Article citationsMore >>

Vygodskaya, G. L., & Lifanova, T. M., Through the eyes of others. Journal of Russian & East European Psychology, 37(3), 32-80. 1999.

has been cited by the following article:

Article

Unfulfilled Ambitions of Russian Pedologists (At the Turn of the 20th Century)

1Department of Psychology and Pedagogy Nizhny Novgorod State Pedagogical University 1, Ulyanov Str., Nizhny Novgorod, Russia


Research in Psychology and Behavioral Sciences. 2013, Vol. 1 No. 3, 30-36
DOI: 10.12691/rpbs-1-3-1
Copyright © 2013 Science and Education Publishing

Cite this paper:
Elena Minkova. Unfulfilled Ambitions of Russian Pedologists (At the Turn of the 20th Century). Research in Psychology and Behavioral Sciences. 2013; 1(3):30-36. doi: 10.12691/rpbs-1-3-1.

Correspondence to: Elena Minkova, Department of Psychology and Pedagogy Nizhny Novgorod State Pedagogical University 1, Ulyanov Str., Nizhny Novgorod, Russia. Email: helensea59@mail.ru

Abstract

This article discusses the question that remains unanswered to this day: why Pedology, so actively developing in the early 20th century, not only in Russia but also abroad, faded away after just three decades? Was Pedology a pseudoscience as stated by the ideology of Bolshevism? Were the ideas about creating and educating a new man, developed and supported not only by leading Russian pedologists, such as: Basov, Blonsky, Vygotsky, Nechayev but also by foreign pedologists, for example: Granville Stanley Hall, Alfred Binet, James Mark Baldwin, significantly flawed from the start? Or was it due to the goals set by pedologists that were too ahead of their time and just like unique seeds failed to grow in a rocky soil? How relevant is the problem of creating a useful science about a child that allows us to see peculiarities of a child's development. Is it time to reflect on those problems raised by so many pedologists of the past?

Keywords