Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin
RU EN






Today: 23.05.2025
Home Issues 2016 Year Issue №9 HYPOTHESIS AND ITS ROLE IN THE FORMATION OF STUDENTS’ THINKING
  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Bulletin Archive
    • 2025 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
    • 2024 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2023 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2022 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2021 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2020 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2019 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
    • 2018 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
    • 2017 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2016 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2015 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2014 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2013 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
      • Issue №13
    • 2012 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
      • Issue №13
    • 2011 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
      • Issue №13
    • 2010 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2009 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2008 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
    • 2007 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
    • 2006 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2005 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
    • 2004 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
    • 2003 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
    • 2002 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
    • 2001 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
    • 2000 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
    • 1999 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
    • 1998 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 1997 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
  • Rating
  • Search
  • News
  • Editorial Board
  • Information for Authors
  • Review Procedure
  • Information for Readers
  • Editor’s Publisher Ethics
  • Contacts
  • Manuscript submission
  • Received articles
  • Accepted articles
  • Subscribe
  • Service Entrance
vestnik.tspu.ru
praxema.tspu.ru
ling.tspu.ru
npo.tspu.ru
edujournal.tspu.ru

TSPU Bulletin is a peer-reviewed open-access scientific journal.

E-LIBRARY (РИНЦ)
Ulrich's Periodicals Directory
Google Scholar
European reference index for the humanities and the social sciences (erih plus)
Search by Author
- Not selected -
  • - Not selected -
Яндекс.Метрика

HYPOTHESIS AND ITS ROLE IN THE FORMATION OF STUDENTS’ THINKING

Yakovleva Elena Vladimirovna

Information About Author:

Hypothesis is one of the most important forms of science development. At the present time the role of the hypothesis increases with the increase of theoretical knowledge and the initiation of young generation to scientific cognition methods at the University. Unfortunately, we can rarely come across the correct use of hypotheses in the educational process; its great importance in the development of students’ cognitive abilities and formation of their thinking is not always taken into account. The reason is that teachers often focus on educational issues, but overlooked the fact that problem solving proceeds by putting forward evidence and hypotheses. The article describes the logical nature of the hypothesis; determines the ways of its application in cognitive activity of students. It is emphasized, that on the one hand, the hypothesis is referred to logical forms of thinking, on the other hand – to the process of nomination, development and proof of new propositions and inferences itself. Meanwhile, the hypotheses can be performed on the basis of observations and experiments; by deductive reasoning deducing new knowledge from already known theories, and by deductive transfer of already known laws to new phenomena. Available ways of hypothesis applying to the students’ cognitive activity based on the years of experience are proposed in the article.

Keywords: hypothesis, methods of cognitive activity, ways of hypothesise development, thinking, induction, deduction, analogy, intuition

References:

1. Merkulov I. P. Metod gipotez v istorii nauchnogo poznaniya [Method of hypotheses in the history of scientifi c knowledge]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1984. 185 p. (in Russian).

2. Mikheev G. I. Rol’ gipotezy v nauchnom poznanii. Avtoref. dis. kand. philos. nauk [The role of hypothesis in scientifi c knowledge. Abstract of thesis cand. of philosoph. sci.]. Moscow, 1958. 16 p. (in Russian).

3. Ruzavin G. I. Metodologiya nauchnogo issledovaniya [The methodology of scientifi c research]. Moscow, UNITY-DATA Publ., 1999. 317 p. (in Russian).

4. Brushlinskiy A. V. Myshleniye i prognozirovaniye: logico-psikhologicheskiy analiz [Thinking and Forecasting: logical and psychological analysis]. Moscow, Mysl’Publ., 1979. 230 p. (in Russian).

5. Vil’keev D. V. Metody nauchnogo poznaniya v shkol’nom obuchenii [Methods of scientifi c cognition in school education]. Kazan, Tatarskoye knizhnoye izdatel’stvo Publ., 1975. 160 p. (in Russian).

6. Golin G. N. Voprosy metodologii fi ziki v kurse sredney shkoly [Methodological issues in the course of secondary school physics]. Moscow, Prosvyashcheniye Publ., 1987. 127 p. (in Russian).

7. Kulyutkin Y. N. Psikhologiya obucheniya vzroslykh [Psychology of adult teaching]. Moscow, Prosvyashcheniye Publ., 1985. 128 p. (in Russian).

8. Makhmutov M. I. Teoriya i praktika problemnogo obucheniya [Theory and practice of problem-based learning]. Kazan, Tatknigoizdat Publ., 1972. 522 p. (in Russian).

9. Shaporinskyy S. A. Obucheniye i nauchnoye poznaniye [Education and scientifi c cognition]. Moscow, Pedagogika Publ., 1981. 207 p. (in Russian).

10. Yakovleva E. V. Sistema formirovaniya logicheskoy kul’tury studentov vysshikh uchebnykh zavedeniy. Dis. dokt. ped. nauk [System of higher educational institutions students’ professional culture formation. Abstract of thesis doct. of ped. sci.]. Kazan, 2009. 556 p. (in Russian).

11. Ogorodnikov V. P. Logika. Zakony i printzypy pravil’nogo myshleniya [Logics. The laws and principles of correct thinking]. St. Petersburg, Piter Publ., 2004. 176 p. (in Russian).

12. Kurbatov V. I. Logika [Logics]. Rostov-on-Don, Feniks Publ., 2005. 283 p. (in Russian).

13. Ivanov E. A. Logika [Logics]. Moscow, Volters Kluver Publ., 2007. 416 p. (in Russian).

14. Demidov I. V. Logika [Logics]. Moscow Izdatel’sko-torgovaya korporatsiya “Dashkov and Ko.” Publ., 2004. 348 p. (in Russian).

yakovleva_e._v._120_127_9_174_2016.pdf ( 450.32 kB ) yakovleva_e._v._120_127_9_174_2016.zip ( 443.13 kB )

Issue: 9, 2016

Series of issue: Issue 9

Rubric: HIGHER EDUCATION

Pages: 120 — 127

Downloads: 1170

For citation:


© 2025 Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin

Development and support: Network Project Laboratory TSPU