Образование как социокультурный феномен

Тип работы:
Народное образование. Педагогика

Узнать стоимость

Детальная информация о работе

Выдержка из работы

UDC 37
SHTURBA Victor A., Kuban State University, Krasnodar, Russia
akademus07@rambler. ru
In the article author analyze the socio-cultural phenomenon of education through the prism of its values and target components. Understanding of the role and place of education in society is not possible out of the human essence context. In living nature man appears as a phenomenon — this thesis is recognized the absolute majority of scientific and philosophical theories, concepts and doctrines, including non-humanistic oriented. It is known that man is a social being — society is environment for its full life. As Aristotle said, only the gods and the animals can live outside society. However, human nature does not imply a simple social existence in the form of an intensive exchange of information with similar entities and, based on this, building complex collective actions. The man has a mind that is capable of abstract thought, speech, language, complex psyche, important component of which is imagination. These features formed the basis of theoretical and methodological basis of the analysis of education as a phenomenon. The author indicated value and target measurement of socio-cultural phenomenon of education, which led to the conclusion about the need to rely on a properly organized philosophical and pedagogical knowledge, the importance of implementation in the educational process of program-target approach and the relevance of the audit of modern educational models for non-borrowed trainings, upbringing and socialization.
Keywords: education, phenomenology, socio-cultural approach, system, valuable components of education, target components of education, educational policy
DOI: 10. 17 748/2075−9908−2016−8-2/1−124−126
ШТУРБА Виктор Александрович, Кубанский государственный университет, г. Краснодар, Россия
akademus07@. ram Ь^Г. Щ
В статье анализируется сложный социокультурный феномен образования сквозь призму его ценностных и целевых компонентов. Осмысление роли и места образования в обществе невозможно вне контекста человеческой сущности. Ведь именно в живой природе человек предстает в качестве феномена — этот тезис признается абсолютным большинством научно-философских теорий, концепций и учений, в том числе и отнюдь не гуманистически ориентированных. Известно, что человек является социальным существом — средой для его полноценной жизнедеятельности служит именно социум. Как говорил Аристотель, только боги и звери могут жить вне общества. Однако человеческая природа подразумевает не простое социальное существование в виде интенсивного обмена информацией с себе подобными существами и построение на основе этого сложных коллегиальных действий. Человек обладает разумом, способным к абстрактному мышлению, речью, языком, сложной психикой, важной составляющей которой является воображение. Именно эти особенности легли в основу теоретико-методологического основания анализа образования как феномена. Автором статьи обозначено ценностно-целевое измерение социокультурного феномена образования, что позволило прийти к выводам о необходимости опоры на соответствующим образом организованные философско-педагогические знания, важности внедрения в образовательный процесс программно-целевого подхода и актуальности аудита современных образовательных моделей с целью отказа от заимствованных форматов обучения, воспитания и социализации.
Ключевые слова: образование, феноменология, социокультурный подход, система, ценностные компоненты образования, целевые компоненты образования, образовательная политика
In the matter of the study of education as an important and complex element, factor, and parameter of macro-historical process require special treatment of its theoretical and methodological grounds. One of the most effective options of education'-s analysis is phenomenology, understood by us as strictly scientific philosophy. According to Husserl, the founder of this approach, the philosophy should implement general guidance of cognitive and practical activity of people, helping them to work on solving the mysteries of & quot-peace and life& quot- [1]. Based on the designated research paradigm, we can to perceive factor or element of macro-historical process as phenomenon and to expose to universal and rigorous scientific and philosophical analysis. Accordingly, the fair will be nominated by the author thesis of inorganic nature, the absence of linearity and non-predetermination of education development process.
Education, like a science, is located under the banner of infinity, as the search attempts of start, birth, appearance of education, indicate the prospects of its end, death, disappearance. After all, scientific and philosophical understanding of education is revolutionizing the History, which transformed from the history of evolutionary development of & quot-human of finite resources& quot- in the history of the revolutionary development of & quot-human of infinite possibilities& quot- in the modern world.
The existence of macro-parameters as language and thinking, in many ways, determines the behavior of a particular individual, and their totality: from different social groups to social communities.
In general, human being held not only in the objectively existing physical world, but also in the created artificially constructed the noosphere1 — the world created by the conscious activity of the hu-
lrThe concept of the noosphere independently entered French anthropologist Pierre Teilhard de Chardin and Russian scientist and philosopher V.I. Vernadsky. In fact it was a conscious overcoming
ISSN 2075−9908 Историческая и социально-образовательная мысль. Том 8 № 2/1, 2016 Historical and Social Educational Ideas Tom 8 #2/1, 2016_
man species. Generalizing the concept, we can say that man lives in an artificial world of their culture, while being aware of the individual himself. In reality, the position of an individual is almost unattainable- it is a myth, moral utopia: man arises and exists only in interaction with other people and under their influence and impact. Accordingly, the existing & quot-biological software& quot- for a man is not enough to be a member of society. It should be an existing & quot-bio-program"- to add stored by signs, symbols, and culture images program. This updated & quot-bio-cultural software& quot- is essentially collective work. Accordingly, the & quot-cultural software& quot- allows realizing the myth and/or utopia about an individual. This process is continuously movement and development, and the substance which bears this collective work, in the world of scientific and philosophical tradition is called a spirit or a soul.
It is a time to note that the natural process, signed formation of the human spirit, traditionally called the education1, is a certain order, which consists of several phases: training, education, and socialization. There is also another version of the substantive interpretation of the category of education, which includes four components:
— Education as a value-
— Education as a system-
— Education as a process-
— Education as a result.
The existence of these elements implies their unity in multi-syllabic dynamic phenomenon: the attempt of analytical decomposition of the studying object does not negate the other parallel existing characteristics. For fixing the even more clear understanding of the peculiarities of the author'-s view of the problems, we note that in this scientific paper we, using historiosophical methodology, consider the existing parallel macrosystemic of education characteristic as an integral social phenomenon and its system characteristics as a combination of interrelated subsystems of various general and professional education units — preschool, school, secondary vocational, higher, postgraduate, etc.
Valuable characteristics of education are a set of three modules: education as value of state, education as value of public, and education as value of person.
The importance of education as value of state is obvious: every state is perceived through the prism of moral, intellectual, economic, social, and cultural dimensions. Accordingly, governments must be maximally interested in the development of education in order to improve not only their own real position in the ranking of the leading countries of the world, but also the effectiveness of its own public diplomacy, one of the tools that are attractive national educational policy model. Accordingly, this postulate of the state value of education needs a certain mechanism of implementation. This goal is achievable rationale multiplicity of effective technologies of theoretical and practical activities, aimed at ensuring the prestige of education in society, awareness of its strategic importance, supported by both material and financial investments, as well as moral and ethical obligation on the part of the authorities. For this purpose is necessary to open and to analyze the value priorities of education for the state, to prove these priorities publicly and to persuade strategic political and administrative decisions makers in the vital importance of educational services for the progressive development of the country, society and citizens.
The importance of education as value of public rather ambiguous: there are societies which, at first sight, can not be identified as having high levels of education, but rather look closely, we will find in those & quot-alter-societies"- their own educational systems, which will differ from habitual to us & quot-normal"- systems.
However, it should be noted that this provision does not mean that education as value of public — I better or worse than education as value of public — II. Strictly speaking, this is not a question of vertical: we are dealing here with the horizontal variety of models and formats. Therefore, it is fair to recognize that the education as value of public — I is just different from the education as value of public -II: evaluative of vertical type in this matter is extremely inappropriate. After all, due to the peculiarities of each society, we need to recognize the characteristics of each individual model of education, respectively, and its value will also be different. As a society we have not ranked today in the vertical, and the educational model can not be compared to the vertical. Bologna system can not be recognized automatically better than, for example, the Soviet educational system. After all, there is a particular public inquiry, which institutional environment responds. Of course, the West is better devel-
dominant in Western thought and outlook of the mechanistic picture of the world, in which people displayed outside world, and treats him as a researcher and owner. Noosphere is a necessary part of the world picture, and man can not treat to nature as a subject to an object.
1 This process has a lot of definitions- there is still no consensus on the interpretation of this phenomenon. Given into account the characteristics of human nature, we consider, the term & quot-education"- in this case is the most appropriate.
oped elitist education, but better of Soviet mass educational experiment did not come up with anything. Considering these statements, we conclude that the best educational practices will not such good automatically in a different socio-cultural environment.
In examining collegiate models predetermining the state and the social value of education, we lose sight of the key parameters such as individual motivation, stimulated attitude, and desired level of quality of life. Unfortunately, we must recognize that in contemporary Russia collegiate formats continue to prevail over personality oriented education model, that can be interpreted as an inertial trend, given existing socialist orientation in the days of the Soviet regime, and continues to this day: the imperial core harder carries psychological trauma and side of the effects of the Soviet Empire collapse, rather than imperial periphery.
The next part of the researched subject is the interpretation of education as system, which is not just a multitude of some facilities, but interrelated totality. It is in this case, the system acquires the integrative, synergistic, and new features and characteristics do not displayed directly from the qualities of the components, included in the system, and is not a simple sum of the mechanistic qualities of the constituting systems'- parts [2, p. 7].
System properties of education give the existence of common attributes characterizing a system as a whole, as well as forming its components, whatever their level of and profile: flexibility, dynamism, variability, adaptability, stability, predictability, continuity, integrity [3, p. 54]. These characteristics are common to almost anyone educational system: the vertical hierarchy of schools (kindergarten — school — university — postgraduate education institution — doctorate institution), horizontal (profile) variety and the administrative-territorial hierarchy levels of government (federal, regional, municipal).
The understanding of education as process does not have value as independent research: it can be a key element for the understanding of more strategic and complex phenomena. Education as result is desired characteristic of the majority of individuals, which continue to be the goal in itself, but did not become a full-fledged tool for the realization of personal change program.
Thus, given into account the results of our scientific and philosophical analysis of values and target components, the practice of education as a socio-cultural phenomenon should be based on properly organized philosophical and pedagogical knowledge- it should be implemented in the framework of program-oriented approach with defined goals, objectives, methods, tools, resources, and criteria for performance assessment- it should not be based exclusively on borrowed teaching, education and socialization formats.
1. Husserl E. Philosophy as Rigorous Science. [Filosofiya kak strogaya nauka]. Novocherkassk, 1994. (in Russ.).
2. Blauberg I.V., Yudin E.G. Formation and Essence of System Approach. [Stanovlenie i sushchnost'- sistemnogo pod-khoda]. Moscow, 1973. (in Russ.).
3. Gershunsky B.S. Philosophy of Education for the XXI Century. [Filosofiya obrazovaniya dlya XXI veka]. Moscow, 1997. (in Russ.).
Information about the author
Shturba Victor A., Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor, Department of Pedagogy and Psychology, Faculty of Pedagogy, Psychology and Communication Studies, Kuban State University, Krasnodar, Russia, akademus07@rambler. ru
Received: 19th Feb. 2016
For article citation: Shturba V.A. Education as a
socio-cultural phenomenon. Krasnodar. Is-
toricheskaya i sotsial'-no-obrazovatel'-naya mysl'-=
Historical and Social Educational Ideas. 2016.
Tom 8. № 2. Vol. 1. Pp. 124−126.
doi: 10. 17 748/2075−9908−2016−8-2/1−124−126.
Информация об авторе
Штурба Виктор Александрович, доктор исторических наук, профессор, кафедра педагогики и психологии, факультет педагогики, психологии и коммуникативистики, Кубанский государственный университет, akademus07@rambler. ru
Получена: 19 февраля 2016
Для цитирования статьи: Shturba V.A. Education as a socio-cultural phenomenon. Krasnodar. Istoricheskaya i sotsial'-no-obrazovatel'-naya mysl'-= Historical and Social Educational Ideas. 2016. Tom 8. № 2. Vol. 1. Pp. 124−126. doi: 10. 17 748/2075−9908−2016−8-2/1−124−126. [en]

Заполнить форму текущей работой