Main strategic guidelines for the development of education. Chapter I general characteristics of psychological and pedagogical research Strategy for the development of the education system of the Russian Federation

Main strategic guidelines for the development of education

Let us dwell on the main strategic directions of State policy, on those documents that every teacher should know and use in their work.

1. Strategy for the development of education in the Russian Federation for the period until 2025 (approved by Order of the Government of the Russian Federation on May 29, 2015)

Raising children is considered a strategic national priority, requiring the consolidation of efforts of various civil society institutions and departments at the federal, regional and municipal levels.

Main directions of development of education

The development of upbringing in the education system involves:

• updating the content of education, introducing forms and methods based on the best pedagogical experience in the field of education and contributing to the improvement and effective implementation of the educational component of federal state educational standards;
• full use in educational programs of the educational potential of academic disciplines, including humanitarian, natural science, socio-economic profiles;
• assistance in the development and implementation of educational programs for students in organizations engaged in educational activities, which are aimed at increasing children’s respect for each other, for family and parents, teachers, older generations, as well as preparing individuals for family and social life, and work;
• development of variability in educational systems and technologies aimed at creating an individual trajectory for the development of a child’s personality, taking into account his needs, interests and abilities;
• the use of reading, including family reading, to understand the world and form a personality;
• improving conditions for identifying and supporting gifted children;
• development of forms of inclusion of children in intellectual-cognitive, creative, labor, socially useful, artistic-aesthetic, physical education-sports, gaming activities, including through the use of the potential of the system additional education children and other organizations in the field of physical education and sports, culture;
• creating conditions for improving children's level of proficiency in the Russian language, languages ​​of the peoples of Russia, foreign languages, and communication skills;
• acquaintance with the best examples of world and domestic culture.

1. Decree of the President of the Russian Federation “On the Decade of Childhood until 2027” dated May 29, 2017 and Order of the Government of the Russian Federation dated July 6, 2018 N 1375-r “On approval of the plan of main events until 2020, carried out within the framework of the Decade of Childhood”

The plan includes the following areas:

1. Improving the well-being of families with children
2. Modern childhood infrastructure
3. Keeping children safe
4. Healthy child
5. Comprehensive education for children
6. Children's cultural development
7. Development of physical education and sports for children
8. Safe children's holiday
9. Affordable children's tourism
10. Safe information space for children
11. The child and his right to a family
12. Social protection of disabled children and children with disabilities health and their integration into modern society
13. Ensuring and protecting the rights and interests of children

As part of the interdepartmental conference on August 28, a discussion and design of the municipal plan took place.

1. Decree of the President of the Russian Federation “On national goals and strategic objectives of the development of the Russian Federation for the period until 2024” dated May 7, 2018

The decree was signed “in order to implement breakthrough scientific, technological and socio-economic development of the Russian Federation, as well as conditions and opportunities for self-realization and revealing the talent of every person.”

By 2024, it is necessary to ensure in the education system:

a) achieving the following goals and targets:

ensuring the global competitiveness of Russian education, entering Russian Federation among the 10 leading countries in the world in terms of the quality of general education;

education of a harmoniously developed and socially responsible personality based on the spiritual and moral values ​​of the peoples of the Russian Federation, historical and national-cultural traditions;

b) solving the following problems:

introduction at the levels of basic general and secondary general education of new methods of teaching and upbringing, educational technologies that ensure that students master basic skills and abilities, increase their motivation for learning and involvement in the educational process, as well as updating the content and improving teaching methods in the subject area “Technology” ;

the formation of an effective system for identifying, supporting and developing abilities and talents in children and youth, based on the principles of justice, universality and aimed at self-determination and professional guidance of all students;

creating conditions for the early development of children under three years of age, implementing a program of psychological, pedagogical, methodological and advisory assistance to parents of children receiving preschool education in the family;

creation of a modern and safe digital educational environment that ensures high quality and accessibility of education of all types and levels;

introduction of a national system for professional development of teaching staff, covering at least 50 percent of teachers in general education organizations;

modernization vocational education, including through the introduction of adaptive, practice-oriented and flexible educational programs;

the formation of a system of continuous updating by working citizens of their professional knowledge and their acquisition of new professional skills, including the acquisition of competencies in the field of the digital economy by everyone;

the formation of a system of professional competitions in order to provide citizens with opportunities for professional and career growth;

creating conditions for the development of mentoring, support for public initiatives and projects, including in the field of volunteering.

1. The national project "Education" includesNine directions

The first and most important direction is the federal project “Modern School”, which includes updating the material and technical base, building new schools, completely eliminating the third shift, creating a network of 25 pilot schools of a new type in rural areas, introducing new teaching methods, and updating educational programs.

The subject “Technology” will be seriously updated: lessons on it will also be held in children's technology parks. The goal has been set - Russia should become one of the 10 leading countries in the world in terms of the quality of general education.

The second federal project is “The Success of Every Child.” This is, first of all, additional education, career guidance and support for talented children. It is planned that Quantorium children's technology parks will appear in every region. In addition, talent identification and support centers will be created in each constituent entity of the Russian Federation by 2024. They will take into account the experience of the educational foundation “Talent and Success” - Sochi “Sirius”.

“Since September of this year, a large career guidance project “Ticket to the Future” has been launched, designed for schoolchildren in grades 6-11. Support for early career guidance.

The third project is “Modern Parents”. A single federal portal will be created for moms and dads, where they can get advice, contact teachers, and receive psychological help. By 2024, centers for emergency psychological and pedagogical assistance to parents will begin operating in all regions.

The fourth is “Digital educational environment”. Its first part is technical: schools need high-speed Internet, electronic journals, diaries, accounting, access and food systems using electronic cards. The second part is the Russian electronic school, which will become a teacher’s assistant: virtual libraries, museums, online courses, 3D laboratories.

The fifth is the Federal project “Teacher of the Future”. At least half of teachers must undergo retraining. The national system of teacher growth also includes a new system of career growth. That is, not vertical: teacher-director-head teacher, but horizontal. Nowadays, new positions of teaching staff are being discussed in the educational environment, reflecting their professional successes, for example, master teacher, teacher-mentor.

The sixth, the federal project “Young Professionals,” is aimed at modernizing vocational education. As part of it, the world championship in professional skills according to Worldskills standards will be held in 2019 in Kazan.

The seventh project, “New Opportunities for Everyone,” will allow absolutely everyone to continuously learn, even people who are already working. For this purpose, a unified navigator platform is being created for available courses and programs, including online courses.

The eighth project is “Social Activity”. A network of volunteer support centers will be formed, and the best volunteer projects will be able to participate annually in a competition for grants.

The ninth is “Increasing the competitiveness of Russian higher education.”

Systemic innovations remain in the implementation of the Federal State Educational Standard, subject concepts, professional standards and the national system of teacher growth.

Introduction

Strategies aimed at changing the quantitative parameters of educational content

Strategies based on qualitative changes in the content of education

Modern models of enriching educational content

1 Example of a foreign model

2 System D.B. Elkonina - V.V. Davydova

3 L.V. system Zankova

4 Program “School 2100”

Conclusion

List of used literature

Introduction

Economic and social upheavals caused by perestroika and the collapse of the USSR, several years of crisis decline in all spheres of life, and as a result, the current state of school education in the Russian Federation is alarming. Even if we leave aside for now the disastrous material and financial situation of the school and teachers, problems associated with child neglect, drug addiction and children’s health are generally problems that require serious financial injections from the state into the education system and significant structural changes in the financial system. economic model of the Russian school. Let me list some of the most alarming points.

Firstly, the above reasons have led to the fact that the school and the education system as a whole have lost the stability without which education cannot exist and develop at all. The education system is constantly in a fever. Ministers are constantly changing, and with each new minister the policy of the Ministry is adjusted. education.

Secondly, education has become an arena for political and commercial “showdowns,” and this should not be allowed under any circumstances. There are not and cannot be such political or commercial benefits that could justify playing with the destinies of children.

Thirdly, in Russia even those few forms of organization and consolidation of the pedagogical community that existed previously have been lost. Education issues have practically disappeared from television programs. Apart from the “Teacher's Newspaper”, the newspaper “First of September” and several professional associations that have no real influence, there is nothing to name. As for associations of parents, which play a very important role in the development of education in many European countries, in our country they did not exist and do not exist.

Fourthly, although education was declared a priority value for Russia already in the famous Decree No. 21 of the President of the Russian Federation (and this wording was included in the Law of the Russian Federation “On Education”), in reality the state, executive and legislative authorities are not seriously concerned with the fate of education, nor children's and youth policy. Constantly talking about the future destinies of the country and society, the state forgets that the future of the country is its children. If we do not now take care of their health, education, culture, and their upbringing in the spirit of activity, humanity, and involvement in national and global values, then in 15-20 years we will face degradation of agriculture, science, culture, and even education itself.

But the state of Russian education is not as tragic as it seems. Following a period of decline there is always a period of, albeit slow, rise, which we can observe now. Our education includes sociocultural programs for children at risk, original schools, a personality-oriented concept of education, variability in programs and textbooks, and official recognition innovative psychological and didactic systems.

Training is conducted using progressive systems: D.B. Elkonina - V.V. Davydov, system L.V. Zankova. The School 2100 program is being actively introduced into school practice.

All three of these models are created within the framework of the above approach. The systems may help prevent Russia from being “squeezed out” to the margins of world politics and economics, which is inevitable without constant improvement of the content of education and constant monitoring of how this task is being implemented.

1. Strategies aimed at changing the quantitative parameters of the content of education

ACCELERATION STRATEGY involves increasing the pace (speed) of passing educational material. The traditional pace of learning for the existing cultural and educational tradition serves as a guide.

The idea of ​​acceleration in didactics was naturally led by the idea of ​​children's talent as being ahead of their peers in terms of the rate (speed) of maturation. Like any pedagogical idea, the “acceleration strategy” has its own positive traits and your shortcomings.

Obvious superiority over peers in the ability to see the essence of a problem, curiosity, outstanding ability to memorize material, independence of judgment and many other qualities noted in gifted children make teachers inclined to think that they are simply “wasting time” by studying at a traditional pace, they are wasting it.

Research conducted by many specialists in different countries indicates that “acceleration” allows a gifted child to optimize the pace of his own learning, which has a beneficial effect on his overall intellectual and creative development. The opinion that these children eventually have difficulties in communication is untenable, at least when discussing the problem of the content of education, since these difficulties depend entirely on the forms of organization of this “acceleration”.

As is known, the following organizational options for “acceleration” (forms) can be considered:

Ø faster (compared to traditional) pace of studying educational material by the whole class at the same time;

Ø a child skipping a grade (several grades) in a regular school.

This acceleration path is quite acceptable and in some cases leads to good results.

INTENSIFICATION STRATEGY does not involve changing the pace (speed) of assimilation, but increasing the volume, or, more precisely, increasing the intensity of learning. She's in in a certain sense is an alternative to the “acceleration strategy”. Its supporters believe: if a gifted child is capable of more, it is necessary not to shorten the period of study, but simply to increase the volume of what is studied. After all, you can study not one foreign language, but several, not an ordinary mathematics course, but mathematics for universities, etc.

It has been noted that there are children classified as gifted, but their advance over their peers covers only the sphere of mental development. According to the levels of social and physical development, they may be normal or even lag behind it (dyssynchrony). This is a fairly common phenomenon in levels, as noted by many experts.

The “strategy of intensification” of the content of education is considered as one of the ways to educate this category of children.

This approach is quite popular in domestic pedagogy. It has been and is actively used in the practice of special schools (schools with in-depth study of mathematics, foreign languages, etc.). Many modern gymnasiums and lyceums, which proclaim work with gifted children as a priority, choose this path.

The constantly growing wave of criticism against strategies based on quantitative changes in the content of education is based on modern ideas about children's giftedness. Attempts to change the quantitative component of the content of education are based on the opinion that a gifted child is “the same as everyone else, only a little better (smarter, more inquisitive, etc.).”

In modern psychology and pedagogy, a different idea has firmly established itself: a gifted child is not just ahead of his peers in a number of development parameters - he is a child who is qualitatively different from other children. He is neither better nor worse than his peers, as many modern researchers rightly note - he is simply different.

It is thanks to the approval of this understanding of children's giftedness in psychology that significant changes in didactics occur. This was especially reflected in the “intensification strategy,” which practically transformed into the idea of ​​a qualitative restructuring of the content of education—the “enrichment strategy.” Experimental work in this direction has led most researchers to the understanding that the content of the educational activities of gifted children should not just have different quantitative parameters, but should be qualitatively different from the content of the education of their “ordinary” peers.

2. Strategies based on qualitative changes in the content of education

STRATEGY - INDIVIDUALIZATION OF TRAINING. Recently, at the level of philosophy of education, the idea of ​​the need to take into account the uniqueness of each individual in educational systems has become increasingly affirmed. As a consequence, we can consider a trend towards a gradual abandonment of the unification of personality in the field of education. The impossibility of educating and training the future creator on a common “educational conveyor” is increasingly realized and forces us to look for new educational models that meet this task, especially for gifted children.

Individualization of education is one of the main options for qualitative changes in the content of gifted education. Increased interest in the individualization of educational activities in general is characteristic of recent pedagogical research. These ideas are developed in the context of a student-centered approach to education. There is and is actively promoted the assertion that the student-centered approach does not contain anything new, that education has always been focused on the individual. Formally, this is so, but one cannot help but notice that this very person, in the traditional, non-personally-oriented approach, was considered not as a goal, but as a means to achieve some “higher interests”: state, political, ideological. In other words, the priority in this system has always been not the individual with her own internal desires, interests, preferences, but the product that she is potentially capable of creating.

Of particular importance is the nature of the implementation of this strategy in relation to the education of gifted children. In practice, there are attempts to replace the problem of individualization of education with a fundamentally different problem - its differentiation. Given the certain similarity of these pedagogical phenomena, it is necessary to understand the fundamental difference between them.

Differentiation is rooted in ancient times, in the history of pedagogy. It originated with the emergence and establishment in mass educational practice as the dominant “conveyor method of organizing learning.” This idea is widespread in modern pedagogy as the main and practically the only organizational option for mitigating the effect of the “school conveyor belt”.

STRATEGY - TEACHING THINKING. Among the most popular ways of qualitatively restructuring the content of education for gifted children, undoubtedly, is the direction of “teaching thinking.”

This unusual phrase usually denotes a popular direction in foreign pedagogy for the purposeful development of a child’s intellectual and creative abilities. It is directly related to solving the problem of teaching gifted children and is considered as an important component of the diagnosis and correction of intellectual and creative abilities.

One of the first to talk about the possibility of developing a series of training procedures to improve the quality of functioning of the intellect was the founder of testology A. Binet. The tasks he developed to diagnose children's intelligence gave him the idea that a system could be created that would allow it to be developed and improved. Thus, the idea arose about the possibility of creating a special program for the targeted development of mental abilities not in the course of traditional knowledge acquisition, but in the process of special classes.

But most of his contemporaries and numerous followers did not share this point of view. It was very difficult for them to see the development of thinking as an independent subject of study. Intelligence, in their opinion, is not something that can be “learned”; it is something that serves as the foundation of learning, is a natural result of the maturation of the organism and its interaction with the environment (including learning).

Domestic pedagogy adhered to a similar point of view.

Work in this direction has intensified significantly recently. The development of creative (critical, rational, etc.) thinking is one of the most popular ideas in foreign pedagogy in recent decades. Many researchers and practicing teachers pay special attention to the special, targeted development of creativity, intellectual functions, teaching children the technique and technology of mental actions, and the processes of effective cognitive search.

Naturally, this required the development of a conceptual scheme of intelligence itself in the broad sense of the word. And schemes that could form the basis of programs aimed at developing intelligence began to be actively created.

STRATEGY - SOCIAL COMPETENCE. Diagnosis and correction of the development of the psychosocial sphere of a gifted child is also one of the most important problems in the development of qualitatively new content for the education of gifted children. Naturally, each of the strategies discussed above provides for it in an explicit or covert form. But in this case we mean special integrated courses included in the curricula of schools for the gifted, courses focused on the development of the child’s affective sphere.

The phenomenon when a child, although ahead of his peers in terms of the level of development of thinking, lags behind them or is at an average level in psychosocial development, is very common. In order to overcome it, programs of special integrated courses are being created aimed at developing the emotional sphere, correcting interpersonal relationships in the team, and self-actualization.

But these types of programs are not only important for children who are experiencing emotional or behavioral difficulties. Many experts in the field of gifted education believe that discussing social and interpersonal issues is especially important for gifted children. Their ability to reason, to better understand the motives of other people’s behavior, combined with increased sensitivity to injustice and contradictions, often negatively affects the development of the affective sphere.

Classes in line with such programs help the child to correctly assess and improve his lifestyle, behavior style, and character of communication, which has a positive effect on his self-esteem and interpersonal relationships with peers and adults, promotes children’s understanding of themselves, their study of similarities and differences with other children, knowledge of your abilities.

But in addition, these special programs make it possible to solve the problem of diagnosing the level of formation of personal qualities related to the sphere of affective development, and create conditions for targeted correction of individual developmental characteristics.

Naturally, the integrative courses under consideration cannot and should not replace traditional educational courses that consider emotional and moral problems as the main ones (literature, history, especially the history of culture, science, etc.; anthropology, sociology, art and art history; fundamentals of religion and etc.).

The main goal of the considered option for enriching the content is not to replace traditional methods of psychosocial development, but to complement them, creating the opportunity for highly professional diagnostics and correction of the child’s affective development.

STRATEGY - RESEARCH LEARNING. The main feature of this approach is to intensify learning, giving it research, creative character, and thus transfer to the student the initiative in organizing his cognitive activity.

Independent research practice of children is traditionally considered as the most important factor in the development of creative abilities. “In the research method, knowledge is not given ready-made, but is obtained as a result of the children themselves working on this or that life material” (B.V. Vsesvyatsky). However, recognition of this position at the theoretical level has not led to the development of forms of organizing educational activities and adequate educational technologies for conducting educational research recognized by the majority of domestic experts.

In an inquiry-based approach, learning is guided by students' direct experiences. Naturally, one of the main goals of such training is to expand this experience in the course of search and research activities. The educational process in this case is built on the basis of the child’s independent search for new cognitive guidelines. This makes it possible to ensure that learning includes not only the assimilation of new information, but also the creative restructuring of initial cognitive guidelines.

With this approach, a significant problem arises: the cognitive side of educational activity is often significantly impoverished due to the linking of learning to the direct experience of the student. Students' experience is often very limited and therefore difficult to use as a starting point when setting goals and guidelines for educational work.

Special studies on the nature of the assimilation and application of knowledge, conducted in recent decades, show interesting, from a pedagogical point of view, features of these processes among beginners and specialists (mathematicians and scientists in the field of exact sciences). The knowledge of specialists is instrumental in nature; it is concentrated around basic ideas and concepts related to basic operational principles. Naturally, newcomers do not have such ideas, and their formation occurs not by simply superimposing new knowledge on existing knowledge, but through restructuring, restructuring of previous knowledge, abandonment of inadequate ideas, posing new questions, putting forward hypotheses (J. Grinot).

Therefore, research learning is considered effective, as well as very difficult for teachers.

3. Modern models of enriching educational content

Modern Russian educational legislation not only allows, but also directly assumes various directions in pedagogy and educational psychology and, accordingly, their implementation in educational institutions. There are educational (pedagogical-psychological) concepts according to which many schools operate, which are provided own programs and standard curricula, and therefore their own textbooks. For example, in primary education, by decision of the Board of the Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation, in addition to traditional education, education according to the D.B. system is considered basic. Elkonina - V.V. Davydov and according to the system of L.V. Zankova. Along with them, programs and textbooks of the direction headed by N.F. Vinogradova, and programs and textbooks of the public organization “School 2100” are used.

This chapter examines these three models of enriching the content of education, developed in our country. Unfortunately, this is impossible in full, within the framework of one work. Therefore, I will limit myself to listing the main goals, objectives, and methods that most clearly characterize each model. I must note that abroad the problem of enriching the content of education is given no less attention (probably even more - government funding for developments and their implementation is much better). In this connection, I considered it necessary to give as an example a model used abroad and which is widespread, according to A.I. Savenkova.

3.1 Example of a foreign model

The most popular abroad was the model of the famous American scientist J. Renzulli - “three types of curriculum enrichment”:

Ø Exposes students to a wide variety of areas and subjects of study that may interest them. As a result, the range of interests expands and an idea is formed of what they would like to study more deeply (in G. Renzulli’s system, the child’s choice of a certain field of activity is mandatory).

Ø It assumes a focus on the special development of the child’s thinking. In order to implement it, classes are held to train observation skills, the ability to evaluate, compare, build hypotheses, analyze, synthesize, classify, and perform other mental operations. The skills and abilities acquired as a result are necessary for solving a wide range of problems and are intended to serve as the basis for the transition to more complex cognitive processes.

Ø Involves conducting independent research and solving creative problems (individually and in small groups). The child takes part in posing the problem and choosing methods for solving it. Introducing him to creative, research work, according to the author’s fair conclusion, is an important condition not only for teaching, but also for raising a gifted child.

As we see, G. Renzulli considers content in a temporary aspect, that is, one type of enrichment gradually develops into another, replacing it. The first is aimed at creating a “foundation for research activity” - maximally expanding the child’s horizons and ultimately choosing the most productive and most attractive type of educational activities for himself. The second, “group activity training,” is focused on developing thinking and improving cognitive abilities. All this creates the basis for the third type of enrichment, which involves the child conducting his own real research and actual learning in the sense of the word that is closest to the traditional understanding.

For all its attractiveness and well-deserved popularity, G. Renzulli’s model cannot be applied in domestic system education. The main reason is that the difference in cultural and educational traditions does not allow this to be done.

3.2 System D.B. Elkonina - V.V. Davydova

The entire content of training according to this system is built on a system of scientific and theoretical concepts that are formed in educational activities unfolding in the form of collectively distributed activities. Such content is necessary, first of all, not for obtaining a sum of knowledge, but for the formation of a person’s general abilities for further self-education and self-improvement. When organizing developmental training in the system, according to D.B. Elkonin, we should focus not on those mental processes that have already formed in children (“the current level of development”), but on those that should be formed and developed by constructing activities appropriate to the age of children (“the zone of proximal development”).

Until now, primary education in a traditional school is aimed at imparting to children primarily empirical and utilitarian knowledge (everyday concepts), which have little in common with knowledge (concepts) of a scientific nature. It has long been noted that you can know a lot, but at the same time not show any creative abilities, i.e. not be able to independently understand a new phenomenon, even from a relatively well-known field of science, or apply existing knowledge to solve specific problems, especially those that go beyond the standard framework.

Thus, the content of learning is understood as the system of concepts about a given area of ​​reality to be mastered, together with the methods of action through which concepts and their system are formed in students.

The most important feature of mastering concepts in a system is that they cannot be memorized, and knowledge cannot simply be tied to a subject. The concept must be formed, and children must form it under the guidance of the teacher.

Programs in individual subjects (mathematics, Russian language, literature, natural science, painting) reflect a system of certain interrelated scientific and theoretical concepts. Therefore, teachers are strictly prohibited from excluding anything from the programs or changing them at their own discretion.

To organize learning, it is necessary, first of all, to form appropriate motives in the child. Hence, one of the tasks at the first stage of education (grades 1-6) is the formation of such motives that would give educational activity its own meaning for a given child. We can talk about a complete solution to problems in teaching in at this stage only under the condition of developing full-fledged motives for educational activities.

According to the developers of the model, educational activity (AL) is an activity of self-change, its product is the changes that occurred during its implementation in the subject himself, this is an activity that has as its content the students’ mastery of generalized methods of action in the field of scientific concepts.

Naturally, such activity must be motivated by adequate motives. They are only those motives that are directly related to its content, i.e. motives for acquiring generalized methods of action, or, more simply, motives for one’s own growth, one’s own improvement. Psychologists call such motives of activity educational and cognitive.

The second most important element of the UD structure, without which it is impossible to achieve the learning result in this system, is the learning task. A learning task is not just a task that a student completes in class or at home. First of all, this is not one task, but a whole system. As a result of completing the system of tasks, the most general ways of solving a relatively wide range of issues in a given scientific field are discovered and mastered.

In general, it is necessary to emphasize that learning, which involves the possibility of direct transfer of knowledge from teacher to student, direct “transplantation” of knowledge into the student’s head, simple tying of knowledge to the subject, bypassing the actions of the student himself with the subject, according to D.B. Elkonina, the most ineffective training. It only loads the students' memory, leaving knowledge verbal and formal. The concept is simply communicated in a ready-made form.

When teaching, the concept must be formed through the actions of the child himself with the subject of study. It is strictly forbidden to communicate knowledge (expressed through a concept) to a child in a ready-made form.

One of the main tasks of teachers is to transfer the student from focusing on obtaining the correct result when solving a specific problem to focusing on the correct application of the learned general method of action.

Any method of action is first learned with the full development of all operations included in the action, and, if possible, carried out materially, that is, in such a way that the correctness of their implementation can be monitored. There should be no rush at this stage. Even pedantry is required here. Until one operation is performed exactly according to the rule, you cannot move on to another.

Separately, it is necessary to say about a special action, thanks to which almost all educational tasks in this system are solved - modeling. It acts as a component of the meaningful analysis of the object. Modeling is considered in three aspects:

Ø modeling properties and relationships within an object;

Ø actions with the created model in order to identify new properties and relationships;

Ø modeling as a psychological mechanism for students to search for the reasons for the action being performed.

In all cases of using the concept “model”, according to the system developers, the following general points can be identified:

Ø The model is a means of scientific knowledge;

Ø The model always acts as such a representative of the original, a substitute for the prototype, which is in some respect convenient for study and can transfer the knowledge gained from this to the original object;

Ø Both models and prototypes are systems characterized by essential structural properties and defined relationships;

Ø Models cover only those properties of the prototype that are significant in a given situation and that are the object of study.

The next important component of educational activity is control. Control means, first of all, control over the correctness and completeness of the execution of operations included in the actions. However, D.B. Elkonin states that so far in this system, control based on results prevails among a certain part of teachers and children. By focusing for a long time on obtaining the correct result and on monitoring the result, we actually formed the child’s inattention. Attention is, first of all, careful control of the action process. Therefore, students’ mastery of control over the process, over the correct execution of each operation and their sequence is not only a means of mastering the main educational action, but - and this is no less important - a means of forming attention.”

The main form of control is operational control, i.e. control over the correctness of the process of implementing the method of action. Hence the task of teachers is to carry out special educational work to develop this method of control, primarily among the students themselves. It is the action of control that characterizes all educational activities as a voluntary process controlled by the child himself.

The final component that completes the control action is the evaluation action. Evaluation also primarily refers to the method of action, i.e. to the extent of completing the learning task. The function of assessment is to determine whether the student has mastered a given method of action and whether he has moved a step higher in this regard. Thus, assessment refers to the performance of the entire learning task as a whole. Evaluation is a key point in determining the extent to which the educational activity carried out by the student has influenced him as the subject of this activity.

3.3 L.V. system Zankova

education training elkonin zankov

When building their training system, Leonid Vladimirovich and his followers relied on the position of L.S. Vygotsky: learning can go ahead of development. Consequently, it (learning) is built not so much on completed development cycles (the characteristics of a completed cycle are consciousness, strength, consistency, operational self-control), but on those that are still being formed, moving development forward.

The training is built on a high level of difficulty. However, this principle can be applied to the educational process only taking into account the main provisions of the system: the optimal overall development of each student, including the weak. Due to the requirement for the individual development of each student, the formulation of the principle is clarified: training at a high level of difficulty while observing the measure of difficulty.

The measure of difficulty is determined by the zone of proximal development of each child, i.e. “the distance between the level of actual development, determined with the help of tasks solved independently, and the level of possible development, determined with the help of tasks solved under the guidance of an adult and in collaboration with a more intelligent colleague... It is empirically clear that one 8-year-old child is capable of solve a problem for a 12-year-old and another for a 9-year-old.”

This does not mean any difficulty, but the difficulty of rethinking, which consists in the independent discovery of the interdependence of phenomena, their internal essential connection. This is a cognitive difficulty. The importance of the cognitive side of learning, in particular, theoretical knowledge, increases significantly. Of course, responsibility for the development of strong skills: reading, spelling, computing and any other basic skills is not removed from the teacher. However, the system calls for the formation of skills on the basis of an ever greater and possibly deeper understanding of the relevant concepts, relationships, and dependencies. That is, the nature of the difficulty is mainly outlined by the knowledge of theoretical provisions and, therefore, is inextricably linked with another requirement of the system - the principle of the leading role of theoretical knowledge.

The principle of teaching at a high level of difficulty while observing the measure of difficulty and the principle of the leading role of theoretical knowledge are inextricably linked with another requirement of the system - the fast pace of passing the program material. This requirement is not so much quantitative as qualitative. The fast pace of learning material causes unique processes in children’s mental activity. When consolidating the material, children do not have the impression that they are reproducing what they have learned, since they consider the learned concepts in conjunction with other previously studied or new concepts. Often a “familiar” concept is viewed as if from a different angle and on different material.

Moving forward at a fast pace practically means refusing to solve “column examples” and similar problems in mathematics lessons, performing monotonous training exercises in literacy lessons (for example, on spelling unstressed vowels in the root), and repeatedly repeating the same answer to a question that requires simple replication. However, the role of repetition as one of the ways to achieve solid knowledge is not denied at all. The very nature of the repetition exercises changes, in which the “old” concept enters into new connections with other concepts. Awareness of these connections leads to a higher quality of assimilation of the concept than with its repeated and monotonous reproduction.

The requirement for a fast pace of passing educational material finds its full meaning in the principle of students’ awareness of the learning process. It is important that the process of mastering knowledge and skills itself, to a certain extent, becomes an object of awareness for schoolchildren. In the process of completing tasks, the student realizes the need to memorize certain rules and formulations, the reasons for errors in mastering the material, etc. “How the acquired knowledge is related to each other, what are the different aspects of mastering spelling or computing operations, what is the mechanism for the occurrence of errors and their prevention - these and many other questions related to the process of mastering knowledge and skills are the subject of close attention of schoolchildren.”

The field of action of these four principles is clarified by the fifth and sixth principles: the teacher’s purposeful and systematic work on the general development of all students in the class, including the weakest; constant attention of the teacher to the physical and mental health of students.

Leonid Vladimirovich formulated one of the fundamental provisions of the methodological system as follows: “In primary education there are no main and non-main subjects. Each subject is significant for the overall mental development of the child.”

Since the general development of a child in the process of aesthetic, labor and physical education is marked by deep originality and differs from the educational impact of all other educational subjects, changing the traditional status of these “non-main” disciplines has become one of the main tasks of the system.

The property of versatility is important. In relation to the educational process, it manifests itself through the diversity of the student’s activities, through the involvement in the sphere of learning of his versatile mental activity: emotional, volitional, intellectual, aesthetic.

No less important is the property of processuality. Processuality is a typical property of a methodological system that ensures the continuous overall development of the student. In accordance with the procedural nature of the methodological system, the textbook is structured in such a way that each new topic is included as a dependent element in a direct and organic connection with other topics of the course. And the teacher never considers a new concept in isolation (autonomously) from acquired concepts, which, in turn, are enriched in the light of new connections and relationships. The processual nature of the methodology is also manifested in the fact that during the assimilation of new material, previously acquired knowledge does not remain at the same level, it enters into new or broader systems of connections and, thanks to this, progresses.

Relationships of the L.V. system Zankov's "mark" was never simple. For decades, the L.V. system Zankova tried to prove that in the first grade children are generally not able to understand that the mark evaluates the result of their work, and not themselves. Therefore, before evaluating the result of a student’s work with a grade, it is necessary to develop one of the most complex intellectual skills in him - monitoring and evaluation activities.

Collision is a typical property of a methodological system, from which follows the need for systematic use in the educational process of contradictions that arise when old knowledge collides with new knowledge, a new method of action with learned knowledge, old individual experience with new requirements for its application, feelings with reason.

Taking into account the individual capabilities of students in different classes, educational material can vary both in the level of difficulty of the tasks presented and in the time of their presentation. The variability of the methodological system, another of its typical properties, follows from the very nature of the teaching and educational process, which depends on the variety of varying specific conditions, primarily taking into account the professional inclinations of the teacher and the individual capabilities of the children. If children are not ready to talk about indifference and mental blindness, then it should be postponed until a later time. The choice is up to the teacher and his professional intuition. The assignments in the lessons also vary in level of difficulty, which is reflected in the very wording of the assignments, some of which are designed for the strong, and some for the weak. But as a result of individually completing tasks that are feasible for all and collectively solving the most difficult ones, the class will come to a discovery.

3.4 “School 2100” program

The only reasonable potential goal of education, according to the creators of the program, is the “cultivation” of a person capable of taking an independent position in relation to external conditions. In other words, a student’s education is, to a large extent, cultivating his ability and need for creativity, first of all, social and personal creativity - creativity of himself.

The authors of the model consider the formation of the child’s educational and cognitive activity to be one of the most important content-target lines of development in primary education, ensuring the final (target) requirements for a child completing the initial stage of education. It is at primary school age that the child masters the system of actions (operations) necessary for successful cognitive activity at subsequent stages. At the same time, it is important that the system proposed for assimilation does not have a strictly algorithmic nature, or rather, that its algorithmic nature does not hinder, but rather contributes to the formation of heuristic actions in the child; The child’s mind should remain flexible, independent, creative, and not be chained within the strict framework of universal regulations.

The principle of relying on the zone of proximal development (L.S. Vygotsky) is important not only in teaching, but also in upbringing. Today, a schoolchild will form and express some opinion, make a decision, perform a socially significant action with the help, advice, support, even prompting of the team, teacher, parents - naturally, if he is aware of this position and accepts it as his own, otherwise it will be the simplest conformism. But tomorrow he will be able to form an opinion on his own, make his own decision, take an action responsibly - and this is the goal of the program.

In order for a school graduate to be in demand by society under any conditions, he must not only be taught in elementary school - it is equally, if not more important, to teach him how to learn.

Another task is to form in the student the knowledge, attitudes and basic skills of pedagogical activity. The concept of pedagogical activity in this context is interpreted extremely broadly and includes preparation not only and not so much for the teaching profession, but for solving a wide range of everyday, professional and general social problems. This is preparation for social activities.

The issue of assessment is extremely pressing. The position of the program developers is formulated briefly: maximum grades - minimum grades. Current grades (not grades!) are hardly needed at all. Totals (for example, quarters) make sense, as Sh.A does. Amonashvili, exhibit with the participation of the class. In principle, one should evaluate not the “degree of ignorance” (i.e., orient the student toward negative reinforcement, toward “avoiding a bad grade”), but the degree of knowledge, orient the student toward positive reinforcement. If we keep the current marks, then only differentiated positive ones.

PRINCIPLE OF ADAPTABILITY. The developmental paradigm of education presupposes a very specific type of school. This is a school that strives, on the one hand, to adapt as much as possible to students with their individual characteristics; on the other hand, to respond as flexibly as possible to sociocultural changes in the environment. Not a child for school, but school for a child!

PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT. In our view, the main task of the school is the development of the student, and first of all, the holistic development of his personality and the readiness of the individual for further development. “... The human personality in the process of education should not be a tool for extraneous purposes, but an end in itself” (P.P. Blonsky. Selected pedagogical works. M., 1961, p. 185).

PRINCIPLE OF PSYCHOLOGICAL COMFORT. This includes, firstly, the removal of all stress-forming factors of the educational process. Secondly, this principle involves the creation in the educational process of a relaxed atmosphere that stimulates the creative activity of the student. Thirdly, the principle of comfort requires reliance on internal motives and, in particular, on the motivation of success and constant advancement.

PRINCIPLE OF THE IMAGE OF THE WORLD. The student’s idea of ​​the objective and social world should be unified and holistic. As a result of the teaching, he should develop a kind of scheme of the world order, the universe, in which specific, subject knowledge takes its specific place.

THE PRINCIPLE OF SYSTEMATICS. It is completely abnormal when a single, continuous educational process breaks up into pieces that are poorly adjusted to each other. From the very beginning, education must be unified and systematic, correspond to the patterns of personal and intellectual development of a child and adolescent, and be part of the general system of lifelong education. In particular, primary school is not a preparation for the future “real” school, but its organic part.

THE PRINCIPLE OF A MEANINGFUL ATTITUDE TO THE WORLD. The image of the world for a child is not abstract, cold knowledge about it. This is not knowledge for me: this is my knowledge. This is not the world around me: this is the world of which I am a part and which I somehow experience and comprehend for myself. The image of the world is at the same time the image of our experience of the world, our relationship to the world.

PRINCIPLE OF ORIENTATING FUNCTION OF KNOWLEDGE. It is rooted in the well-known thesis of Blonsky and Vygotsky that “to educate a child does not mean to give him our truth, but to develop his own truth before ours, in other words, not to impose on him our world created by our thought, but to help him process with thought the directly obvious sensory world." There are two sides to this. First: the content of school education is not a certain set of information selected and systematized by us in accordance with our “scientific” ideas. Much knowledge does not teach intelligence. The task of general education is to help the student develop an indicative framework that he can and should use in various types of his cognitive and productive activities. The second side of this, in essence, problem: being part of the scientific picture of the world, knowledge must reflect the language and structure of scientific knowledge in the learning process. Reconciling both is not easy, but it is necessary.

PRINCIPLE OF CULTURE MASTERY. At a very first approximation, culture is a person’s ability to navigate the world (or the image of the world) and act (or behave) in accordance with the results of such orientation and with the interests and expectations of other people, social groups, society and humanity as a whole. Culture is a function, but not a substance: a person as a social subject “behaves” in some generally accepted and appropriate way, which can and should be described in terms of culture.

PRINCIPLE OF LEARNING ACTIVITIES. We teach activity - not just to act, but also to set goals, to be able to control and evaluate your own and others' actions. No matter how rightly we criticize the reduction of the content of education to the famous ZUN (knowledge - abilities - skills), without the formation of skills and the skills that underlie them (meaningful, situationally-oriented actions and automated operations), it is impossible to imagine learning, especially initial learning.

THE PRINCIPLE OF RELIANCE ON PREVIOUS (SPONTANEOUS) DEVELOPMENT. Do not pretend that what has already taken shape in the child’s head before our appearance does not exist; we must rely on previous spontaneous (or at least not directly controlled), independent, “everyday” development.

CREATIVE PRINCIPLE. At school it is necessary to teach creativity, i.e. to develop in students the ability and need to independently find solutions to previously unknown academic and extracurricular problems. Today, a schoolchild’s attitude to the world in the scheme “I know - I don’t know”, “I can - I can’t”, “I know - I don’t” should be replaced by the parameters “I search - and I find”, “I think - and I find out”, “I try - and I do” "

Conclusion

Students’ activities to master the content of education are carried out in various forms of learning, the nature of which is determined by various factors: the goals and objectives of learning; number of students enrolled in training; features of individual educational processes; place and time of students’ educational work; provision of textbooks and teaching aids, etc.

The learning process is implemented only through organizational forms that perform an integrative role, ensuring the unification and interaction of all its components. The set of forms, united on the basis of the connection between students and teachers through educational material and complementing each other, constitutes the organizational system of education.

Organizational forms and systems of education are historical: they are born, develop, and are replaced by one another depending on the level of development of society, production, science, and educational theory and practice.

List of used literature

1.Bordovskaya N.V., Rean A.A. Pedagogy. Textbook for universities. St. Petersburg, 2001.

2.Likhachev B. T. Pedagogy. Course of lectures. Moscow: Prometheus, Yurayt, 1998.

.Mukhina S.A., Solovyova A.A. Non-traditional pedagogical technologies in teaching. Rostov-on-Don, 2004.

.Pedagogy./Ed. V.A. Slastenina. Moscow: Academy, 2004.

.Pedagogy./Ed. P.I. Pidkasitogo. Moscow, 2002.

.Slastenin V.A., Isaev I.F., Shiyanov E.N. General pedagogy. Moscow: Vlados, 2003.

.Kharlamov I.F. Pedagogy. Minsk, 2002.

Tutoring

Need help studying a topic?

Our specialists will advise or provide tutoring services on topics that interest you.
Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

Crisis phenomena in education and upbringing did not arise suddenly. They intensified and clearly manifested themselves by the beginning of the 80s. Their origins were laid back in the early 30s, and they began to emerge already in the 70s, which was associated with the directive transition to universal secondary education, more complex training programs for all and the obvious failure of the unified education system, its inability to solving the problems of the emerging dynamic post-industrial society.

In the mid-60s, education in our country occupied a leading position in the world in many respects. We have taken a leading position in the depth and thoroughness of educational programs, in the quality of knowledge of schoolchildren, and introduced universal secondary education. The scale of higher, secondary specialized and vocational education expanded very quickly.

However, in subsequent years, our educational system lost its dynamism, and we stopped noticing rapid changes in education in the leading countries of the West and in the developing countries of the East. Social and economic contradictions within the country grew, and the educational system did not respond to them, because the educational reforms were cosmetic in nature, and the school remained largely official and government-run.

Complex processes were taking place in society, the results of which became clear only in the mid-80s. The pace of economic development slowed sharply, the loss of previous ideological guidelines occurred, the aggressiveness of the environment and social instability increased, the nature of communication between people changed, which was associated with the loss of traditions of community, mutual assistance and mutual support. A growing alienation of young people from officially promoted social values, schools, and families has been revealed. A single-child, conflict-ridden, often single-parent family has ceased to fully perform educational functions. Young people increasingly felt the lack of demand for knowledge and talent by society. The gradual erosion, “thinning” of the cultural layer, cultural traditions, intelligence - these and other similar factors significantly complicated the implementation of effective educational policy.

In the mid-80s, it was discovered that in a number of parameters our school was seriously lagging behind foreign ones. We lagged significantly behind developed countries in terms of the scale of higher education. There has also been a tendency to curtail the volume of complete secondary education. Our foreign colleagues are significantly ahead of us in terms of the degree and depth of differentiation and individualization of education. Our school also lags behind in terms of duration of education. Our average length of education was 10.5 years. In the USA and Japan - 12 - 13.5 years. For a long time, the school was dominated by a focus on unification, on uniform standards, on the overwhelming priority of the collective principle, which led to a certain leveling of the student’s personality, insufficient disclosure of his originality, activity, initiative, and creative potential. Our school to this day remains largely isolated in relation to the social environment, trying to solve all problems on its own. School is still seriously lagging behind in developing in young people social adaptability and mobility, resilience in life, independence, entrepreneurship, initiative, i.e., precisely those qualities that are absolutely necessary during the transition of society to a market economy.

It was revealed, despite beautiful slogans and individual positive examples, the scarcity of material support and the weakness of the personnel base due to the “brain drain” from the education system to other, more attractive, more prestigious and materially profitable areas of activity. One of the manifestations of this trend is the feminization of schools.

In the early 90s, in connection with the restructuring of the economy and social life, attempts to force the transition to a market economy, a systemic socio-economic crisis arose in the country, which could not but affect education. Due to the new socio-economic conditions, the greatest losses were suffered by the primary level of education and upbringing - preschool institutions. Many departmental kindergartens were abandoned, closed or converted into educational institutions of a different type. One can only regret this loss. There is also a very important loss - the old education system has collapsed. The previous education system turned out to be untenable due to a change in ideological guidelines, and due to its authoritarianism, formalization, “event-based” nature, as well as due to its “school-centrism” and poor use of the pedagogical capabilities of the environment. The collapse of the old educational system is hardly worth regretting, but it is necessary to preserve the best of what has been achieved and fill the resulting vacuum. These processes are gaining momentum and require search, initiative, and thoughtful analysis.

However, despite all the difficulties, the Russian education system survived and retained its high global status. Moreover, our education has not only been preserved, but has also acquired new qualities: it has become more mobile, democratic and variable. There is now a real opportunity to choose the type of educational institution, the level of programs studied, the degree and nature of assistance. It should be emphasized that education survived precisely because it was updated, because there was a persistent and productive search for new options, new content and means of teaching and education.

The education crisis has developed against the background childhood crisis, which manifests itself in a reduction in the birth rate, a high level of morbidity among children (according to the latest data, in Russia there are less than 10 % healthy children and 35% - chronically ill), an increase in juvenile delinquency, vagrancy, social orphanhood (with living parents), the emergence of a large group of adolescents and young people who do not study or work. Instead of acceleration in recent years“deceleration” is observed - a slowdown in the growth and development of the younger generation. Sociologists have recorded a decline in the value of childhood and the need for children.

The crisis of education, as well as the entire social sphere, is not fatal; rather, it is renewal crisis, and, by updating itself, the education and training system strives to overcome the crisis and break out of it.

Analysis of the social situation, the practice of transformation, world pedagogical experience from the perspective of modern scientific approaches allows us to outline new guidelines for the development of education, strategy for its renewal. We believe that these strategic guidelines form the core of new pedagogical thinking - the most important condition for the success of transformations.

First of all, a major change is taking place educational goals, and, consequently, criteria for its effectiveness. It is not the quality of knowledge, as such, and especially not the volume of acquired knowledge and skills, but the development of personality, the realization of unique human capabilities, and preparation for the complexities of life that become the leading goal of education, which is not limited to the school, but goes far beyond it.

Our educational system is still focused on knowledge, skills and abilities as the final goal, as a result. The level of knowledge serves as the main criterion when graduating from school, when entering a university and other educational institutions. The “cult of knowledge” often remains the ideal to which the school strives. This, however, is not entirely true. Even the ancients argued: much knowledge does not teach intelligence. Our schoolchildren, as evidenced by the latest UNESCO data, rank somewhere in the second ten in terms of subject knowledge and skills. In this regard, we lag behind South Korea, Taiwan, Switzerland, Hungary, and a number of other countries, but are noticeably ahead of the USA, England, France, Germany and other developed countries. It would seem not so bad. However, when it comes to the development of creative intelligence, experts assign us a much more modest place. It seems like a paradox. But in reality everything is understandable. Knowledge in itself does not ensure development, even intellectual development. But modern learning goals cover not only the development of intelligence, but also the development of emotions, will, the formation of needs, interests, the formation of ideals, and character traits. Knowledge is the basis, the springboard for developmental education, an intermediate, but not its final result. All training should be focused on the development of the personality and individuality of a growing person, on the realization of the potential inherent in him. From knowledge-centrism our education must come to human-centrism, to the priority of development, to the “cult of personality” of each pupil. Education in this regard acts as a way to implement educational tasks, as part of it. The entire educational system should be a broad field for human life, affirmation and development and include the family, extracurricular institutions, informal contacts, etc.

It is worth noting that it is not so much the content of the goals (guidelines) of education that has changed, but rather their hierarchy and subordination. This is very clearly reflected in Art. 14 of the Law “On Education”. The leader put forward the task of self-determination and self-realization of the individual, and then the task of developing civil society, strengthening and improving the rule of law.

The formation of a personality capable of realizing their capabilities, healthy, socially stable and at the same time mobile, adaptable, capable of developing and changing their own strategy in the changing circumstances of life and being happy - this is the true goal and criteria for the success of modern education, corresponding to its humane-personal orientation and modern social guidelines. In this regard, strategic goals education is more accurately defined as social and personal, focused on a harmonious combination of social (public, state, universal) values ​​on the one hand, and personal and individual values ​​on the other. As for the pedagogical process itself, the goals, content and methods of communication between the teacher and students, children in the team, then priority is given to personal orientation, developmental learning, in which psychological knowledge and approaches play a special role.

Changes content of education, its cultural basis, and this change occurs in several directions:

a significant increase in the cultural intensity of education, the basis of which becomes the entire world and domestic culture, and not the ideologically filtered, “approved” part of it; in other words, the content of education becomes not only the acquired knowledge, but also the spheres of human achievements that go far beyond the scope of science: art, traditions, experience of creative activity, religion, achievements of common sense;

increasing the role of humanitarian knowledge as the basis of development, as the meaningful “core” of the individual;

movement from mandatory, identical content for everyone to variable and differentiated, and in the extreme case - individualized; from a single state, officially approved content to original author's programs, courses and textbooks (with the mandatory preservation of a single educational core, determined by the mandatory minimum and state standards).

An approach to the selection and assessment of content is approved from the point of view of its educational and developmental potential, capable of ensuring the formation in students of an adequate scientific picture of the world, civic consciousness, integration of the individual into the system of world and national cultures, promoting mutual understanding and cooperation between people (Article 14 of the Law “ About education"). The task is to form a holistic picture of the world in the student, to help him, on the basis of universal and national values, identify personal meanings in the material being studied, to pass on the best traditions and creative abilities to the younger generation in order to develop these traditions.

The movement from unified forms of organization education (secondary school, vocational school) to variety of forms of education and types of educational institutions: gymnasiums, lyceums, colleges, private schools, higher vocational schools, complex educational institutions such as kindergarten-school, lyceum-college university, etc. The search for modernization and renewal of the mass school so that it is adapted to development opportunities is becoming especially relevant and the needs of different categories of students, as well as problems associated with the development of rehabilitation, educational, health and specialized institutions of various profiles.

The absolutization of the lesson as a form of organizing teaching at school is beginning to be overcome, albeit very timidly. Along with lessons, seminars, lectures, workshops, debates, and educational games are held.

The need for a transition from mass education to differentiated education is gradually being realized - not in the sense of abandoning collective forms of work, but in the sense of individualization and level differentiation of programs and methods, taking into account the needs and capabilities of each student. There is also a recognition of the need to move from lagging education to advanced education, although this problem cannot be solved within a single school. It is associated with increasing multifunctionality education as a whole as a social sphere and each of its cells - an educational institution. Along with the leading traditional functions - educational, upbringing and development - education and its institutions have to increasingly take on the functions of cultural continuity and cultural creation, social protection of teachers and students, and perform the role of a social stabilizer and catalyst for socio-economic development. Finally (as has already been discussed), the search and research function has played an increasingly important role in recent years.

A gradual transition of education and upbringing to diagnostic basis, which is facilitated by the development of psychological services in educational institutions. A new understanding of the standard in education is affirmed not as a mandatory unification of requirements, but as a single basis, a mandatory minimum of knowledge, the level of minimum requirements and a limiter of the educational load.

The tendency to increase the role is making its way regional and local (municipal, community) factors in education. As the experience of many civilized countries, as well as domestic traditions, shows, the community - an association of people at their place of residence (based on the neighborhood principle) - is the most interested and caring owner of a preschool institution, school, or social center of a microdistrict. Of course, a balance of universal, all-Russian (federal), regional and local values ​​and attitudes and interests of the region is always necessary, subject to the priority of federal and universal values.

There is an intensive transition from a regulated, authoritarian upbringing destroyed by life to humanistic, non-violent, free education, based on the voluntary choice of forms of activity, initiative and mutual trust of educators and students. Education is reoriented towards universal human values, towards the ideas and ideals of humanism and mercy. These ideas do not necessarily have to be expressed in religious form. The child must be protected from the imposition of any ideology, both communist and religious. In the modern educational system, the ideas of a school that is not closed in itself, but open to the social environment, actively participating in the life of the microdistrict and using its pedagogical and material resources, are increasingly making their way and sprouting. The school educational and upbringing system actively interacts with additional (out-of-school) education focused on the family, the individual, and humanitarian values.

Questions and tasks

1. Quality of knowledge and quality of education: what is the discrepancy between these concepts?

2. Select definitions that, in your opinion, adequately characterize the current situation in education and upbringing:

a) disaster;

b) crisis;

c) decay;

d) renewal and revival;

e) loss of position;

f) struggle for survival;

g) stabilization;

h) gradual formation.

3. What are the leading guidelines? new strategy development of education?

4. Select and justify the preferred strategy for the development of education:

a) personality-oriented;

b) socially oriented;

c) personal and socially oriented;

d) socially and personally oriented.

5. Is it possible to simultaneously solve the problems of stabilization and development of educational systems of a city, country, region?

6. What problems of educational development can a psychologist, teacher, or manager solve in research terms? What determines the complex nature of psychological and pedagogical research?

7. In what aspects can education act as a factor in social development, as a factor in the transmission and multiplication of culture?

Both foreign and domestic scientists note that the education system does not meet modern requirements and, as a result, is in a state of crisis, the essence of which is that the education system is turned to the past, focused on past experience, and lacks orientation towards the future. Modern development of society requires a new education system - “innovative learning”, which would form in students the ability to projectively determine the future, responsibility for it, faith in themselves and in their professional abilities to influence this future.

Global Education Trends

1. Internationalization of education, which includes computerization, the use of global computer networks, humanization and humanization of education (for example, the Internet, distance learning).
2. Fundamentalization of education, those. the knowledge obtained should be the foundation (base) for any type of activity; This is the development of the ability to structure material, the ability to highlight the main thing, the main ideas.
3. Continuity of education means that education should be an element of everyday life. The goal of continuity of education is the development of personality throughout life (for example, additional education for children, adults).

Basic provisions for the development of education

The education system must work proactively, i.e. teach to see the development trend of the subject and sphere of professional activity.
The education system should serve as a means of adapting a person to life, i.e. to form psychological readiness to change the type of professional activity (professional retraining), to be able to “adapt” in society and at work.
The education system must solve its problems through regionalization of education - representing the interests of residents of the region, taking into account international experience and the federal component.
The inseparability of education and training. An educational institution should not only teach, but also educate. You can't just teach; By teaching, the teacher educates and vice versa.
Education should provide personally relevant knowledge, i.e. knowledge that positively influences the behavior and thinking of an individual; processed and used; develop the ability to obtain additional information independently. To do this, it is necessary to teach students not to memorize, but to think; to give “not fish, but a fishing rod to catch fish.”
In education, a policy of humanization of education must be implemented.

Humanization of education

In recent years, there has been a lot of talk about the humanization of education.
Humanism(from Latin “human”, “humane”) in the philosophical sense of the word - a system of views that recognizes the special value of man as an individual, his right to freedom, happiness, development and manifestation of his strengths and abilities, which considers the good of man a priority in assessing the activities of social institutions.
Humanization of education – this is the development of educational systems, taking into account the recognition of one of the priority values ​​of the personality of the teacher and students, the harmonization of their interests, relationships and conditions for development and self-development.
The traditional education system can be characterized as knowledge-centric. She oriented students towards mastering ZUNs, i.e. externally specified standards. The quality of knowledge was determined by that. What the student reproduced, made according to the model. Such training does not take into account the mechanisms of personality development, cognitive activity, and the ability for creative activity.
Modern pedagogy brings to the fore the person himself, his values, his personal freedom, the ability to predict and control himself. “There are no children, there are people.” A child is the same person, which means that he must be treated as a full-fledged individual” (J. Korczak).
(Humanistic paradigm: the main goal of the pedagogical process is to promote the development of a person’s abilities, the development of his personality, his spiritual growth, his morality and self-improvement, self-realization. The student may not know much, but it is important that a truly spiritually developed person is formed, capable of self-development and self-improvement; at the center of education is the student, the person with all his weaknesses and strengths. The ideas of humanistic pedagogy are based on the ideas of humanistic psychology (Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, etc.).
The most difficult and lengthy thing in the process of humanization of education is humanization, emancipation of the very personality of the teacher. The teacher, like a spiritual radar, must detect in the child best qualities. Its purpose is to awaken in a growing person the desire to find his own path to the truth through faith and love. But this cannot be done without a change in lifestyle, without a deep humanitarian education as a way of life and actions. The position of the teacher must be changed - from a position where he “stands above the student” to a position “ahead of the student.”
The humanization of education presupposes its differentiation and individualization based on the creative self-development of the student’s personality. Humanization of education focuses on giving the student the right to be what he is, the right to express his thoughts, the right to make mistakes, the right to independently organize his activities and life.
The content of education includes such a direction of its humanization as humanitarization. Most often, this means an increase in the share of humanities in the content of education.
Humanitarianization of education is the formation in the student of a special form of attitude towards a person, towards the world around him and towards himself, his own activities in it.

The issue of education development is a key issue for the existence of modern Russia. The success of education development will be largely determined by how accurately we are able to formulate a strategy for its development and find the right means and optimal ways to implement it. Vladimir Mikhailovich Menshikov, Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences, Professor, shares his experience

What should be the strategy for the development of Russian education?

To formulate a strategy for the development of Russian education means to identify trends in its development, which are determined, on the one hand, by the prospects for the development of society, on the other, by the logic of its internal development, its potential.

Main development trend modern society– its extremely complex, contradictory and practically unpredictable development. It can be argued that the optimal education system for modern society is innovative continuous education, aimed at the formation of a comprehensively developed person, ready for life in a situation of unpredictable development of society. Innovative means that education should prepare a person who is ready to solve a class of constantly emerging new problems, i.e. prepare a creative personality. Continuous - education should become education for the whole life of a person, it should become a daily way of life.

What should Russian education be like in light of the main trend of its development?

Such education should, on the one hand, fully introduce a person into the modern world, and for this to give every person a fundamental academic education, on the other hand, prepare him to solve constantly emerging new problems, which means that education is necessary that shapes a creative personality.

Hence the requirement for the organization of two education systems: on the one hand, a general one - focused on giving a person a modern picture of the world, introducing him into the space of fundamental activities, basic social experience, on the other - education that develops creativity in a person. Moreover, these systems can coexist both separately and together.

Does Russia have the social prerequisites for creating a system of innovative continuous education?

Two factors determine the development of education - the development of society and the potential and state of education itself. If we evaluate the development of modern education in Russia from the perspective of the first factor - the socio-economic development of the country, then the development of the Russian education system is a big question. If Russia remains in its current state: an oil and rocket needle and a boundless shuttle-banking business from sea to sea, then Russia will not have any new education, because it simply will not need it.

Of course, it cannot be ruled out that an understanding will finally come that if Russia does not become a country of developed industry and agriculture, the most advanced technologies, science and culture, i.e. will not create a new model of its modern development(and this is exactly the task that the country’s President V.V. Putin set in his May decrees, including the requirement to create 25 million new jobs), then very soon the country itself will not exist.

The problem of creating innovative continuous education should become the most important vital task of the entire country, as was, say, for the USSR in the late 1920s - early 1930s, during the era of industrialization of the country, the task of creating mass higher education. Let me remind you that in 1940 our country had more students than all of Western Europe.

Pedagogical potential of Russia in the face of a new global challenge in education

If we evaluate Russia’s pedagogical potential in the light of this trend, we can say that Russia is incredibly lucky. On the one hand, Russia has a classical, or academic, general and vocational education, and on the other, there is a system of additional education focused on the creative development of the child’s personality, since a person’s creative abilities are manifested and formed in specific constant systemic activities.

It should be noted that when we talk about the system of additional education as a system for the formation of creativity, we cannot contrast it with the system of general education. The Soviet system of general and vocational education prepared truly creative people, as evidenced by the successes of the USSR and the fact that Russian specialists work all over the world. But the system of additional education, focused on training a person in a specific activity, is more aimed at the in-depth development of individual human abilities in certain areas of activity: sports, technology, art, etc. Therefore, we must express our deepest gratitude to the Soviet Union, which preserved and significantly developed the general and vocational education it inherited from the pre-revolutionary school, and also created a perfectly functioning system of comprehensive additional education.

Of course, theoretically, it can be assumed that a country with such great pedagogical potential can train highly qualified personnel for the whole world, becoming a “world brain factory.” But to go for this option for the development of education, you need a team of practitioners and theorists of the highest world level. Talking today about creating such a team in modern Russia is a pipe dream.

Ideology – as the most important condition for the development of education

The state of any social sphere is determined not only by the general development of the country, but also due to the fact that it has significant autonomy in its development, by its internal state. Therefore, individual social spheres are capable of going far ahead in their development. Will Russian education be able to truly tap into its potential in its development? To answer this question, we need to answer two questions: what ideology does our education profess? and what layer of people really controls it?

Who today does not solemnly swear that we do not have a guiding ideology. Even the state swears to this in the Constitution of the Russian Federation. But such a statement is evidence of a complete misunderstanding of what ideology is. Ideology is society’s awareness of the goals and meanings of its existence, its development. Accordingly, there are no societies without ideology, just as there is no person without a goal and meaning in life.

Accordingly, both modern Russian society and Russian education have an ideology of development. Globally, Russia’s ideology is represented today by two directions: on the one hand, it is a liberal direction, on the other, a conservative-patriotic one.

Liberalism is an ideology that determines the development of modern Russian education

The dominant ideology that really determines the development of the country and education is liberalism. At the same time, it is well known to everyone that the people simply hate this ideology. The main reason for this hostility, of course, is not the personality of the people who personify liberalism, although among its representatives there is not a single famous person - from Yegor Gaidar to Masha Gaidar - who would not cause deep hostility among the people, and above all in the ideology of liberalism itself. It would seem that liberalism stands for individualism, humanism, freedom in everything and everyone. And yet, the absolute majority of the people of Russia hate him. Why?

The reason is liberalism itself. Liberalism proposes the development of any phenomenon not by improving its law, canon, tradition, but by denying them, and because of this it brings only death and destruction. This terrible, essentially satanic beginning of liberalism, which was already beginning to determine the development of Europe in the second half of the 19th century, was one of the first to be felt by K.N. Leontyev. He wrote: “If one can live and act under such conditions, then how could one not live and act calmly under new and so soft institutions?.. However, we see that nowhere can people stop at these institutions, and everything civilized humanity is now rushing in a countless crowd into some dark abyss of the future... an abyss still invisible, but the proximity of which is little by little beginning to instill despair and horror in everyone!..”

It is now obvious that the implemented liberal ideology everywhere – from family to politics – brings only destruction, annihilation and death. Agree, there is a big difference between foreign policy foreign ministers Kozyrev, who systematically surrendered Russia’s national interests, and Lavrov, who defended them.

Liberal intellectuals, like their great predecessor P.Ya. Chaadaev, unlike today's liberals, who sincerely loved Russia, believe that Russia is something backward, inert, failed, lost in the ways of its development. And its purpose is to take the path of Western European development, to show all humanity how to develop correctly, following the only correct path - the path of Western European development. The result of such a policy is only destruction.

How true is this ideology in relation to education?

Naturally, liberal ideology extends today to modern Russian education. No matter how it settles at the level of a simple statement “Russian education is a totalitarian relic of a totalitarian country” or abstruse argumentation, such as the one that Russia is a “local civilization” (and this despite even A. Toynbee, who believed that Russia is one from world civilizations) and therefore must be reformatted into a global civilization, of course American, and, accordingly, abandon the existing education system.

If we talk about the essence of liberalism in Russian education, then A.A. formulated it with brilliant simplicity and mathematical accuracy. Fursenko: “The shortcoming of the Soviet education system was the attempt to form a creative person, and now the task is to cultivate a qualified consumer who is able to skillfully use the results of the creativity of others.”

But the fact of the matter is that education in all ages among all peoples, along with religion, preserves the national code of the people; it prepares, firstly, the guardians of the traditions of society, and secondly, creative people who continue the development of traditions and the national code; it, as it was in the USSR, prepares creators.

Hence, main reason the deterioration of the quality of Russian education is not in people, but in liberal ideology aimed at building a new Russian education through its total reformatting.

How Russian education is and will be destroyed

Since Russian education today is the undivided domain of the liberal intelligentsia (it is she who writes the script for its development), then, knowing the ideology and worldview of liberalism, its hatred of everything Russian, it is not so difficult to understand what is happening in the existing Russian education and what fate awaits it in the future . Destruction today, destruction tomorrow. And increasing the salaries of the teaching corps will not change this trend - teacher salaries themselves do not decide the fate of education. Of course, given all other conditions, a well-paid teacher will work better. But American teachers are paid a level higher than Russian teachers, and do they teach better than their Russian colleagues? The main thing - what and how, in what conditions he will teach - is not determined by the teacher.

So, the destruction of Russian education occurs primarily through the destruction of the very ideal of classical education; the destruction of classical content with the ever-increasing complexity of educational material (school textbooks are often written in a more complex language than textbooks for universities); the destruction of a single educational and especially educational space (as a professional, I can appreciate how effectively the nascent spiritual and moral education was destroyed in Russia); transferring learning from the labor process to the entertainment process; uncertainty in the development of secondary vocational education; an ever-increasing increase in the scope of paid services.

Of course, higher education is being destroyed first of all. A great benefit for Russia in the 1990s, during the period of destruction of everything and everyone, with all the known disadvantages, was the sharp expansion of higher education. The Lord literally saved the youth of Russia by sending them not to prisons, but to universities. The liberal intelligentsia, who loves to count money to the point of pathological obsession (after all, she is an effective (!) manager (!), repeats indignantly: why does Russia need so many people with higher education, if they are not “in demand”? Even if we ignore the global trend in the development of global education (lifelong education), switch to the language of “effective managers” and ask: where is it cheaper to educate a student - in a university or in prison? And which cleaner is more “competitive”: a cleaner with a university education or a prison education. And in order to remove all the questions, let’s ask our liberal brethren: with what education do they hire cleaners to clean their “orphans’ huts”? Happy university! Will we send them to school with the prison sentences? But the law prohibits it! So no matter how you look at it and no matter how effective money is considered, a university education is more competitive than a prison education, including in terms of financial costs.

So, the destruction of higher education will occur by replacing the very concept of Russian university education, in the course of implementing the Bologna decisions: the destruction of fundamentalism in the content of education; a sharp reduction in classroom hours, which in fact makes fundamental education impossible, and at the same time a sharp increase in the workload of teachers, which makes it impossible for them to engage in science, etc.

The destruction of science will occur not so much through underfunding as through the massive closure of dissertation councils, because it is impossible to train the required number of personnel even for universities without a significant number of dissertation councils. Today, officials are covering up the mass closure of councils with a drop in the quality of dissertations! Let's say their quality has dropped. But where and when in the world have they seen the quality of dissertations improved by simply reducing advice?! In 2014, the number of defended dissertations decreased by half compared to 2013, but has their quality improved? Then why was the dissertation council destroyed?

And with the closure of councils, the worst thing happens: institutions for training highly qualified personnel disappear, because people studying in graduate school need to defend themselves normally, and not run around the country in search of a place to defend their dissertation. Then how will we build innovative education in conditions of total destruction of the holy of holies of science - the system of training scientists?

The situation is aggravated by the fact that today the reform of Russian education is also carried out according to external recipes. As a result, modern school policy resembles Russian foreign policy during the Kozyrev era. But in general, the internal mechanisms of destruction of Russian education are reinforced by external ones.

But what do we get by destroying the best concept education in the world and replacing it with (American)? And although it is practically impossible to do this - we live in too different cultural traditions - let’s say we build it. And what will we get! American education is worse in concept than the traditional Russian education available today, because American education, which liberals always talk about only with aspiration: individualism, free and creative personality, etc. etc., - in comparison with the Russian one, if only we soberly evaluate the American and Russian schools. Figuratively speaking, the same as the Russian classical music and country. No, I have nothing against country music. I’m just not sure that this music is better than the classical art of Russia, and most importantly, that if the Bolshoi Theater Symphony Orchestra under the direction of Fedoseev himself is equipped with a banjo, then it will play country music better than American cowboys.

I know all the indignation of the liberal camp: are you against the development of Russian education? I'll explain. No, I am not against its development. You simply cannot create something by destroying a great tradition. Has the bitter fate of Tsarist Russia and the USSR, destroyed by the hands of our ancestors and our own hands, taught us nothing? Isn’t it clear that it is impossible to create Russian education by replacing it with an education that is worse in concept? You cannot develop the Bolshoi Theater by staging Rosenthal's Children in it. Accordingly, “Rosenthal’s Children” at the Bolshoi Theater is a modern liberal policy in Russian education.

Is real development of Russian education possible?

To answer this question, we must understand that there is no simple connection between the development of society and its individual social spheres. A society may lag behind in its development in some areas, but be ahead in others.

One of the highest achievements of the USSR was its education! The secret of the success of our education was that in the USSR it was possible to build a truly classical education system for everyone.

And this means that our task, having realized that we have inherited the best education system in the world in concept (in the West it exists only in the form of elite schools), is to preserve and develop this system. And this can only be done by organically developing this system, for which we remember that many times the President of Russia pointed out the need to develop education based on the traditional values ​​of our country. Alas, his direct instructions were not followed. The question arises: “What do you propose?” First of all, radically change the ideology of the development of Russian education. This should not be a liberal, but a conservative-patriotic ideology, presupposing the development of the country and its education on its own foundations. At the same time, we are not talking at all about isolation, much less about developmental lag. It’s just that something can be developed only by internally developing the system itself, improving it in the logic of internal development, while interacting with the whole world.

Accordingly, the successful development of our education is possible as an organic development of classical principles. This is the education that most successfully develops a comprehensively developed creative personality, and is the answer to the challenges of the time, to unpredictable natural and social challenges. And this requires extremely intense daily work to develop our education by all its subjects - from the state to parents.

And then there is the need for personnel selection. It’s not enough to make a decision to fly into space and allocate funds to build a rocket; you need to find Korolev capable of designing and building a rocket. Let me emphasize: we are not talking about a purge of personnel, but about the selection of personnel capable of solving the enormously difficult problem of the organic development of Russian education, which faces global challenges.

Spiritual and moral education as the most important direction in the development of general education

If we can talk about Russian education as a whole as a system that is in the stage of its destruction, then its foundation - spiritual and moral education, and it is this that traditionally determines the characteristics of Russian education, we can talk about as a sphere that has already received a death sentence, and The only thing that remains is for time - literally in 3-5 years - to finally bury him.

Of course, when we talk about spiritual and moral education, the first question that arises is: does Russia need it at all and what should it be like? And how right were our ancestors in placing it as the foundation of our education?

Is it necessary? No other issue in the development of our education today causes such fierce controversy as the problem of organizing spiritual and moral education based on the traditional religious cultures of Russia. Liberals, speaking out against the systemic teaching of Orthodox culture, give a lot of arguments against this, starting with the purely practical – the curriculum, which is “not rubber”, and ending with the theoretical ones, such as the fact that there is no soul! Let's say not. But then why do more than 1.5 million people die each year in our country from spiritual diseases (alcoholism, drug addiction, suicide, etc.), which is twice the number of victims in the Gulag during Stalin’s entire reign? Let's think about the numbers: according to official data, 8 million people in our country use drugs. Even more - alcohol. How to counter this?

Only in one and only way: by creating a pedagogical system that forms spiritually and morally healthy people. The obvious truth. But instead, the liberal community effectively destroyed spiritual and moral education in Russian schools. Its defeat began with the liquidation of the regional component, within which Orthodox culture was taught. The final verdict became the “Strategy for the development of education in Russia for the period until 2025.” This is a complete unconditional victory, and with the general joy of the Orthodox community, which is actively taking part in the preparation and adoption of this “Strategy” and rejoicing that there is finally (!) no “liberal crap” in this document! At the same time, the fact that the “Strategy” does not contain a provision on a system of spiritual and moral education worries her least of all. If there is no spiritual education in the “Strategy”, then very soon there will not even be any memories left of its organization in school. This means that the enormous work of hundreds of scientists and thousands of teachers, the work already done by Russia, at the hands of Orthodox leaders who took part in the development of the “Strategy”, will turn into dust.

Well, now let’s understand what we are losing by abolishing spiritual and moral education. We are losing not only spiritual and moral education, which made it possible to form the spiritual and moral immunity of the country, but also the very possibility of reproducing the civilizational matrix of Russia. After all, it is recreated by people. And these people can only be formed in a system of spiritual and moral education, built on the basis of traditional religious values, just as the scientific and technical sphere of society is formed by people who have received mental education, the content of which is built on the basis of scientific values.

To understand what we have lost, let's conduct the following thought experiment. As you know, L.N. Tolstoy was not only a brilliant writer, but also a spiritual figure. As a spiritual figure, he is known as the most merciless critic of the Russian Orthodox Church. As an alternative to it, he proposed his teaching, called Tolstoyism. And how many people in Russia did Tolstoyism unite? But let’s say he is right in his criticism, and the Orthodox Church should not exist on earth. Now imagine that instead Tolstoyanism would be introduced in Russia! And what would Russia get? Firstly, the denial of the entire previous culture, a complete break with the previous culture. Secondly, a complete reformatting of society. I’m not sure that in a country professing Tolstoyism, the books of even L.N. himself would have been preserved. Tolstoy. Would Russia survive as a result of such reformatting? We can absolutely say: no! No! and no!

So, if society wants to see its younger generation healthy, it will organize a system of physical education. Accordingly, if society wants to have spiritually and morally healthy people, it must organize systematic spiritual and moral education. And our ancestors, who believed such upbringing to be the basis of education, were right.

What content and how should such education be organized? Any education develops successfully only if it has its optimal content: for example, for mental education, the system of scientific values ​​is optimal, for aesthetic education – artistic, etc. For spiritual and moral education, the system of traditional religious values ​​is optimal. There is no equivalent replacement for this content. Without this system of values, spiritual and moral education ceases to exist as an absolutely necessary life type of education; it turns into a set of good wishes, and not absolute living truths, because moral values ​​have their vital significance and meaning only in the system of spiritual values. Because of this, spiritual values ​​determine not only the system of moral values, but the entire cultural, entire civilizational space of Russian society.

This means that for the successful development of Russian upbringing and education, a holistic system of spiritual and moral education is necessary - from kindergarten before university – on the basis of traditional religious values. It should become the semantic basis of all our education and upbringing, which should have a system of general Orthodox education, similar to the system of general education with in-depth study of various branches of culture; special military schools, music, sports schools; system of additional education in the Sunday school system, etc.

And only when we restore the spiritual and moral foundation can we build an education that, developing on this basis, is able to respond to the global challenges of our time.

Conclusion

Building the country's ideology on the foundation of Christian civilization and scientific and technological progress could become the basis for the development of a modern education system in a resurgent Russia - education aimed at forming a person capable of living in conditions of social uncertainty.

However, no less important than understanding the main direction of the general parameters and conditions for the successful development of education is the question: who and how will carry out this process?

How to escape from the labyrinth of destruction of your correct ideas with your own hands, or more precisely, with the hands of those who are instinctively aimed at destroying Russia? The only way is to appoint creators rather than destroyers as leaders of education. And the higher the level of management, the greater importance this requirement for the manager should have.

An equally important question is: how? To do this, we must understand that we live in much worse conditions than during the war, because we live in conditions of uncertainty. If during a war a mobilization project begins to work, then during a spiritual and moral crisis this method of organizing life should be even more in demand, since it is possible to implement a development project in the conditions of a global spiritual and moral crisis only through an incredible effort of faith, will and reason, because to resist the social Only the energy of faith, reason, will (courage) and conscience can disintegrate.