CHARACTERISTIC OF DIFFERENT COMPONENTS DEVELOPMENT OF PSYCHOLOGICAL READINESS TO PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES FOR STUDENTS WITH SOMATIC DISORDERS

The paper presents the main results of empirical studies aimed at determining characteristics of psychological readiness to professional activities for students with somatic defects. The study involves 238 students, 96 of them have different physical disabilities. 10 questionnaires and techniques were applied. Results are presented according to an eight-component structure of psychological readiness to professional activities proposed by the authors. The study results are presented in comparison with healthy students’ results as well as in terms of certain indexes dynamics during university learning for various components of psychological readiness. The obtained results can become a basis for psychological activities aimed at such readiness formation.


Introduction
Presently professional development of persons with somatic disabilities is an actual problem for different fi elds of psychology.Given the urgent needs of social practice, psychological phenomena of this category of people are increasingly drawing attention of scientists and psychologists.
The main social and psychological issues that arise for individuals with somatic disabilities include: their alienation from the world, absence of demand at labor market, social isolation.As a result, there are signifi cant diffi culties in their active social life forming, low "confi dence in the world", tendency to perceive social environment as hostile, a lowered level of aspiration and lowered self-estimation (Камінська, 2010; Лебедева, 2009; Томчук, Комар, & Скрипник, 2005).Modern scholars emphasize that providing high school training for students with somatic disorders is an extremely important interdisciplinary problem which solution requires combined efforts of psychologists, health workers, sociologists, social workers, legislators, public administrators, etc. (Таланчук, Кольченко, & Нікуліна, 2004; Тищенко, 2010; Томаржевська, 2007; Хорошайло, 2008).
In particular, current scientifi c challenge is to develop a scientifi c basis for forming such students' psychological readiness for future careers.We understand psychological readiness to professional activities of students with somatic disabilities as a multi-component dynamic system, which consists of eight interrelated components (motivational, cognitive, operational, personal, evaluating, aim setting, creative, good mood mobilizing) and psychologically enables such students to perform their professional activities in the future at a certain level of effi ciency (Сердюк & Петрученко, 2011).
In this paper, we present main results of our empirical research aimed at determining the characteristics of psychological readiness to professional activities for students with somatic disorders.

Method
The study involved 238 full-time students of different specialities at the University "Ukraine" (Kyiv): social work, physical rehabilitation, psychology, management and law.Among them, 96 students had various physical disabilities.Of the entire sample, 85 tested persons were enrolled at the fi rst academic year (35 people with somatic disorders and 50 healthy ones), 78 were at their third year (31 people with somatic disorders and 47 healthy ones), 75 were at their fi fth year (30 people with somatic disorders and 45 healthy ones).

Results and Discussion
Findings were made during our empirical research that allowed us, according to our developed structure of psychological readiness to profession activities for students with somatic disabilities, to defi ne peculiarities (compared to healthy students) and quantitative diagnostic characteristics of such readiness.
The results concerning the motivational component of the readiness do not allow us to state clearly, in comparison with other researchers (Тищенко, 2010; Томчук, Комар, & Скрипник, 2005; Чайковський, 2006) signifi cant lowering of a motivation level for students with somatic disabilities.For example, an "interest for learning" index is equal for both studied samples of students.Perhaps, this can be explained by the fact that in our study, in contrast to the above mentioned works, there were students with somatic disabilities from Kyiv, who, living in the capital, may have more opportunities for professional self-fulfi lment than students studying at regional universities.
Index dynamics is also almost the same for both samples and close to typical dynamics described in the literature (Кокун, 2012), so for the I, III and V educational years the highest level of interest for learning is shown by the fi rst-year students and the lowest one by the thirdyear students.Similarly, we also observed a signifi cantly higher level (p ≤ 0,01-0,001) among female students in comparison with male students.Motivation to succeed, as a motivational index that has more general nature and does not directly describe learning motivation, was indeed signifi cantly higher among healthy students (p ≤ 0,001) in our study as well as in Skrypnyk's (Скрипник, 2006) work.Its average value for students with somatic disabilities equals 14,1 (σ = 4,7) and 16,2 for healthy people (σ = 3,5).There are no signifi cant changes of this index for students of different educational years.This, in our opinion, shows that this indicator describes motivational feature as a relatively stable personal trait that is not subject to signifi cant changes during university training.
The level of all four professional motivation components (motives of own labour, of social value of work, of self-esteem at work and of professional skills) differs signifi cantly (p ≤ 0,01-0,001) between healthy students and students with somatic disorders.Both samples have the most expressed index of "social signifi cance of labour".But it is signifi cantly higher among healthy students (Table 1).Also, in comparison with students with physical disabilities, healthy students have substantially higher motives of "social signifi cance of work" and "self-esteem at work".The former, compared with healthy students, have more expressed motives of "own labour" and "professional skills".Thus, social and personal motivation dominates for healthy students, but content-professional motivation is more important for students with somatic disorders.However, no signifi cant differences are observed at the level of professional motivation component expression for students of different years of study.
As for the cognitive component of psychological readiness for professional work, it was found out that healthy students' self-estimation of own knowledge about profession conditions and peculiarities is nearly the same as self-estimation of students with somatic disorders, but the self-estimation of professional knowledge and skills by students with somatic disabilities is currently signifi cantly "more modest" in comparison with healthy ones (p ≤ 0,01).This suggests that students with somatic disabilities consider themselves much less professionally prepared for future careers.
Table 2 shows the results obtained through an additional question, which in the questionnaire version intended for students with somatic disabilities described the cognitive component of their psychological readiness to professional activities.These results indicate that universities must pay more attention to inform students with somatic disorders on possibilities to compensate for individual functional limitations during their profession performance as well as to form practical skills for such compensation.
Evolution of the students' cognitive component of psychological readiness to professional activities is positive.The self-estimation level of own knowledge about professional conditions and peculiarities and of professional knowledge and skills among both healthy students and students with physical disabilities is growing during training years, signifi cantly rising from

CHARACTERISTIC OF DIFFERENT COMPONENTS DEVELOPMENT OF PSYCHOLOGICAL READINESS TO PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES FOR STUDENTS WITH SOMATIC DISORDERS
L. Serdiuk, N. Petruchenko the I to the V years of study (p ≤ 0,01).The self-estimation of own knowledge about ways of individual functional limitations compensation during professional activity performance by students with somatic disabilities also tends to increase.However, it is not so pronounced and it statistically is only at the level of trend (p ≤ 0,1).Nearly everything 5% Table 3 shows the results for the following operational component indicators: a level of communication and organizational skills for both studied samples.Our results for the scale of communicative abilities slightly differ from the results obtained in the study of Tomarzhevska (Томаржевська, 2007).We also confi rmed a signifi cantly lower level of communication skills for students with somatic disabilities (p ≤ 0,001).Similar results were obtained by Tishchenko (Тищенко, 2010).As it was found out, such correspondence is observed for the organizational skills level among healthy students and students with somatic disabilities -the latter have this level signifi cantly lower, on average (p ≤ 0,001).
It should also be noted that clear development of such important components of psychological readiness to professional activities as communication and organizational skills was not observed among tested students during learning process from the I to the V year (p ≥ 0,1), which corresponds with the study of Kokun (Кокун, 2012).We agree that it is due to absence of purposeful development of these qualities during professional training and it is a big disadvantage.
Let us analyse the results obtained according to the self-effi cacy scale by Schwarzer and Yerusalem (Шварцер,1996) that characterizes such an integral indicator of the operational component of psychological readiness to future specialist's profession as self-effi cacy (in this case -academic self-effi cacy).Index comparison for both studied samples is presented in Table 4.The results indicate that the level of academic self-effi cacy among students with physical disabilities is also much lower than the level among healthy students (p ≤ 0,001).In our view, it is quite logically consistent with previous results, as, for example, communication skills, which are lower on average for students with somatic disabilities, substantially determine person's self-effi cacy level in various fi elds.It should be noted that progressive improving of academic self-effi cacy from the I to the V educational years (p ≤ 0,05 at comparing the I and the V years) were observed in both study samples.
As in the case of the self-estimation of their professional knowledge and skills, students with somatic disabilities are much inferior to healthy students in self-estimation of readiness for independent professional work (p ≤ 0,001).This confi rms once again our above mentioned conclusion that students with somatic disabilities are signifi cantly less likely to consider themselves professionally prepared for future careers.
Additional question to students with somatic disabilities revealed that the level of practical skills development for individual functional limitations compensation during professional activity performance is still below the level of knowledge about the ways of such compensation.
Dynamics of two above indicators are positive in both studied samples, it is evidenced by their gradual increase during training (p ≤ 0,05 at comparing the I and the V years).
It was determined that the relationship of students with somatic disabilities with classmates and teachers are somewhat more polar than relationship of healthy students.As for readiness formation, in our view, attention should be paid to students who evaluate their relationships with classmates and teachers as "mediocre" and worse.It was found out that these students constitute more than a third of all tested persons.
We begin analysis of the personal component of psychological readiness with comparison of results describing surveyed students' self-attitude (Table 5).
The results from the above table show that the majority of indicators characterizing selfattitude differ signifi cantly for healthy students and students with somatic disabilities (from p ≤ 0,05 to p ≤ 0,001).
Students with somatic disabilities, on average, have a signifi cantly lower level of "integral self-attitude", which describes the cumulative level of this personal phenomenon.This indicates a much pronounced tendency among these students in comparison with healthy ones to form internal undifferentiated feeling "against" rather than "for" themselves.They have signifi cantly lower values for such important indicators of positive self-attitude as "selfrespect", "self-sympathy" and "attitude expected from others".It indicates that students with somatic disabilities have lower levels of such important personal components of psychological readiness for professional work as faith in their own strength and skills, ability to be a "master" of own life, positive self-estimation, self-approval, self-consistency, self-understanding, expectation of positive attitude to themselves from others.

CHARACTERISTIC OF DIFFERENT COMPONENTS DEVELOPMENT OF PSYCHOLOGICAL READINESS TO PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES FOR STUDENTS WITH SOMATIC DISORDERS
L. Serdiuk, N. Petruchenko As for the major scales, both studied samples did not differ signifi cantly, only by the scale IV -self-interest.
The results of seven "internal" scales developed to reveal deepness of drive to certain internal actions toward the testee's "I" led us to the conclusion that students with somatic disabilities have signifi cantly lower indexes on such scales as "self-confi dence", "attitude of others", "self-acceptance", "self-interest".
Comparison of results characterizing signifi cant life orientations between samples of healthy students and of students with somatic disorders is presented in Table 6.These data indicate presence of suffi ciently expressed specifi c life orientations of students with physical disabilities compared to healthy ones.Thus, the fi rst group of students has signifi cantly lower indexes (from p 0,01 to p  0,001) on three subscales of the Signifi cant life orientations test: "process of life or interest and emotional richness of life", "locus of control-I (I am a master of my life)" and "locus of control -life, or life handling" (and a lower general indicator as a result).At the same time, group mean indexes of the surveyed samples are virtually identical for two subscales ("purposes in life" and "life results").
According to subscale interpretation, it indicates that students with somatic disabilities tend to perceive life process as interesting, emotionally rich and full of meaning in a lesser degree in comparison with healthy people, they are dissatisfi ed presently by their lives.Also they have less confi dence in their ability to control events of their own life and rather believe that a human life is beyond conscious control and freedom of choice is illusory and it is pointless to guess at the future.
At the same time, students with somatic disabilities are virtually indistinguishable from healthy people as for presence of life goals in the future, that provide awareness, focus and temporal perspective for life.The same is for positive estimation of their past, sense of its productivity and meaningfulness.
Also quite typical results were obtained as for specifi cs of self-actualization of students with physical disabilities (Table 7).Students with somatic disabilities have on average signifi cantly lower indexes than healthy students (p  0,05) for both basic scales of the test -"time competence" and "support".Although we can see from the table above that the absolute values of this difference is not gross and is only present as a trend.In particular, it shows that students with physical disabilities are less able to live in the present time (to experience a current life moment in its wholeness, not just as a fatal consequence of past or preparing for future "real life"), to feel the continuity of past, present and future (to see life as whole) than healthy students.These students are, on average, less independent in their actions, more subject to external infl uences.
Analysis of additional scales is more interesting.Thus, students with somatic disabilities have signifi cantly lower indexes (p  0, 05-0, 01) on both scales that form a "value block" -"system of values" and "fl exibility of behaviour".It means that they share in a lesser degree the values

CHARACTERISTIC OF DIFFERENT COMPONENTS DEVELOPMENT OF PSYCHOLOGICAL READINESS TO PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES FOR STUDENTS WITH SOMATIC DISORDERS
L. Serdiuk, N. Petruchenko that are inherent to a self-actualizing person and exercise lesser fl exibility in implementation of their values at behaviour and interaction with others, they have lesser ability to respond quickly and adequately at changing situation.Similarly, these students have signifi cantly lower indexes for the "senses block" scales ("Sensitivity to oneself" and "Spontaneity") and for selfperception scales ("Self-esteem" and "Self-acceptance").This suggests that these students are less able, to some extent, to be aware of their needs and feelings, feel and refl ect on them, are less able to behave naturally and relaxed, show their emotions to others.It also shows their lesser ability to appreciate their merits and advantages, accept themselves as they are.However, signifi cant differences between the studied samples for three blocks and corresponding six scales: 1) "concept of man" ("views of human nature" and "synergy" scales), 2) "interpersonal sensitivity" ("acceptance of aggression" and "rapport capability" scales), 3) "attitude to knowledge" ("cognitive needs" and "creativity" scales) were not revealed.
It shows (on the base of the fi rst block above) that students with somatic disabilities have roughly the same views on human nature, on the dichotomies of masculinity-femininity, rationality-emotionality as healthy students.They have the same capacity for holistic perception of the world and people and for understanding of unity of opposites.The second block shows that both studied samples have the same ability to accept their irritation, anger and aggression, to subject-subject communication, to establish rapidly deep and close emotionally rich human contacts.The third one shows that both samples have the same desire to acquire knowledge about the world (we will return to the latter scale -"creativity" -in more detail during analysis of a creative component of psychological readiness).
As for indexes of Cattle's 16-factor personality questionnaire 16-PF, students with somatic disorders have almost the same levels as healthy students for the next factors: "intelligence", "restraint", "sensitivity" and "self-control".This indicates that both investigated samples have no differences in quick understanding, ability to analyse situations, ability to make meaningful conclusions, intelligence, general cultural development, expressivity, sensitivity, cautiousness, responsibility, discipline, consistency in social demands compliance, controlling their emotions and caring for their reputation.
At the same time, healthy students have signifi cantly higher levels (p  0,05-0,001) for "emotional stability", "courage" factors and signifi cantly lower fi gures for the "assuranceanxiety" factor (p  0,001).This suggests that students with somatic disabilities, compared with healthy ones, have the next distinctions: greater intolerance, impatience, irritability, susceptibility, tendency to anxiety, to avoiding complex issues resolving; lesser courage, vigour, activity, willingness to take risks and cooperate with strangers in unfamiliar circumstances, lesser ability to make independent, creative decisions; they are less cheerful, light-hearted, self-confi dent, cool-headed, calm.
It was revealed according to the Kellermann-Plutchik questionnaire (Практическая психодиагностика, 2002) that the highest intensity of psychological defences among students is observed for such mechanisms as "denial of reality", "compensation" and "reaction formation."Thus, the studied samples have signifi cantly different levels for three mechanisms -"denial of reality", "rationalization" and "reaction formation" (p  0,05-0,001).Students with physical disabilities have higher levels for all three mechanisms.
In our opinion, it seems quite logical.After all, for a person who has physical disability, it is natural to maintain personal integrity, self-esteem, social adaptation and "deny reality" to a certain extent -with background reluctance to recognize certain facts of reality that can, if they admit, be too painful -and sink into emotionally pleasant dreams and fantasies.On the other hand such person tries to interpret certain situations rationally and depreciate needs they cannot fulfi l.
The evaluation component of psychological readiness enabled us to see a very characteristic tendency: students with somatic disorders have signifi cantly lower levels of selfassessment of their skill compliance with future profession requirements than healthy students (p  0,001), which is understandable due to the presence of disorders, but at the same time, their desire to have a profession is higher than desire of healthy students (p  0,05).
Doing result assessment we must pay attention to some students who have inadequate psychological readiness to professional activities.These are students that estimate their skills in comparison with future profession requirements as "inadequate" and their desire to have a chosen profession is "not very much" or "mediocre".
Also, there is an alarming fact that students' desire to have a chosen profession decreases gradually from the I to the III academic year and then to the V year (at a confi dence level p  0,001).
The component of aim setting is defi ned by the index of desire to work within a chosen future profession.These indexes do not signifi cantly differ for healthy students and for those with somatic disorders.But from the point of view of students' psychological readiness for professional activity (in this case, as clearly insuffi cient), we must pay attention to one-third of students who either are not going to work in a chosen profession or have not made up their minds yet.This index decreases from the I to the III year of study (p  0,01) and then remains the same for the V year.
We used the "developed imagination" factor from the Cattel's 16-factor personality questionnaire 16-PF and the "creativity" scale of the Self-actualization test of E. Shostrom -SAT as indicators of the creative component of psychological readiness.Both of the above indexes do not differ for the studied samples of students.Average quantitative value for the "developed imagination" factor of healthy students is 5,7 (σ = 1,5), and 5,9 (σ = 1,6) for students with somatic disabilities.Indexes of the "creativity" scale for the fi rst sample have a mean value of 6,4 (σ = 2,6), and 6,1 (σ = 2,0) for the second one.So creative orientation of students with somatic disabilities is not inferior that creative orientation of healthy ones, as it follows from the latter technique interpretation.
As for the good mood mobilizing component, students with somatic disabilities have such indexes as ability to work during day and week signifi cantly less stable (p  0,001).This indicates necessity to pay particular attention to these indexes of the good mood mobilizing component of psychological readiness for professional work at implementation of measures aimed at its formation.
These results show that students' with somatic disabilities views about their future life in general and about professional activities are not too optimistic.Only about 20% of these students are optimists.Almost half of the surveyed students feel uncertain in their perception of future.And about a third of students feel pessimistic.It also highlights the need to pay particular attention to these indicators of the good mood mobilizing component of psychological readiness of students with physical disabilities.It should be noted that these two indicators of professional and life optimism are linked suffi ciently closely for these students.So for this category of students, professional future seems almost inseparable from the future life in general.cautiousness, responsibility, discipline, social demand performance, emotional control and care about their reputation.Students with disorder in comparison with healthy ones are more intolerant, restless, irritable, susceptible, tend to be anxious and avoid resolving complex issues; they are less courageous, persistent, active, less willing to take risks and cooperate with strangers, they have less ability to make independent, creative decisions; they are less cheerful, confi dent, and cool-hearted.
Students with physical disabilities have signifi cantly greater degree of following three psychological defence mechanisms: "denial of reality", "rationalization" and "reaction formations".
Study of the evaluation component showed a characteristic trend: students with somatic disabilities have lower levels of the "self-esteem" index by Cattel's questionnaire and signifi cantly lower self-estimation of their skills correspondence to future profession requirements than healthy students, which is understandable due to presence of such disorders, but at the same time their desire to have a profession is higher than desire of healthy students.
Healthy students and students with somatic disorders do not signifi cantly differ in intention to work within chosen future profession as the index of aim setting component of psychological readiness for professional work shows.However, it should be noted that a signifi cant number of tested students -a third -either are not going to work in a chosen profession or have not made up their minds yet.
Indexes of readiness creative component (the "developed imagination" factor by Cattel's questionnaire and the "creativity" scale by SAT test) show that a degree of person s' creative orientation of students with somatic disabilities is not inferior to that of healthy students.
As for the good mood mobilization component, performance during day and week of students with somatic disorders is signifi cantly less stable.Attitude of students with somatic disabilities to their future life in general and to professional life is not optimistic: only about 20% of them have an optimistic attitude, almost half of them mark presence of uncertainty in their future, and about a third feels pessimistic.So for this category of students professional future seems practically inseparable from the future life in general.
In addition to studied comparative features of psychological readiness to professional activities, peculiarities of individual index dynamics for various components of psychological readiness should be also taken into account during implementation of measures aimed at readiness formation among students with somatic disorders.
Thus, the highest level of interest in academic training (motivational component) is observed during the fi rst educational year and the lowest -during the third one.
The students' level of self-estimation of own knowledge about profession conditions and peculiarities and of present professional knowledge and skills (cognitive component) increases during training, signifi cantly rising from the I to the V academic years.The level of self-estimation of own knowledge of ways for individual functional limitation compensation during professional activity performance also tends to increase among students with somatic disabilities, but it is not statistically signifi cant.
Academic self-effi cacy from the I to the V academic year improves progressively (operational component).Levels of readiness for independent professional work and practical skills for functional limitation compensation (students with somatic disorders) increase also.
Degree of students' desire to have a chosen profession gradually decreases from the I to the III academic year and then to the V year (evaluative component).
Intention to work within a chosen future profession (aim setting component) decreases from the I to the III years and then remains the same till the V year.

Table 2
Students' with somatic disabilities self-estimation of knowledge about their functional limitations compensation during future professional activities

Table 3
Levels of communication and organizational skills of healthy students and students with somatic disabilities

Table 4
The level of academic self-effi cacy for healthy students and students with somatic disabilities

Table 5
Self-attitude indicators for healthy students and students with somatic disabilities on the base of R.Pantileyev and V. Stolin questionnaire(Пантилеев, 1993)

Table 6
Signifi cant life orientations of healthy students and of students with somatic disorders, technique of D. Krambo and L. Maholik adapted by D. A. Leontiev(Леонтьев, 1992)

Table 7
(Shostrom, 1964)on indicators of healthy students and students with somatic disabilities by Self-actualization test of E. Shostrom -SAT(Shostrom, 1964)