When training a specialist psychologist at a military university, the problem of “theorizing” training arises acutely. The statements of 4th- and 5th-year cadets make us think seriously about this problem: “What we study is a pure abstraction, bare artificial constructs that are in no way connected with life. Learning occurs at the level of memory, not understanding..." "They tell us a lot about work in certain areas of practical psychology, but they don’t show us, and even more so they don’t let us “touch with our hands...”” “...And now I see a lot , but I don’t know what to do with it and how. It seems to me that the faculty needs to pay attention to the specific application of knowledge, because you go out into the world and feel like that dog that understands everything, but cannot say anything...” 5th year cadets face difficulties when carrying out psychological and pedagogical correction . Many of them do not know how to correctly collect information, ask questions correctly, do not use structural and logical thinking necessary to identify the psychological problems of military personnel and, as a result, cannot provide competent psychological assistance in solving these problems. If we turn to the documents, in particular, to the State educational standard of Higher Professional Education in the specialty 020400 "PSYCHOLOGY", we will see the following requirements: A specialist must be able to solve problems corresponding to his qualifications: • on the basis of accumulated theoretical knowledge, research skills and information search, be able to navigate modern scientific concepts, competently pose and solve research and practical problems;• participate in practical applied activities, master the basic methods of psychodiagnostics, psychocorrection and psychological counseling;• master a complex of knowledge and methods of teaching psychology in higher educational institutions. As can be seen from document, great importance is given to practical skills when preparing a specialist. At a Military University, of course, there are specifics related to military activities. The military industry is a “hot” place, and like no other, it requires a young specialist to have already developed practical skills. This problem is also present in other civilian universities. Similar information from students was received in earlier studies (since 1996) by employees of the psychology laboratory professions and conflict [10-11]. The results of these surveys, allowing us to identify the “internal picture” of the professional development of students, express a certain syndrome, a “pain point” of the faculties of pedagogy and psychology - an acute shortage of active forms of learning and the associated shortage of application experience acquired by students theoretical knowledge to solve professional problems. It should be noted that leading psychologists, specialists in the field of educational psychology, have been drawing the attention of their colleagues to this circumstance for many years and call for a practical solution to this problem in their publications and speeches at faculty meetings [6,8, 12]. In the literature on pedagogy and educational psychology, the discussion of the problem of active forms of learning has a long history, dating back to antiquity (for example, the teachings of Confucius) and the Middle Ages. It is interesting that in the school of Confucius (551-479 BC) many principles and postulates of the modern humanistic concept of education were formulated, in particular respect for the student, acceptance of students as they are, one’s own example is the basis of education, tolerance , unity of learning and life, equality of all people as students, refusal of coercion, the teacher’s task is to teach the student the ability to independently pose questions and look for answers to them, to open a new perspective to the student’s thoughts. Confucius called to “love people truly, without interest, without humiliating them with care or indifference, accepting them as they are.”is, helping to develop the best in them, but without turning a blind eye to their vices and weaknesses.” A critical attitude towards the traditional model of education, which arose in the last century [4], was caused by changes in the requirements made by society (both abroad and in our country) to the quality of professional training of highly qualified specialists and, accordingly, adjustment of the training goals themselves. In the 60-70s. a need arose for new professional competencies: the ability for independent continuous professional education, the ability to make adequate decisions in non-standard situations and the ability for optimal communication in conditions of collective professional interaction [12]. In the 90s a new priority has been added to them: the creation of a critical mass of professionally competent, educated and moral people, without which humanity will not be able to ensure sustainable, safe and successful development. Modern research on the problem of active forms of learning demonstrates a clear opposition to the traditional paradigm of professional education at a university [8 ,9,12]. It is represented by a continuum of opinions, in which the American psychologist Carl Rogers takes a radically negative position, considering it untenable and harmful to the student. As an alternative, K. Rogers, as one of the founders of humanistic psychology, proposes a person-centered concept of learning, in which the student is not just an equal subject of the educational process, but also a leading figure, and the teacher, receding into the background, serves as a facilitator helping the student learn completely independently. As is known, this concept has been fully implemented in several American schools in different states [13]. The most tolerant point of view is to supplement (where possible) the traditional teaching model with modern innovative active methods [4]. An intermediate position can be represented by the concept of a contextual approach to vocational education based on active forms of learning by A.A. Verbitsky [2]. It is a holistic, methodologically developed and tested system for organizing the educational process in two universities, which involves a combination of traditional but transformed innovative teaching methods in the context of the main goal of higher education: to provide students with an educational system that would allow them to master the fundamentals of their future in the process of educational activities. professional activities. It is important to emphasize that criticism and protest against the traditional teaching paradigm, as one of the theoretical concepts of training, does not seem to be very justified and fair. Analysis of the historical development of the concept of learning and the psychological structure of the learning process, carried out by I.I. Ilyasov [6], convincingly demonstrates that the traditional teaching paradigm implicitly contains the postulate of student activity and, in principle, makes it possible to implement it in teaching practice using appropriate techniques. One of the postulates of this model is the understanding that solving problems by students is the most important and necessary component of learning, and the degree of success in solving a problem acts as a criterion for the level of mastery of educational material and the ability to apply it. Therefore, criticism of this teaching model can, in the opinion of the author of this message, be considered rather as a protest against the very practice of its implementation on a mass scale.E.P. Krinchik believes that the most significant claims of the “opposition” to the traditional model of education boil down to the following: 1. Professional information (theoretical, empirical and methodological) is transmitted in finished form by its only carrier - the teacher. The student is assigned the role of a passive recipient of this information, which he must perceive, assimilate (remember) and reproduce in the exam. The traditional model of education is called the “memory school” [4] Prevalence.