New specialist training strategy in national physical education system: ontodidactic methodology


Dr.Hab., Professor L.I. Lubysheva1
Dr.Hab., Professor S.V. Dmitriev2
1Russian State University of Physical Education, Sports, Youth and Tourism (GTSOLIFK), Moscow
2Kozma Minin Nizhny Novgorod State Pedagogical University, Nizhny Novgorod


In commemoration of V.K. Bal'sevich, founder of ontokinesiology and human movement theory

Keywords: ontodidactics, ontokinesiology, anthropic technologies, kinesiological approach, physical education.

Background. Modern paradigm shifts in the national academic education system are associated with a variety of new theoretical and practical challenges that need to be responded by the relevant proactive innovations. Presently the national academic physical education system is in need of new technologies to facilitate the “intellectually, physically and socio-culturally developed personality building process catering for the social demand”; with the personality being capable to design its sport education, health improvement and correction activity so as break free of confines of the traditional physical, mental and spiritual domains. The notion of an uninterrupted flow of knowledge in didactics is rooted in the Y.A. Komenskiy’s idea that “everybody should be trained in everything” i.e. on an integrated basis and to the full extent of the modern knowledge base.

In the context of the education process integration, ontodidactics may be interpreted as an educational theory with its content and sense derived from the human ontology i.e. from the genuine modi of human existence. Ontodidactics is driven by the concept of homo sapiens being viewed as a bio-socio-cultural spiritual being; with the human ontology completeness and integrity reflecting methodology in the educational material being put in opposition to the fragmentariness, abstractness and negligence to humanitarian dimension of the traditional educational materials offered at national schools, in colleges and universities [7].

Objective of the study was to provide theoretical grounds for the ontodidactic methodology and apply it as a new physical education and sport personnel training policy.

Study results and discussion. Fundamental studies of the leading national researchers in the field of educational process technologies (V.A. Khutorskoy, M.E. Bershadsky, V.V. Guzeev, A.M. Kushnir, et al.) and physical education (V.K. Bal'sevich, M.M. Bogen, Y.K. Gaverdovskii, V.B. Korenberg, S.D. Neverkovich, et al.) have made it possible to build up anthropic education technologies giving a top priority to the socially and spiritually advanced personality centred development rather than only to the individual progress as such [1,5].

The modern anthropic education technologies (ontodidactics) are based on the idea of the two key education process functions (i.e. the individual consciousness transformation function and the extended reproduction of culture via human activity) being combined. Most important in ontodidactics are the “human transformation” methods geared to rebuild thinking process, consciousness, activity and psychosomatics rather than “reform the world” by physical actions only.

The above technologies that have been subject to the S.V. Dmitriev’s school research for above 20 years  offer the means to integrate man into a social medium; and develop a set of human-society relationship control meta-technologies based on the ideas of a uniform methodology of natural sciences and human-spirit-related sciences (human studies) [2, 3, 4].

We would outline some modern innovative ontodidactic methods and technologies pivotal for the research and technological progress in the physical education domain as follows:

– Education for specific “preset responsibilities” (human resource reproduction model);

– Project methods and tools geared to universalize knowledge and actions (constructive activity);

– Initiatives to build up and optimise the individual values based on the relevant spiritual and sensational relationship with the world (via integration of cognitive, social and spiritual identity domains);

– Theoretical and didactical programs (including physical education theory, educational process theory, methodology of science etc.) to guide the intellectual progress of personality and its technological development for future professional career;

– Knowledge, Skills and Abilities (KSA) standards applied as subjective-disciplinary matrices of the applied education technologies to form the relevant knowledge base;

– Interdisciplinary KSA in form of project/ programmatic education system also viewed as conceptually integrated syntagms (derived from Greek syntagma – jointly built, i.e. combined education modules) setting the frame for cognitive, reflexive and constructive responsibilities within the professional career;

– Creative methods designed to build up an individual health and physical culture (physical identity);

– Bio-monitoring, health tests, synthesis and optimisation of mechanisms of the psychomotor system, operational intelligence, eidetic abilities, perceptive and constructive movement semantics, with the relevant bionics and neurobiocomputer control systems (biocybergogics);

– Health protection, compensation, correction and rehabilitation centred education; and adaptation by means of mental control system;

– Intellectual and body-oriented education technologies with an emphasis on physical training and individual development driven by the life-long education concepts;

– Artistic, creative and aesthetic education and development methods (making an emphasis on the artistic qualities of movements, plasticity-prioritizing didactics etc.); and

– body-linguistics and linguo-creative education and development technologies.

It should be noted that the modern physical education system makes a differentiation between the subjective content of the KSA standards and the following two education systems: the first system considering the KSA as an object that is integrated into the system to change it in one or another manner; and the second system which mission is to secure the above integration (digestion, mastering and implementation viewed as different renovation strategies) process.

The fist education system implies the relevant external programmatic controls of the human learning activity; with the relevant innovations being mostly governed by the object-specific knowledge about the “human factor”; and with the Knowledge, Skills and Abilities (KSA) being viewed as an objective of the learning activity. The system implies the relevant education and development environment being established to facilitate, on the one hand, an active teacher-student interactions in the education process and, on the other hand, active information mining activity with the information being digested and transformed as dictated by the relevant programmatic material logics and systemic learning concepts.

The second education system implies the individual motivational domain being rebuilt and excelled with the individual creative thinking patterns being expanded and deepened. The system is designed to facilitate the creative abilities and personality development activity viewed as the education process objective, with the Knowledge, Skills and Abilities (KSA) considered the means of the professional and personality excellence process. The process is designed with the leading role given to the education policy rather than technology; with the policy dictating both the education content selection logics and the learning process customisation to the individual needs and qualities. In contrast to the traditional subjective-disciplinary education process technologies with their mostly regulatory functions, the anthropic education technologies are designed as genuinely self-regulatory systems.

It may be important to mention that the anthropic education technologies make an emphasis on the methods of one science being applied to the subjects of another science. These technologies are focused not only on the marginal research fields but rather on the internal regularities and synergetic principles of different sciences to facilitate a “great synthesis” of sciences, technologies, arts and socio-educational control methods. The results of the personality-building, performance-building, competency-building process are viewed as a super-subjective and universal accomplishment.

The specialist knowledge and performance integration process is based on the research methods and professional education responsibilities being integrated within the national education system, with the education process being considered as a stage in a professional career rather than preparation for the career. Due initiatives need to be taken to develop quasi-professional activity models including students’ educational research projects (SERP); didactic and professional education games; dialogue-based situation-solving education models; regular round-table discussions and disputes; master classes; sport education trainings etc.

The modern education system offers “redundant” education services with the super-subjective array of knowledge and skills (including problem-solving skills, thinking and action process creativity and learning determination) being ranked more important than the traditional subjective-disciplinary competences acquired by a student.

The anthropic education technologies make it possible to develop personal activity regulating methods with the relevant regulatory self-learning and self-development mechanisms.

The ontodidactic methodology including the anthropic education technologies as its constituent is closely determined by our interpretation of the V.K. Bal'sevich’s ontokinesiology that refers to the biophysical, mental and intellectual human resource (individual makings and qualities) development and improvement process [1]. We appreciate the kinesiological concept of the physical education process for the reason that modern kinesiology strives to explore and explain the close relationship between the human muscular movements and spiritual activity [6].

We believe that the V.K. Bal'sevich’s ontokinesiology and ontodidactics may be viewed as a complicated self-organising system with an expressed constructivism driven by the anthropic education technologies. V.K. Bal'sevich demonstrated that a physical culture and sporting activity implies the relevant phylogenetic programs and performance/ operational mechanisms being developed and improved via a complex interaction and psycho-physiological integration process; with the phylogenetic programs activated by the relevant adaptation mechanisms being persistently formed and trained. It should be noted that the phylogenetic programs may not be considered as adaptable to the specific activity or “live-movement” operation systems – since the individual operational patterns are “preset on the whole” in them in underdeveloped forms (that are later improved by the “species-gender evolution” as provided by the V.K. Bal'sevich).

It is a matter of common knowledge that the phylogenetic mechanisms as such bear no psychical qualities, with these qualities being developed by each individual via his/her own learning and training activity; with the relevant operational/ technical mechanisms being formed for every mental process function. Every key component of the individual productive activity is formed by the education process, with the intellectual, physical and bodily reflexion methods being used to rebuild the performance/ operation mechanisms of the “species-gender” qualities to transform them into the individual operational qualities as dictated by the genetic codes and social codes of individual psychosomatics, psycho-motor-functionality and psycho-semantics.

Conclusion. A student determined to acquire professional competences of a sport educator-technologist mastering in onto-didactics needs to be prepared to make his/her own contribution to the modern creative socio-cultural activity. Every student will give a top priority to the knowledge and practical experience essentially important for his life and professional career, with a special emphasis on the efforts to improve own competitiveness on the labour market and the relevant innovative potential.

The new physical education policy based on the ontodidactic methodology closely related to ontokinesilogy is designed to mobilise and activate the internal development and self-advancement processes in the future physical education specialist. The new policy gives a high priority to creative search, innovations and inventions and the education-driven personality development agenda that implies the student being increasingly active as a researcher, experimenter, technologist and expert. An idea of the policy is focused on the initiatives to build up the mechanisms to facilitate the individual transition from the self-identification (self-determination) patterns to self-fulfilment in the professional domain.

We believe that the kinesiological approach implemented in the national physical education system will facilitate the efforts to build up a harmonic universe of humanitarian and natural-scientific knowledge due to the natural objective-subjective dualism in understanding of the physical education phenomenon by both of the scientific sectors being removed.


  1. Bal'sevich V.K. Ocherki po vozrastnoy kineziologii cheloveka [Essays on developmental kinesiology in man]. Moscow: Sovetskiy sport publ., 2009, 220 p.
  2. Dmitriev S.V. Sotsiokulturnaya teoriya dvigatelnykh deystviy cheloveka [Socio-cultural theory of human motor actions]. N. Novgorod: NSPU publ., 2011, 359 p.
  3. Dmitriev S.V., Bystritskaya E.V Antropno-deyatelnostnaya paradigma v pedagogike (Polemicheskie zametki) [Anthropic-Activity Paradigm In Pedagogics (Polemic Remarks)]. Teoriya i praktika fiz. kultury, 2013, no. 1, pp. 96-101.
  4. Dmitriev S.V., Neverkovich S.D., Bystritskaya E.V. Obrazovatelnye tekhnologii – ot logiki vzaimodeystviya k logike sotvorchestva [Educational technologies - from logic of interaction to logic of co-creation]. Sportivny psikholog, 2011, no. 2 (23), pp. 72-77.
  5. Korenberg V.B. Aktivnost – protosoznanie – deyatelnost – soznanie (obrashchenie k probleme obshchey teorii deyatelnosti) [Activity - proto-consciousness - activity - consciousness (addressing the problem of general theory of activity)]. Moscow: KDU publ., 2011, 216 p.
  6. Lubysheva L.I., Zagrevskaya A.I. Kineziologicheskiy podkhod kak metodologiya sovremennoy sportivnoy nauki [Kinesiological approach as methodology of modern sports science and practice]. Teoriya i praktika fiz. kultury, 2015, no. 12, pp. 3-5.
  7. Novichkov N.B. Ontodidaktika i obrazovatelnye standarty [Ontodidactics and educational standards]. Srednee professionalnoe obrazovanie, 2010, no. 8, pp. 2-5.

Corresponding author:                             


The article considers a variety of theoretical, practical and regulatory concepts of the anthropic technology application in the national physical education system, with the objective-subjective field of competitive ontokinesiology developed by V.K. Bal'sevich, a prominent specialist in biomechanics and kinesiology commonly recognized the world over, being used as a study model. It was demonstrated that the educational research technologies giving a high priority to a creative research and personality developing education tools and supported by research-specific software are to help mobilize and activate the internal individual development and self-improvement mechanisms. A student determined to acquire professional competences of a sport educator-technologist and mastering in onto-didactics should be prepared to make own contribution to the creative socio-cultural activity. We believe that the kinesiological approach implemented in the national physical education system will facilitate the efforts to build up a harmonic universe of humanitarian and natural-scientific knowledge due to the natural objective-subjective dualism in understanding of the physical education phenomenon typical for both of the scientific sectors being removed.