The article analyzes the results of the methodological experiment, under the conditions of which the teaching of the future lawyers of oral monologic speech on the principles of differentiated approach has been carried out. The experiment was conducted both horizontally and vertically, lasted for 70 hours and consisted of the three stages – before-experiment cross-section, experimental teaching and two interim cross-sections. Ninety students took part in the experiment. The experiment was aimed at verification of the efficiency of the author’s methodology of teaching first-year law students of the English oral monologic speech on the principles of differentiated approach (taking into account the level of students’ knowledge and autonomy) on the basis of the defined principles, methods, the stages of teaching, as well as the sub-system of exercises and tasks. The differentiation of the tasks, the contents of teaching, the types of exercises and tasks along with the approach to their performing and the level of independence, constituted the variable condition of the experiment. The author has defined the criteria of assessment of spontaneous speech (the ease of speech, the scope of the utterance, the meaningful completeness and the level of realization of the communicative intent, the contextual and grammatical integrity, linguistic literacy) and prepared speech (criteria of informativeness, adherence to the compositional peculiarities of a certain functional type of a report, the contextual completeness and the level of realization of communicative intent, the contextual and grammatical integrity, linguisticliteracy). The perspective of further research can be seen in the development of methodology of teaching the language aspects and other types of the communicative activity to the HHE students (and also the secondary school students) on the basis of other criteria of their differentiation.
In social surveys, questions are often asked as to what subjects think people in various occupations actually earn and what they think these people should earn. Responses to these questions figure prominently in sociological studies on legitimacy of inequality and perceptions of justice. In the present study, responses to these questions are employed as well, but the major focus is on investigating the effects, if any, the way these questions are asked affects estimates of actual and just earnings provided by the subjects. More specifically, two hypotheses are proposed, the first of which concerns the association between actual and just earnings, as perceived by subjects, as a measure of legitimacy. It is argued that changing the order in which questions about the earnings are asked affects the strength of this association. A substantive justification for this hypothesis borrows from reward expectation theory and its concept of referential structures. The second hypothesis deals with between-subject agreement in the evaluations of just earnings and it proposes that the agreement may appear weaker or stronger depending on how the occupations to be evaluated by subjects have been selected. This hypothesis builds on expectations states theory, in particular, on status-processing principles in status-inconsistent situations.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.