Academic journal article Asian Social Science

Prevention of Latent National Aggression in the Course of Future Teacher Education

Academic journal article Asian Social Science

Prevention of Latent National Aggression in the Course of Future Teacher Education

Article excerpt


The basic principles of tolerance, respect for other cultures, readiness for cross-cultural dialogue, basic principles of productive bilingualism are introduced not at school or university, but in kindergarten (age 3-5). At this age, family (parents) and educators play a special role. However, it is in the kindergarten where kids are often badly influenced. The technology of preventing latent national aggression should give students the opportunity to participate in goal-setting, planning their pedagogical activity and its control; ensure their predicting of cross-cultural content, types and results of business or simulation games; when developing the methods of organization of stages in the game, it is necessary to consider the relationship between regulatory, cognitive and communicative components of anticipation. The technology should be based on multicultural content. The values of two cultures, two languages should be disclosed in this content, and positive situations of cross-cultural dialogue should be presented.

Keywords: tolerance, preschool education, technology of preventing national aggression

1. Introduction

Currently the problems of cross-cultural dialogue, tolerance development and national aggression prevention in the institutions' educational environment are the topic of discussion for many scholars (Sleeter, 1996; Einarsdóttir & Perry, 2012; Kudryavtsev, 2011; Veraksa, 2011). But there are not many researches concerning this aggression prevention during preschool teachers' education (Gabdulchakov, 2011). In Russia multicultural education in kindergartens is only declarative. Actually it is either absent, or is formal. In recent years, national problems have intensified. People come to understand that this education should be lifelong.

Various authors in their research, monographs give different definitions for aggression and aggressiveness: human instinct to «defend the territory" (Lorenz, Ardri); as establishing domination (Morrison); as the reaction of a person on a hostile surrounding reality (Homi, Fromm). Very widespread are the theories associating aggression and frustration (Miller, Doob, Dollard).

National aggression is not expressed directly in the institutes of the Volga region. It is hidden (latent). This allows holding the balance and stability in political, economic, social-cultural and education spheres. However, in case of the slightest disbalance in these spheres, aggression may become overt with unpredictable outcome.

Historically, aggression has been evaluated in a variety of ways. Among them, the Buss-Durkee Hostility Inventory (Buss & Durkee, 1957) has been one of the most popular questionnaires. On the basis of this previous work, Buss and Perry proposed in 1992 a psychometrically improved and updated measure of aggression: The Aggression Questionnaire (AQ). The original version of the AQ contains 29 items and is designed to assess four dispositional dimensions of aggression: Physical Aggression, Verbal Aggression, Anger, and Hostility. Physical and Verbal Aggression involve hurting or harming others and represent the instrumental or motor component of the behavior. Anger involves physiological excitation and represents the emotional component of the behavior. Finally, hostility consists of feelings of ill will and injustice and represents the cognitive component of the behavior. Using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), Buss and Perry (1992) showed that they both are multidimensional four- factor model and a hierarchical factor model (four correlate with the first stated factors and reflect the second factor of general aggression), they fit to the data well. Moreover, using peer nomination procedure, Buss and Perry (1992) found reasonable positive correlations with the self-report measures. Several studies highlighted the psychometric quality of the 29-item AQ in different contexts (e.g. Archer, Holloway, & McLoughlin, 1995; Fossati, Maffei, Acquarini, & Di Ceglie, 2003; Condon, Morales-Vives, Ferrando, & Vigil-Colet, 2006). …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.