / A.K.Bolotova, Yu.M. Zhukov, L.A. Petrovskaya. - M .: Gardariki, 2008 .-- 279 p.

Chapter 3 Diagnostics and development of communicative competence

3.1. Diagnostic system for communicative competence

According to the presence of research and practical areas in psychology, psychological methods of research proper and methods of influence can be distinguished. Research methods usually associated with impact, but the changes they cause appear as unplanned consequences, and usually the task is to take them into account. Methods of exposure directly focused on interfering with the development of a group or personality in order to cause a certain change.

The subject of our attention is socio-psychological training - a field of practical psychology, focused on the use of active methods of group psychological work in order to develop competence in communication, or communicative competence. The basic methods of socio-psychological training (SPT) are group discussion and role play in various modifications and combinations.

Diagnostics of communicative competence

Diagnostics of communicative competence is currently carried out mainly in four areas of the psychologist's activity: the study of child development, the study of the defects of persons with mental disorders, certification of management personnel, and the organization of social training.

Under communicative competence usually refers to the ability to establish and maintain the necessary contacts with other people. The competence includes a certain set of knowledge and skills that ensure the effective flow of the communicative process. This understanding of competence dictates a strategy for constructing a system for its diagnosis: an inventory of the components of competence (knowledge, skills) and the selection or creation of an appropriate psychodiagnostic procedure for assessing each of the components. However, in practice, this approach cannot be effectively implemented - as communication research expands and deepens, the growth in the number of detected components exceeds the rate at which diagnostic tools are created that meet the elementary criteria of reliability and validity. But even if the appropriate toolkit were available today, it would not be possible to use it due to its obvious cumbersomeness. In fact, when diagnosing competence, they are limited to assessing a very narrow set of its components, and the reasons for the choice are rarely explicated, and maybe even realized. Since a comprehensive diagnosis is difficult (if not impossible), it is desirable to define criteria for the selection of components of competence for assessment. Two main criteria for such a selection can be formulated as the principles of diagnostics of competence: 1) no assessment of the personality without an assessment of the current or potential environment; 2) no evaluation without development. The adoption of these two principles as criteria leads to the selection of components of competence that are relevant to the present or predicted social context of the main types of an individual's activity, and only those that can be formed or improved by existing or created learning tools. This significantly narrows the range of candidates for elements of the psychodiagnostic system. Diagnostics acquires its systemic characteristics in connection with a meaningful consideration of communicative competence. A meaningful analysis is unthinkable without relying on a certain theoretical basis.

As theoretical basis meaningful analysis of communicative competence, we accept representations O structure of objective activity, developed in domestic science. Particularly important in this context is the allocation of the indicative and executive parts of the action, as well as the concept of the internal means of activity. Communicative competence is considered as a system of internal resources necessary to build effective communicative action in a certain range of situations interpersonal interaction.

Like any action, the communicative act includes analysis and assessment of the situation, the formation of the goal and the operational composition of the action, the implementation of the plan and / or its correction, and the assessment of effectiveness. Of paramount importance for the diagnosis of competence is the analysis of the composition of the internal means of activity, which are used in orientation in communicative situations. Assessment of "cognitive resources that provide adequate analysis and interpretation of the situation is the primary task of diagnosing communicative competence, it is no coincidence that this aspect of the problem is given great attention. To date, enough has been developed. big number effective methodological techniques for researching the socio-perceptual component of communicative competence.

Many techniques are based on the analysis of “free descriptions” of various communicative situations, given by the experimenter verbally or with the help of pictorial means. This creates opportunities for reconciling the survey situation with the context of the real or potentially possible sphere of life of the subject, which favorably distinguishes this methodological approach from standardized questionnaires, in which a significant part of the points are often not relevant to the communicative sphere that is relevant for the tested persons. The purely qualitative nature of the primary material does not prevent the development of procedures for quantitative - structural and level - analysis of this kind of data.

A special place among the methods for assessing cognitive resources is occupied by a set of techniques called repertoire matrix testing or technique of repertoire grids. The combination of algorithmic and great flexibility allows using the technique of repertoire lattices to determine the elemental composition and the way of building cognitive structures, on the basis of which the organization of socio-perceptual experience occurs.

Both of these methodological approaches make it possible to identify the components of cognitive resources that are actually used by people when orienting themselves in communicative situations that are significant for them. The psychodiagnostic data obtained in this way can serve as a reliable basis for choosing the methods of correction of the inadequacy in the development of the cognitive sphere revealed in the course of the study. It is also important that the mentioned groups of techniques, being primarily diagnostic, can at the same time serve as elements development procedures competence.

Diagnostics of the competence of the orientational part of the communicative action is partially carried out using techniques based on methods of analysis of specific situations. Although these methods were originally applied for the purposes of social learning, they are now widely used not only as a means of developing competence and monitoring the effectiveness of training, but also specifically for attesting the competence of management personnel. This approach does not allow directly assessing the cognitive resources used in the orientation of the communicative action, but it makes it possible to determine the degree of efficiency of their use, which can be judged by the adequacy of the definition of the situation. It is essential here that with an appropriate selection of situations for analysis, the relevance of the stimulus material to the class of tasks that a person faces in his Everyday life and in the field of professional activity. But nevertheless, this method is more suitable for diagnosing the basis of an action, not so much as an indicative one, as an executive one, if, as is usually the case, the situation is not only analyzed, but its solutions are also assumed.

Interpretation of a communicative situation is, despite all its importance, only part of the indicative basis of communicative action. A holistic diagnosis of communicative competence, or an assessment of the resources of a communicative act, presupposes an analysis of the system of internal means that ensure action planning. This component of the diagnostic system is represented by the already mentioned class of methodological techniques, designated as a method of analysis and solution of specific situations. In assessing competence, various qualitative and quantitative characteristics of the decision results are used, among which the main place is occupied by such an indicator as the number of different types of design solutions. The assessment procedure should not be limited to the identification of the “field of action”, or “fan of possible solutions”. and by-products. It is also essential here to identify ideas about ways to neutralize or compensate for possible negative effects of side effects (as well as enhancement of positive effects). The availability of resources to compensate and neutralize the negative effects of an action is evidence of communicative competence. Despite the fact that there are no specific methods for assessing this aspect of competence, there are no fundamental difficulties here - such methods can be created "in the image and likeness" of methods of qualitative and quantitative assessment of the results of solving specific situations.

A look at communicative competence as a system of internal means of orientation and regulation of communicative actions reveals a significant gap in the arsenal of diagnostic tools. Studies of social interaction have made it possible to establish that people are guided in the process of communication on a difficult a system of rules for the regulation of joint actions. This system of rules includes local social etiquette, rituals, rules for regulating competitive activity, "dramatic maxims" - the rules of self-presentation. This most important part of cognitive resources is not "grasped" by the existing methodological apparatus of psychodiagnostics. And it's not just a lack of attention to this component of communicative competence - difficulties of a fundamental nature arise here. If the characteristics of the situation, being the conditions for the implementation of the action, are presented in consciousness and can be analyzed in the process of polling, then the rules that have the status of means of regulation are not realized with the same completeness. Most of behavior that "follows the rules" has the properties of highly automated skills, and these rules themselves could be identified only during the period of their formation. Knowing the rules of behavior is akin to knowing the rules of spelling, which are only rarely realized. However, the analogy is far from complete. The rules of conduct are not as uniform as the rules of grammar, and some of them are esoteric. Oddly enough, but it is a purely individual subsystem of “rules for internal use” that is explicated with the least difficulty, since actions based on them are perceived by others as “atypical” and require explanation, which creates the prerequisites for the deployment of reflexive processes. Generally accepted rules can be reflected only in cases of their obvious violation. A person's ignorance of generally accepted rules usually causes an awkward feeling among others, but it is unclear how to use this phenomenon for psychodiagnostic purposes. Apparently, the creation of adequate tools for analyzing this component of communicative competence is a matter of the future.

Diagnostics of the executive part of a communicative action is based on the analysis and assessment of its operational composition. The analysis of the operational composition is carried out using observation either in natural conditions or in specially organized game situations that simulate situations of real interaction. A large role here belongs to technical means of recording behavior - audio and video recording equipment - since their use increases the accuracy and reliability of observation data and, which is especially important, the observed person himself can be involved in the analysis process.

The analysis begins with an inventory of the communication techniques used - a kind of operational repertoire is highlighted. Such a repertoire may include mastery of the tempo of speech, intonation, pause; lexical diversity; non-directive and activating listening skills; non-verbal technique - facial expressions and pantomime, gaze fixation, organization communication space etc. One assessment parameter is the richness of the repertoire used, or the breadth of the operating range, the number of communicative techniques used. Another parameter is the relevance or adequacy of the technique used. The assessment of this characteristic of the operational potential of a communicative action is carried out using the method of expert judgments in the process of assessing an audiovisual recording. The aforementioned procedures have long been included in the research arsenal, but their use for diagnostic purposes is very problematic due to their significant laboriousness. If we talk about their application in purely diagnostic tasks, then some possibilities open up with the introduction of automated tools for analyzing communication processes. Apparently, some characteristics of listening (tempo, intonation, pauses) can be detected without any special difficulties by modern equipment, as for non-verbal technique, here the possibilities of automatic analysis are much more modest. And the situation with the interpretation process is very bad - in the foreseeable future it is difficult to count on the fact that a machine will be able to replace a person here. Therefore, the diagnosis of the operational composition of actions is made difficult, first of all, by the fact that it requires a lot of time for observers, encoders and interpreters to perform it qualitatively. Another thing is diagnostics in the course of group training, where members of the group can play the role of experts in the process of solving training tasks, which removes the main problem. In this regard, we can say that "diagnostics without development" is not only ineffective - it is, to a large extent, practically impracticable.

The modern approach to the problem of development and improvement of the communicative competence of adults is that learning is considered as self-development and self-improvement based on their own actions, and the diagnosis of competence - as self-diagnosis, introspection [Petrovskaya, 1989]. This point of view is fundamentally different from the one that prevailed in psychodiagnostics for a long time. More precisely, the problem of the subject of diagnostics in the recent past was not posed at all - it was assumed for granted that the analysis and assessment of test results is the prerogative of the psychologist, and the test takers may not be informed of the conclusions made. This approach, perhaps, was to some extent justified when using psychodiagnostic tools in the tasks of professional selection, but one cannot be guided by it if the goal is to develop competence. And the problem of diagnosing competence is not solved by simply informing the participants about the test results - its essence is to organize the diagnostic process in such a way that its participants receive effective information, i.e. one on the basis of which people would be able to carry out the necessary correction of their behavior themselves.

Diagnostics of communicative competence is currently carried out mainly in four areas of the psychologist: when studying the development of the child; in the study of defects in persons with mental disorders; when conducting certification of management personnel; when organizing social learning.

As noted above, the composition of communicative competence includes a certain set of knowledge and skills that ensure the effective implementation of communicative actions. This understanding of competence dictates a strategy for building a diagnostic system: an inventory of the components of competence (knowledge, skills) and the selection or creation of an appropriate psychodiagnostic procedure for assessing each of the components. However, in practice, this approach cannot be effectively implemented - as communication research expands and deepens, the growth in the number of detected components exceeds the rate at which diagnostic tools are created that meet the elementary criteria of reliability and validity. But even if the appropriate toolkit were available by now, it could not be used due to its obvious cumbersomeness. In fact, when diagnosing competence, they are limited to assessing a very narrow set of its components, and the reasons for the choice are rarely explicated or even realized at all. Since comprehensive diagnosis is difficult (if not possible at all), it is desirable to define criteria for selecting the main components of competence for assessment.

As a theoretical basis for a meaningful analysis of communicative competence in this work, ideas about the structure of objective activity are taken. Particularly important in this context are the allocation of the indicative and executive parts of the action, as well as the concept of the internal means of activity. Communicative competence is considered as a system of internal resources necessary to build effective communicative action in a certain range of situations of interpersonal interaction.

Like any action, a communicative act includes an analysis and assessment of the situation, the formation of the goal and the operational composition of the action, the implementation of the plan and / or its correction, and the assessment of effectiveness. Of particular importance for the diagnosis of competence is the analysis of the composition of those internal means of activity that are used in orientation in communicative situations. Assessment of cognitive resources that provide adequate analysis and interpretation of the situation is the primary task of diagnosing communicative competence, and it is no coincidence that this aspect of the problem is given great attention. To date, a fairly large number of effective methodological techniques for studying the socio-perceptual component of communicative competence have been developed.

A large number of techniques are based on the analysis of "free descriptions" of various communicative situations, given by the experimenter verbally or with the help of visual media... This creates an opportunity to reconcile the situation of the survey with the context of the real or potentially possible sphere of life of the subject, which favorably distinguishes this methodological approach from standardized questionnaires, in which a significant part of the "items" often do not relate to the communicative sphere that is relevant for the tested persons. The purely qualitative nature of the primary "material" does not prevent the development of procedures for quantitative - structural and level - analysis of this kind of data.

A special place among the methods for assessing cognitive resources is occupied by a set of techniques called repertory matrix testing, or the technique of repertoire grids. The combination of algorithms and great flexibility makes it possible to use the technique of repertoire lattices to determine the elemental composition and the way of building cognitive structures, on the basis of which the organization of socio-perceptual experience takes place.

Both of these methodological approaches make it possible to identify those components of cognitive resources that are actually used by people when orienting themselves in communicative situations that are significant for them. The psychodiagnostic data obtained in this way can serve as a reliable basis for choosing the methods of correction of the inadequacy in the development of the cognitive sphere revealed during the study. It is also important that the mentioned groups of techniques, being primarily diagnostic, can at the same time serve as elements of the procedures for the development of competence.

Diagnostics of the competence of the indicative part of the communicative action is partially carried out with the help of techniques based on "methods of analysis of specific situations." Although these methods were originally applied for the purposes of social learning, now they are widely used not only as a means of developing competence and monitoring the effectiveness of training, but also specifically for the purpose of attesting the competence of management personnel [Käärst, 1980]. This approach has a limitation, since it does not allow directly assessing the cognitive resources used in orienting a communicative action, but, on the other hand, it makes it possible to determine the degree of efficiency of their use, which can be judged by the adequacy of the definition of the situation. It is also essential that with an appropriate selection of situations for analysis, the relevance of the stimulus material to the class of tasks that a person faces in his daily life and in the sphere professional activity... But nevertheless, this method is more suitable for diagnosing not so much an indicative basis of action as an executive one, if, as is usually the case, the situation is not only analyzed, but its solutions are also assumed.

Interpretation of a communicative situation is, despite all its importance, only part of the indicative basis of communicative action. A holistic diagnosis of communicative competence, or an assessment of the resources of a communicative act, presupposes an analysis of the system of internal means that ensure action planning. This component of the diagnostic system is represented by the already mentioned class of methodological techniques, designated as a method of analysis and solution of specific situations. When assessing competence, various quantitative and qualitative characteristics of the decision results are used, among which the main place is occupied by such an indicator as the number different types constructive solutions. The assessment procedure should not be limited to the identification of the “field of action” or “fan” of possible solutions. Equally important is the diagnosis of such a component of orientation as analysis and assessment of the consequences of each of the possible actions, both direct consequences (i.e., associated with the achievement of the goal) and side effects. It is also essential to identify ideas about ways to neutralize, or compensate, possible negative effects of side effects (as well as enhancement of positive effects). The availability of resources to compensate and neutralize the negative effects of an action is evidence of communicative competence. Despite the fact that there are no specific methods for assessing this aspect of competence, there are no fundamental difficulties here - such methods can be created "in the image and likeness" of methods for qualitative and quantitative assessment of the results of solving specific situations.

A look at communicative competence as a system of internal means of orientation and regulation of communicative actions reveals a gap in the arsenal of diagnostic tools. Studies of social interaction have made it possible to establish that people in the process of communication are guided by a complex system of rules for regulating joint actions. This system of rules includes local social etiquette, rituals, rules for regulating competitive activity, "dramatic maxims" - the rules of self-presentation. This most important part of cognitive resources is not "grasped" by the existing methodological apparatus of psychodiagnostics. And it's not just a lack of attention to this component of communicative competence - difficulties of a fundamental nature arise here. If the characteristics of the situation, being the conditions for the implementation of the action, are presented in consciousness and can be analyzed in the process of polling, then the rules that have the status of means of regulation are not fully understood. Most of the “following the rules” behavior has the properties of highly automated skills, and these rules themselves could only be identified during their formation. “Knowing” the rules of behavior is akin to knowing the spelling rules, which are only rarely realized. However, the analogy is far from complete. The rules of behavior are not as uniform as the rules of grammar and syntax, and some of them are very specific, and sometimes unique. Oddly enough, but it is a purely individual subsystem of rules, “rules for internal use” that is explicated with the least difficulty, since actions based on them are perceived by others as “atypical” and require explanation, which creates the prerequisites for the deployment of reflexive processes. Generally accepted rules can be reflected only in cases of their obvious violation. A person's ignorance of generally accepted rules usually causes an awkward feeling among others, but it is unclear how to use this phenomenon for psychodiagnostic purposes. Apparently, the creation of adequate tools for analyzing this component of communicative competence is a matter of the future.

Diagnostics of the executive part of a communicative action is based on the analysis and assessment of the operational composition of the action. The analysis of the operational composition is carried out using observation either in natural conditions or in specially organized game situations that simulate situations of real interaction. An important role is played here by technical means of recording behavior - audio and video recording equipment - since their use increases the accuracy and reliability of observation data, and, which is especially important, the observed person himself can be involved in the analysis process. At the first stage of the analysis, an inventory of the communication techniques used is carried out - a kind of operational repertoire is highlighted. Such a repertoire may include mastery of the tempo of speech, intonation, pause; lexical diversity; empathic and activating listening skills; non-verbal technique: facial expressions and pantomime, gaze fixation, organization of the communicative space, etc. One of the assessment parameters is the richness of the repertoire used, or the breadth of the operational range - the number of communicative techniques used. The second parameter is the relevance, or adequacy, of the technique used. The assessment of this characteristic of the operational potential of a communicative action is carried out using the method of expert judgments in the process of assessing an audiovisual recording. The aforementioned procedures have long been included in the research arsenal, but their use for diagnostic purposes is very problematic due to their significant laboriousness. If we talk about their application in purely diagnostic tasks, then some possibilities open up with the introduction of automated tools for analyzing communication processes. Apparently, some characteristics of listening (tempo, intonation, pauses) can be detected without any special difficulties by modern equipment, as for the visual component of non-verbal technique (facial expressions, pantomimes), here the possibilities of automatic analysis are much more modest. And it is very bad with the interpretation process - in the foreseeable future it is difficult to count on the fact that a machine will be able to replace a person here. Therefore, the diagnosis of the operational composition of actions is made difficult, first of all, by the fact that it requires a lot of time for observers, encoders and interpreters to perform it qualitatively. Another thing is diagnostics in the course of group training; here the team members can act as experts in the decision process training tasks, which removes the main problem. In this regard, we can say that "diagnostics without development" is not only ineffective - it is largely impracticable.

The modern approach to the problem of developing and improving the communicative competence of adults is that learning is considered as self-development and self-improvement based on their own actions, and the diagnosis of competence as self-diagnosis, introspection [Petrovskaya, 1989]. This point of view is fundamentally different from the one that prevailed for a long period in psychodiagnostics. More precisely, the problem of the subject of diagnostics in the recent past was not posed at all - it was assumed for granted that the analysis and assessment of test results is the prerogative of the psychologist, and the test takers may not be informed of the conclusions made. Such an approach can be and was to some extent justified if psychodiagnostic means were used in the tasks of professional selection, but one cannot be guided by it if the goal is to develop competence. And the problem of diagnosing competence is not solved by just informing the participants about the test results - its essence is to organize the diagnostic process in such a way that its participants receive effective information, that is, one on the basis of which people could make the necessary correction of their own. behavior [Zhukov, Petrovskaya, 1984].

So, it is advisable to consider communicative competence as a system of internal means of regulating communicative actions, highlighting the orienting and executive components in the latter.
Diagnostics in this case is primarily a process of introspection, and development is a process of self-improvement of means for organizing communicative interaction.

Test "Are you sociable?"

Instructions:"Answer the questions Yes or No».

1. Do you like to talk more than listen?
2. Can you find a topic for conversation with a stranger?
3. Do you always listen carefully to the interlocutor? Do you like to give advice?
4. If the topic is not interesting to you, will you show it to the interlocutor?

5. Are you annoyed if you are not listened to?

6. Do you have your own opinion on any issue?

7. If the topic of conversation is unfamiliar to you, will you continue the conversation?

8. Do you like to be in the spotlight?

9. Are there at least three areas in which you are fairly well versed?

10. Do you know how to build a conversation, are you a good speaker?

Processing of results.

Count the points: one point for each positive answer.

1 - 3 points. One of two things: either you are a taciturn (taciturn), from whom you cannot get a word, or are so sociable that they are trying to avoid you. But the main thing: it is not always pleasant to communicate with you, but it is always difficult.

4 - 8 points. You may not be a very sociable person, but you are almost always an attentive and pleasant conversationalist. Sometimes you are absent-minded, especially when in a bad mood, and thus you can offend the interlocutor without even wanting to. Try not to show your friends your bad mood, then they will be kinder to you.

9 - 11 points. Probably, people are very pleased to communicate with you. And friends cannot do without you. It's fine! But please let the other person speak.

ANSWER FORM

Instructions:"Answer the questions Yes or no. Please put any mark in the appropriate box on the answer sheet. "

Diagnostics of communicative competence

Instructions

Processing of results

The results of the questionnaire are processed using the following scales, within which the average value (of two questions) is determined for each scale separately... As a result, the sum of the average points scored on all scales is calculated:

1. if the sum is less than or about 30 points, then attention should be paid to increasing communicative competence;
2. from 30 to 60 points - special attention should be paid to some unsatisfactory aspects of communication, since they can significantly affect the effectiveness of management activities;
3. over 60 points - demonstrates confident mastery of the communicative minimum.

Scales for processing the questionnaire according to the communicative minimum

Preparatory phase - questions 1,2

Contact phase - 3.4

Emotions in conversation - 5.6

Understanding phase - 7.8

Persuasion Phase - 9.10

Completion phase - 11.12

Conversation control - 13.14

ANSWER FORM

Instructions: "Please, mark on a scale of seven how much you agree with the judgments below."

Processing of results