• International Journal of Computer Science & Network Security
• /
• v.24 no.4
• /
• pp.127-134
• /
• 2024

The article highlights the problems of the digitalization of the educational process, which affect the pedagogical cluster and are of a psychological nature. The authors investigate the transformational changes in education in general and the individual beliefs of each subject of the educational process, caused by both the change in the format of learning (distance, mixed), and the use of new technologies (digital, communication). The purpose of the article is to identify the strategic trend of the educational process, which is a synergistic combination of pedagogical methodology and psychological practice and avoiding dialectical opposition of these components of the educational space. At the same time, it should be noted that the introduction of digital technologies in the educational process allows for short-term difficulties, which is a usual phenomenon for innovations in the educational sphere. Consequently, there is a need to differentiate the fundamental problems and temporary shortcomings that are inherent in the new format of learning (pedagogical features). Based on the awareness of this classification, it is necessary to develop psychological techniques that will prevent a negative reaction to the new models of learning and contribute to a painless moral and spiritual adaptation to the realities of the present (psychological characteristics). The methods used in the study are divided into two main groups: general-scientific, which investigates the pedagogical component (synergetic, analysis, structural and typological methods), and general-scientific, which are characterized by psychological direction (dialectics, observation, and comparative analysis). With the help of methods disclosed psychological and pedagogical features of the process of digitalization of education in a mixed learning environment. The result of the study is to develop and carry out methodological constants that will contribute to the synergy for the new pedagogical components (digital technology) and the psychological disposition to their proper use (awareness of the effectiveness of new technologies). So, the digitalization of education has demonstrated its relevance and effectiveness in the pedagogical dimension in the organization of blended and distance learning under the constraints of the COVID-19 pandemic. The task of the psychological cluster is to substantiate the positive aspects of the digitalization of the educational process.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.54 no.2
• /
• pp.154-169
• /
• 2021

The establishment of the Bronze Age is one of the most important achievements suggested by Korean archaeology shortly after liberation. There is no doubt that Moo-Byung Yoon is the representative figure, who refuted the ambiguous Eneolithic age (金石倂用期) created by Japanese scholars and settled the concept of the Bronze Age. In this article, the author takes a new look at Yoon's institutional role in studying the Bronze Age in Korea. Until now, Yoon's representative achievement has been his typology of the Slender dagger of the Korean Peninsula. However, it is not less important that Yoon also established the Bronze Age concept with the excavation of a dolmen and a Bronze Age subterranean dwelling in Oksok-ni, Paju during the 1960s. Of course, it was not a personal assignment for Yoon. He was aided by Prof. Kim Won-Yong's work, who had introduced newly excavated materials from North Korea and China; these materials gave some insight for establishing the Bronze Age concepts in the 1960 and 1970s. Kim's suggestion about the possibility of a Korean Bronze Age led to Yoon's refined typological study on Korea's bronze wares. However, Yoon's excessive schematic classification of artifacts and reliance on the Japanese chronology became an obstacle for making the Korean Bronze Age isolated from East Asia. As a result, it is regrettable that his research led to the "cultural lag" phenomenon of Bronze Age research. Meanwhile, Japanese archaeology, which had influenced Yoon, also faced a major change. In 2003, the Japanese archaeological community revised the Yayoi culture's beginning around the 1,000 BC. This means a shift in the perception that we should understand Japan's Bronze Age in the context of the East Asian continent. Of course, it is not appropriate to reevaluate or denigrate Yoon's research from the current view. Rather, it is necessary to recognize the limitations of Yoon's time and present a new path to research by combining the archaeological tradition of refining research on the relics he maintained with a new chronological view and a macro view of East Asian archaeology. This is why we should take a new glimpse into Yoon's research.