Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Introduction. The development of classes with a psychological-pedagogical focus emphasises the importance of the early identification of prerequisites for a teacher’s future professional development. At the pre-vocational stage, particular attention is given to the emerging moral, value-based, personal, and instrumental foundations necessary to foster readiness for pedagogical activity. However, contemporary psychological and pedagogical practice still lacks psychometrically validated diagnostic instruments capable of assessing students’ readiness for pedagogical activity in classes with a psychological-pedagogical focus. Aim . The present study aims to develop and pilot-test scales to assess students’ readiness for pedagogical activities in classes with a psychological and educational focus. Methodology and research methods. The methodological foundation of the study was the conceptualisation of readiness for pedagogical activity as a developing, multidimensional construct comprising moral-value, personal, and instrumental readiness. Based on a theoretical analysis, a bank of statements was created, which underwent expert evaluation and was discussed in a focus group with students. A total of 709 students in Years 10 and 11 (the final two years of secondary school), from classes with a psychological and pedagogical focus across ten regions of Russia, participated in the pilot testing of the developed scales. To verify the structure of the scales, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were employed; internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient; and convergent validity was evaluated through correlation analysis with indicators of motivation for choosing the teaching profession, adolescents’ professional attitudes, involvement in career guidance activities, and academic performance. Results. As a result of the study, three scales were developed to assess readiness for pedagogical activity at the pre-vocational stage. The scale of moral-value readiness comprises the indicators “Mission”, “Values”, and “Pragmatism”, which together account for 50.4% of the total variance. The scale of personal readiness includes the indicators “Identification”, “Self-regulation”, and “Independence”, explaining 46.2% of the total variance. The scale of instrumental readiness consists of the indicators “Experience”, “Difficulties”, and “Awareness”, accounting for 56.0% of the total variance. The internal consistency coefficients of the scale indicators range from 0.70 to 0.87. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed that the models fit the empirical data well. The χ²/df ratio did not exceed 2.73; Comparative Fit Index (CFI) values ranged from 0.946 to 0.961; Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI) from 0.925 to 0.948; Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) from 0.046 to 0.049; and Standardised Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) from 0.0395 to 0.0563. Correlation analysis revealed significant relationships between the indicators of the readiness for pedagogical activity scales and confidence in professional choice, altruistic-intrinsic motivation, the influence of others, involvement in career guidance activities, and students’ academic performance. Scientific novelty. The study proposes and empirically tests a diagnostic instrument designed to assess readiness for pedagogical activity at the early, pre-vocational stage of developing the subject of pedagogical labour. The developed scales enhance understanding of school students’ readiness for pedagogical activity within the context of moral, value-based, personal, and instrumental prerequisites for future professional development in education. Practical significance. The findings may be utilised within systems of psychological and pedagogical support for students engaged in pedagogical activities, in designing targeted programmes to assist with professional self-determination, and in identifying various profiles related to the development of readiness for pedagogical work.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tarasov et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: