Introduction.The article is devoted to the problem of becoming a professional teacher with its most important component, which is empathic training. The study analyzes peculiar features of pedagogical university master students’ empathic training within framework of the modern educational process. The article aims at justifying and revealing the authors’ concept of the effective organization of Master’s Degree students’ empathic training at pedagogical university. The practical significance of the research results can serve as a tool for organizing future specialists’ professional and pedagogical training.

Materials and Methods. The main research methods are theoretical methods: historical and pedagogical analysis, theoretical and methodological analysis, forecasting and long-term planning; empirical methods: analyzing, experiment, observing, questioning, testing, self-evaluation, rating, examining, quali-metric methods, statistical methods of data processing and verifying suggested hypotheses.

Results. The study introduces the competence model that creates specific conditions for organizing Pedagogical University Master students’ empathic training. The authors present characteristics of the main components of the model, interactive technologies, trainings, including the correspondent training modules. The effective techniques for Master students’ empathic training at pedagogical university are revealed and described.

Discussion. The study shows that the project is efficient when pedagogical university Master students’ empathy competence is formed.

Conclusion. The authors conclude that implementing competence model contributes to the process of developing Master students’ empathy competence at pedagogical university, which is of great importance in becoming a professional teacher.

• The study defines basic components of pedagogical empathy.
• The authors introduce competence model that promotes the development of pedagogical university Master students’ empathy competence.
• The research describes the supportive environment for developing Pedagogical University master students’ empathy competence.
• The researchers overview interactive technologies of forming and developing pedagogical university master students’ empathy competence.

1. Beres D., Arloy J. (1988) Fantasy and Identification in Empathy. The psychoanalytic quarterly. Vol. XLII, 1, 305–337.
2. Kohut H. (1984) How Does Analysis Cure? The University Chicago Press, 1984.
3. Rogers C. A. (1980) Way of Being. Boston: Houghton Miffin, 1980.
4. Hippenreyter Yu.B. (1993) Fenomen kongruentnoy empatii [The phenomenon of congruent empathy] Voprosy Psychologi. 4, 61–68. (In Russian).
5. Buie D.H. (1981) Empathy: its Nature and Limitations. Journal American Psychoanalytic Association. 281–307.
6. Саrrol J.B. (1963) A Model of School Learning. Teachers College Record. 723–730.
7. Jacobs T.J. (1992) Isakover’s Ideas of the Analytic Instrument and Contemporary Views of Analytic Listening. Journal of Clinical Psychoanalysis. Vol. 1, 2, 237–241.
8. Isakover O. (1992) Problems of Supervision. Journal of Clinical Psychoanalysis. Vol. 1, 2, 162–170.
9. Igan Dzh. (2000) Bazisnaya empatiya kak kommunikativnyiy navyik [Core empathy as a communicative skill] Practical Psychology and Psychoanalysis. 2, 24–31. (In Russian).
10. Shkitina N.S. (2015) Empatiynaya sostavlyayuschaya professionalnoy kompetentnosti buduschego uchitelya [Empathic component of future teacher’s professional competency] Bulletin of Chelyabinsk State Pedagogical University, 6, 113–118. (In Russian).
11. Yudina T.O. (2016) Empatiya i moral: mesto vstrechi (obzor zarubezhnyih issledovaniy) [Empathy and Moral: meeting point (review of foreign research] Shagi-Steps. Vol. 3, 1, 28–39. (In Russian).
12. Agavelyan R.O. (2013) Empatiya kak faktor psihologicheskoy gotovnosti defektologa k professionalnoy deyatelnosti [Empathy as a factor of defectologist’s psychological readiness for professional activity] Educational Programmes for Master Students at Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University. Novosibirsk: NSPU. 149–153. (In Russian).
13. Kohut H. (2000) Introspektsiya, empatiya i psihoanaliz: issledovanie vzaimootnosheniy mezhdu sposobom nablyudeniya i teoriey. [Introspection, empathy and psychoanalysis: the study of the relationship between the method of observation and theory] Anthology of modern psychoanalysis. Vol.1. Ed. Rossokhin A.V. Moscow. Institute of Psychology. Russian Academy of Sciences. (In Russian).
14. Lukyantseva D.N. (2017) Lichnostnaya suverennost i empatiya v strukture lichnosti pedagoga [Personal sovereignty and empathy in the teacher’s personality structure] Uralskiy nauchnyiy vestnik. Vol. 5, 2, 040–042. (In Russian).
15. Yusupov I.M. (1991) Psihologiya vzaimoponimaniya [Understanding Psychology]. Kazan. Tatar Publising House. (In Russian).
16. Greenberg L.S. and Elliot R. (1999) Varieties of Emphatic Responding. Directions in Psychotherapy. Edited by A.C. Bozarth and L.S. Greenberg. 95–103.
17. Varshavskaya N.E. (2016) Empatiya v strukture pedagogicheskoy napravlennosti. [Empathy in the structure of pedagogical focus] Educational Environment Today: Development Structure. 4(8), 120–122. (In Russian).
18. Kurbanova Z.B. (2017) Empatiya kak professionalno vazhnoe kachestvo lichnosti pedagoga [Empathy as a Teacher’s Professionally Important Quality] NovaInfo.Ru. Vol. 2, 60, 412–415. (In Russian).
19. Palchikov M.A. (2016) Empatiya kak instrument povyisheniya effektivnosti pedagogicheskoy deyatelnosti [Empathy as a tool for increasing pedagogical activity effectiveness] Pedagogy and psychology: topical issues of theory and practice. 4 (9), 271–369. (In Russian).
20. Sannikova A.Yu. (2017) Empatiya – effektivnyiy instrument obscheniya [Empathy as an effective communication tool] Scientific and methodical electronic journal Concept. 6, 246–248. (In Russian).
21. Yakovlev E.V. (2010) Pedagogicheskoe issledovanie: soderzhanie i predstavlenie rezul’tatov [Research in Pedagogics: its content and presentation of its results] Chelyabinsk, RBIU. (In Russian).
22. Suhovershina Yu.V. (2006) Trening kommunikativnoy kompetentsii [Communicative competency training] Moscow: Academic Project. Triksta. (In Russian).
23. Alder G. (2002) Tekhnologiya neyro-lingvisticheskogo programmirovaniya [Technology of neuro-linguistic programmimg] Saint Petersburg, Piter. (In Russian).
24. Gnatyshina E.V. (2017) Methods of the Evaluation of the Potential of the Region Pedagogical Universities on the Basis of Benchmarking. Espacios.  38 (25). Available from: http://www.revistaespacios.com/a17v38n25/17382502.html (Accessed 12 March 2018).