CC BY
12Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences 8 (2013 6) 1219-1231
УДК 316.723
Educational Environment of Young People as Part of Socio-cultural Environment of the Country and the Region
Aleksandr P. Pavlov*
Siberian Federal University 79 Svobodny, Krasnoyarsk, 660041 Russia
Received 14.07.2013, received in revised form 24.07.2013, accepted 02.08.2013
The topic of the present article is socio-cultural space as the sphere of human capital of young people in modern Russia. The article studies the problem of efficiency of realization of the resources of the youth human capital in the socio-cultural environment of the country. The main attention is paid to educational resources, the role of education in socialization of young people.
The author proves that from the point of view of sociology, the concept of educational environment is broader than that of teaching and pedagogical environment. The educational environment includes the full range of conditions (physical, legal, psychological, value) which not only encourage young people to study, but also shape them as an actors of the educational process in the country, the region. In the author's opinion, not only does socio-cultural space connect individuals in the space-time continuum, it is also a kind of horizon ofpossibilities for realization by individuals of life potential. The author offers his own interpretation of the phenomenon under study, paying particular attention to the "diachronic" aspect of the analysis: the study of the life trajectories of young people in the socio-cultural environment of modern Russian society. For realization of the author's approach implement a number of concepts are used, that have practically not been studied in social science: "the models of life", "reputation and achievement-oriented capital of the youth".
Keywords: socio-cultural space, human capital, the youth, educational environment, the model of life.
This work was financially supported by the Russian Foundation for the Humanities as part of the research project of the RGNF "The dynamics of socio-cultural processes in East Siberian region in the context of contemporary modernization of Russia (on materials of sociological research in Krasnoyarsk Krai)," Project №: 13-03-00379.
Introduction
The current situation with education at all levels, including school, under the conditions of the reforms in the society, is characterized by the search for new educational paradigms necessitated by the "challenges" of the epoch.
Some of them are:
1. Russia's entry into the global world of information, into the global online community, accompanied by cultural assimilation, "blurring" of cultural boundaries between countries and nations;
© Siberian Federal University. All rights reserved Corresponding author E-mail address: [email protected]
*
2. The world is swiftly changing. This is especially true ofinformation technologies, which, over the last ten - fifteen years, have changed the world beyond recognition. Radical restructuring of all spheres of public life, including education, is taking place. There are new texts, discourses, social codes and ways to read them.
3. In fact, the country's social and cultural space has completely changed over the last decade. The modern world is developing on the basis of fundamentally new algorithms. New ways are necessary for manipulating huge volumes of heterogeneous data, using human resources, located and distributed in social enclaves, sectors on the basis of "horizontal", "network" principles of human life.
4. The problems in education in Krasnoyarsk Krai are the same as in the country as a whole. Of course, there are some specifics. It is known that there are large gaps in the quality and standard of living of the inhabitants of different territories of the krai. Moreover, a lot of social landscape (villages, small towns, posyolki) which were the centres of social and cultural life are being destroyed, are degrading, their population is aging, people, especially young, are going away. A significant proportion of young people do not connect their life with their "native homeland". Culture and education could be "compensatory" resources to hold young people. But these spheres are in need of support, in some territories they are just on the edge of disaster. Suffice it to mention the chronic shortage of school teachers, poverty and dilapidated state of cultural institutions. Especially in small towns, villages and posyolki.
Most of the settlements, including some districts of the capital city of the krai, are uncomfortable, not cozy enough for living. There are not enough comfortable urban areas for relaxing, walking, not enough houses with modern conveniences and clean, well-kept yards.
Culture in the regions of the krai is poorly oriented at the youth audience; it does not cater for their demands.
Example
The important resource of cultural potential of young people is Siberian Federal University, where young people study, who come from different regions of the krai, Siberia.
Unfortunately, the majority of the young people studying in SFU and other universities of Krasnoyarsk do not aim to return home after graduation. The regions of the Krai, deprived of the youth capital, which, in fact, is the main innovative, creative capital, are doomed to spiritual stagnation, stagnation in all spheres of public life. This situation, in our opinion, is not seriously enough studied by scientists and regional politicians concerned with problems of young people.
Not only should modern sociologists actively participate in monitoring studies of social and cultural processes in the country, the region, but they also should look for new approaches to understanding social effects of management activities in the context of modernization. This is necessary not only for sociologists, but also for future managers, teachers, researchers in different spheres concerned with modernization (Nemirovskiy, 2012).
New approaches are, in their turn, based on new concepts. For example, the concepts of social and cultural space, and life trajectories are more and more actively applied in domestic and foreign sociology.
The problems of socio-cultural environment are interdisciplinary. The studies of socio-cultural space are carried out by representatives of various humanities and social sciences: anthropologists, sociologists, historians, linguists, culturologists, art historians, philosophers.
The sociological approach to the category of space was developed in the works of the classics of Western Sociology: M. Weber, G. Simmel, representatives of Chicago School (R. Park, E. Burgess), structuralism and post-structuralism (M. Foucault). Particularly noteworthy is the concept of habitus by French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu. Various aspects of the structure and dynamics of the socio-cultural environment were explored by F. Graebner, W. Schmidt, F. Ratzel, etc.
Among the domestic sociologists who have made a contribution to the study of social and socio-cultural spaces such "classics" of socio-philosophical and sociological thought can be named as P.A. Sorokin, N.Ya. Danilevskiy; Soviet and modern Russian scientists: A. R. Fillipov, E. A . Orlova, M.V. Gorbanevskiy, V.N. Toporov, Yu.M. Lotman , N.N. Bystrova, A.V. Sokolov etc.
From the standpoint of sociology, socio-cultural space can be represented by the following structural levels: physical (natural and geographical landscape, the physical space), social (social areas, habituses, the boundaries that mark the social distance between individuals, social groups), value-symbolic (phenomenal spaces, which are eidetic, imaginative, mythic, ideological, communicative representations of social reality.)
From our point of view, socio-cultural space is a space of person's activities, where his/her social and life potential is realized. According to P. Bourdieu, "Social space is the abstract space, constituted by an ensemble of subspace fields (the economic field, the intellectual field, etc.), owing their structure to unequal distribution of certain types of capital, social space can be viewed as the structure of distribution of different types of capital". (Bourdieu, 1993b.)
The cultural component of social space means that it is organized "around the person."
Social space is the sphere of actualizing social and cultural experiences, socialization, the area in which an individual's personality is formed.
From our point of view, socio-cultural space is an anthroposociogenous landscape: the space in which human dimension is relevant to social ones.
Socio-cultural space should be considered in synchronic and diachronic perspectives.
Synchronic perspective: symbolically marked, regulatory and institutionalized social distances, positions of social actors in the society.
Diachronic perspective: life trajectories of individuals in social space.
Despite the fact that the term "socio-cultural space" is rather often used by sociologists as well as representatives of other social sciences, there is no common understanding and interpretation of this term.
We believe that social space is structured according to the nature of human life.
Of course, objective parameters of the environment have a determinative impact on the nature and dynamics of social order, on the system of social life and mentality.
In addition to objective dimensions of social spaces, there are also their phenomenally-ontological characteristics, which are equally important. They include spatial images-representations, "symbolic universals", within which ontological meanings are constituted, and basing on which, life trajectories of individuals are shaped.
P. Bourdieu treats social space as "an ensemble of invisible links, the same ones that form the space of positions that are external to each other, defined through one another, according to their proximity, neighborhood, or the distance between them, as well as their relative positions: at the top , at the bottom and in between". (Bourdieu, 1993a)
In other words, there is no "pure" space (except as an abstract cognitive model used in fundamental theories). It is always filled, permeated by a multitude of social relations, and therefore has quality characteristics. This means that social space is not just a place for placing and positioning people, objects, resources, etc. It is a real and symbolic system of current social topology, social mark, with the help of which a person identifies himself as a social actor.
Figuratively speaking, it is not only a "room" for a community of people, it is also a "mirror" in which one sees oneself, finds oneself among others and finds in oneself something that connects him/her with others. Social space is the area where socio-cultural self-identification is formed. Self-identification is supplemented by social identification with the specific region, territory that the person perceives as his/her "living space." Each territory has its own specific self-identification (Nemirovskiy, 2011).
Another important aspect of spatial differentiation should be paid attention to.
Any person lives in three worlds. Our graduation is different from the well-known concept of the three worlds by Karl Popper. The first world is the world of human existence, that E. Husserl defined as "life-world", and his student M. Heidegger called Dasein. It is the primary, "primordial" world of human presence together with others, the world of existential worries about their own existence, the spirit to live, "exist" in the face of Death, Nothing.
Social space - is the sphere of life, the environment, which organizes the daily life of the person, makes it possible for them to use symbolic paths, toposes, marks of the boundaries in order to "return" to the existential sources. These "marks" are done by and are visible only to those who perceive the hidden and encrypted moral, sacred, political, etc. topography" (Markov, 1997).
The second mode of space ("the world") is the world that J. Habermas called the world of the System. It is an adaptation of the person to institutional conditions and norms of life. The core of the second world is the law, legal institutions. A person's activity "inside" this world, after M. Heidegger, can be characterized as "at-handedness", instrumentality.
Finally, the third world is the world of knowledge. Social space is an eidetic sphere ensuring inclusion of individuals in communication flows, circulating in social space. In other words, structurally, social space is the organized space of knowledge, meanings, "truths" that are legitimized, "channeled" through specific institutions and practices (educational and training institutions, socialization.)
The institutionalized "third world" is the educational environment. It is important to emphasize that education of a young person is not limited to his/her attending school. As it was rightly observed by a well-known American philosopher and psychologist John Dewey: "We bring up not directly, but through the medium ... either we allow the spontaneously evolving environment to direct the education of young people, or we shape a special environment for this purpose" (Dewey, 2000).
Point
We believe that from the point of view of sociology, the concept of educational environment is broader than that of teaching and pedagogical environment. Its central element, the object and, at the same time, the subject is the personality of a young man. Therefore, educational environment includes both educational and pedagogical environment, and also the full range of conditions (physical, legal, psychological, value) which not only encourage young people to study, but also shape them as active actors of educational process in the country, the region.
It can be added to the above said that: not only does social space connect individuals in the space-time continuum, it is also a kind of horizon of possibilities for realization by individuals of their life potential. In this meaning, it can be said that social space as an essential element of social order is a complex of interrelated institutionalized disciplinary spaces, "responsible" for production and cultivation of the human body and spiritual order of everyday life, connected with it.
From the point of view of French sociologist P. Bourdieu, social space is organized in such a way that the distribution of power and symbolic capital are fixated in it. Symbolic capital is "the form, taken by different types of capital, which are considered and recognized as legitimate." In other words, the point is that individuals tend to occupy such positions in social space that have a greater value weight and more prestigious status.
But symbolic capital is distributed unevenly in social space and localized in different fields, each of which corresponds to the particular type of power and the method of allocating capital. "The position of the agent in social space can be determined by this agent's position in various fields, i.e. in the distribution of power, activated in each separate field" (Bourdieu, 1993b).
For example, in the education system students as agents of this field are focused on such types of capital as knowledge, future professions, which are legitimated by diplomas. School teachers develop their own capital in the form of titles, positions, etc.
Social space is a formative principle, a kind of matrix, which is the basis of the constitution of the social order. At the same time, it itself is structured in the process of struggle and competition of individuals for the privileged niches in the society. The space simultaneously produces the order and fixes its structural boundaries.
The disciplinary space and subspace of the modern information society are undergoing significant changes. Firstly, they are losing, in our view, a number of features that were inherent in the social spaces of traditional and modernist societies. First of all, institutionalized structures, "responsible" for substantivation of meanings, which circulate in a given space, are being blurred. The structures, which served as centers of meaning, institutionalized signifiers, are being destroyed. Inflation of accepted norms, regulating the processes of understanding of social reality, is taking place. Social reality is losing its eidetic integrity, clarity. As a result -there are communication failures affecting behavior of institutions, individuals, and leading to unnecessary time and resource losses and expenses. In other words, the modern man lives in a world of over-complex mosaic-like labyrinth, in which traditional communication channels are destroyed. These failures are most obvious in the processes of socialization of young people, who do not have a clear understanding of what education is, what life strategies they need.
The space of eidos is being replaced by the space of installations. Social reality is reproduced without participation of individuals, with the help of special techniques of "assemblies", the so-called simulacra. Unlike eidoses, which are images that integrate people around core values and meanings, modern space of simulacra (supermarkets, stadiums, airports) are formed on the principle of assembling "Lego" cubes: it is possible to create any "realities", "worlds" from the same substrate units.
This concerns, in our view, the current state of education, too. The education crisis is related primarily to the fact that education is gradually losing its correspondence to its name. Indeed, the educational (eidetic) space requires compulsory presence and participation of individuals in the eidetic event that is explicated with the help
of specific discursive practices (debates and discussions), and is expressed in a particular mood, participation of young people in educational processes that take place in the society. There is a risk of elimination of human presence from educational processes, of such qualities of an individual that make him the semantic center of his own existence.
The process of blurring eidetic space is accompanied by destruction of traditional disciplinary spaces regulating human actions. Disciplinary spaces are becoming history; they are replaced by the society of anonymous control, the society of universal transparency, social installations and manipulative techniques. This is the age when the intimate center of existence -the soul (for which there is no place in the new spaces) is disappearing.
First of all, it should be emphasized that the youth of the twenty-first century differs in their value orientations not only from their peers, who lived in the Soviet Union, but also from the young generation of the nineties of the last century. During the first decade of the new century, a lot of things changed in the life of the country, in the life of young people.
Firstly, the youth of the XXI century (for convenience, we will call it 'the modern youth') is a generation that does not actually know the experience of living in the Soviet Union under the conditions of "real socialism." In contrast to the generation of the nineties, it is indifferent to the Soviet past.
At the same time, the youth of the twenty-first century as well as the young generation of the nineties live in the state of permanent risk that has acquired a systemic character. We can talk about uncertainty, unpredictability of life trajectory, of self-determination and self-realization of all young people to a greater or lesser extent.
The risks are connected not only with such factors as competition, market, the dynamics and
revolutionary nature of innovation processes, covering all spheres of social and individual life. They are due to a fragile system of canals ("lifts") of social mobility. In the nineties the opportunities for young people to achieve their social and life success, using traditional legitimate channels of mobility (education, training etc.), were extremely limited.
You could add to this the extremely low level of social protection of young people by the state. The "risk strategies", which are based on the ideologemes: "to survive at any cost", "the end justifies the means" have come to the forefront. Young people with this ideology often resort to criminal channels in order to succeed (racketeering, theft, robbery, drug trafficking, etc.). As it was rightly noted by Yu.A.Zubok: "the uncertainty of life situation and the need for risky behavior distort values-aims and actualize values-means, affecting social development of young people as a directed process" (Zubok, 2003).
The desire of students to pursue higher education should be noted as a positive aspect of their socialization. The fact that nowadays the majority of young people are seeking higher education does not mean that they all want to get high-quality knowledge and professions. For many young people education is a "factory of illusions": an imitation of employment, imitation social and life success is created and performed for several years. After graduating from a higher education institution, when a young person needs to engage in work and social employment, these illusions fade. Sociological studies show that, paradoxically, high motivation to work and focus on productive work lead to reduction in living standards, rather than to their increase.
It is not by chance that in our society a type of young person, called the "major" is spread. A major is a fast liver, a person who is living for today. The main thing for him is "beautiful life", ability to "impress". This type is common
not only among wealthy and affluent teenagers and young people, but also among young people without means, the socially unprotected part of young people.
One cannot but agree with the opinion that "the majority of young people have a mosaic-eclectic pseudo-mentality, i.e. absence of any more or less clear picture of the world, values, norms and attitudes, apparent contradictions in the mind" (Semenov, 2007).
Nowadays the attitude of young people to education, especially to higher education, has changed. Education is more and more often viewed as the most important resource of one's success in life and improving one's social status.
The needs of the modern youth, especially school children, are often not based on conscious long-term life strategies, and therefore are situational and opportunistic in nature. Another significant part of young people lives as if "off the cuff", i.e. by short time distances without setting long-term objectives. Realization of personality occurs in the transition from one life "project" to another. These projects are short-term, isolated, self-sufficient. This is a "small life" that a young person is living "here and now". There is hardly any successiveness to previous projects. Each "project" (secondary school, technical school, college, work, marriage, personal relationships, etc.) is connected with other projects on the "network". This means that the temporal structure of social and personal life of young people is not built as a linear trajectory of life ("life line"), but as a complex network of local life nods, discrete points of biographies of young people.
Many of them think: why change something in their lives. While they are young they can get pleasure from life "here and now". Especially taking into account the fact that virtually all the media, the Internet, the entertainment industry are huge "factories of desires", forming the consumer culture of young people.
Relationships between young people are based on the principles of building of networks in which there is no single center and there are no hierarchical dependencies, but there are numerous horizontal connections. Any change in one "nod" of such network affects other nodes and cells of the network. The very concept of the network structure is the natural antagonist of power verticals. The young generations in Russia operate freely on the horizontal levels of the society, finding their own kind in the immediate community, city, country and the world. This is largely contributed to by the Internet. Under the current conditions, the role of personal qualities of an individual, such as the ability to cope with complex life situations, make responsible and creative solutions, is increasing. The time when success was achieved through the influence of parents or friends is becoming a thing of the past. In this connection, "the pressure" on education, both school and university, is increasing.
Today everyone is talking about the crisis of education, especially school education. They are teachers who the crisis is blamed on. Part of the criticism of modern teaching practice is fair. Indeed, the quality of education is deteriorating. It is not necessary to conduct sociological research in order to make such a conclusion. Students ("yesterday's" pupils) often demonstrate profound ignorance and very poor erudition in almost all areas of knowledge. But it should be noted that the quality of education depends on the motivation of learners. Today, this motivation, especially in the regions and cities with big social and socioeconomic problems, is weak. Why study if I will not be able to apply my knowledge in my town (posyolok). The situation in a big city is slightly better. But even in metropolises the opportunities for young people to apply their knowledge as a resource for well-being and professional success are not ample.
The resources, which a young person has, are not only material (material and financial resources are most often the resources of their parents). Along with material resources, there are other resources.
We will consider other resources of human capital of young people.
Cognitive, educational resource: a complex of socially demanded knowledge, skills and abilities, forming cognitive capacity, competence of a young man.
Reputation (status) resource: prestige, image, "the good name";
Information resource: access to sources of relevant social and commercial information.
Communication resource: possibilities of communication with carriers of information (people, the media, the Internet).
Health resource: psychological and physiological characteristics of a young person.
This combination of resources makes up human capital of a young man. Human capital is a complex of qualities, features of an individual, allowing him/her to achieve a certain life status and success, through the use of life resources.
Recourses themselves are not yet capital. They become capital if they bring social and life dividends to individuals.
There are two types of human capital: achievement-oriented and reputation.
Achievement-oriented capital is the capital that allows a young person to achieve a high social status (career) and financial position.
Reputation capital is the capital which enables a young person to feel their importance in the society and to demonstrate his/her importance to others. Reputation capital is associated with the image of a person. That is, it is important for a holder of this capital to be positively perceived by his social environment and to be identified with people, social spheres and institutions that are considered prestigious, important, high-
status, etc. Image is a symbolic simulation and demonstration of the importance of the social situation of a young person in the social space, with which they identify themselves.
Achievement-orientedcapitalischaracteristic of young people focused on innovation, career. These are mobile people who are not afraid to risk, they have such important qualities as the ability to plan their activities, calculate risks and costs, and correlate them with the benefits, bonuses; they are able to finish what they started, when it comes to achieving personal success. The holders of achievement-oriented capital are usually individualists (but with Russian specifics, as discussed above). They are characterized by a type of behavior (social action) that M. Weber called purpose-rational: well thought-out actions, aimed at success.
Reputation capital is characteristic of people demonstrating either the traditional or value-rational type of behavior.
What kind of capital is more important? Obviously, this is not a proper question. Achievement-oriented capital is necessarily supplemented by reputation one. At least, if we are talking about a normal, civilized society.
It can be said that focusing on reputation capital, in isolation from achievement-oriented capital, had negative consequences and antisocial effects. For example, in the nineties, many young people bought "fake" diplomas of higher education, "papers" of candidates and doctors of science. This was external ostentatious reputation in the form of various titles of honorary academicians of various "academies".
Today the situation is changing. Young people are beginning to realize the importance of reputation capital. There are different reasons for this. One of the most important is competition: when applying for a job and getting high-ranking positions, with equal competences the advantage is with those who demonstrate reputation capital.
So, youth capital is such qualities of a young person that he/she can use to achieve success in life, successful socialization and social mobility. That is to say, his/her individual capital. On the other hand, personal capital of young people is (or at least should be) public capital. That is, it must bring revenue and benefit to the society as a whole.
In any normal society, a legitimate sequence of stages of socialization and social mobility is established. Of course a person can "skip" some life phases. Not everyone experienced the "school of life" in kindergarten, not every young person studies in institutions of higher education. But everyone knows that each institutional phase of socialization is a kind of resource (and, at the same time, the channel), which allows them to have additional bonuses in the form of success, money, career, etc.
Of course not all institutional phase, which a young person "goes through", bring him dividends in practice. In some kindergartens educational process and the educational potential are at extremely low level. And higher education is not always really higher, either. It is a kind of system composed of interconnected "modules" (a combination of educational and training services, ensuring a certain level of competence necessary to achieve certain level of success). If a young person wants to "raise the bar of success", he has to go through other institutional phases, located along the trajectory of life.
Thus, a life trajectory is an active mechanism for formation, distribution, and "rotation" of human capital. This mechanism involves the institutional system of socialization and social (professional) training of young people - holders of capitals which are in demand in the society. But the "transmission belt" of this mechanism is young people themselves, who are interested in the effective use of institutional resources for
obtaining human capital, which is in demand in the society.
The life path of the modern youth is different from life trajectory of its peers in the USSR due to a higher degree of personal freedom, the opportunity to choose life strategy based on their interests. Moreover, this choice is not made once and forever. Young people can change their life "routes" in the course of their life. Of course, for many young people, there exist objective restrictions: lack of financial resources, life experience, quality education, etc. For example, socialization and social mobility in the countryside and in small towns are not comparable with the conditions in the city. Of course, one cannot ignore the high level of social differentiation of modern Russian youth.
The life trajectory of an individual, which is a certain line, the set of points of human life, through which he/she passes during their life, depends on both objective factors (environment surrounding objects and phenomena) and subjective (personal preferences).
Every person has one life path. But this way is discrete. At different stages of life a person changes, transforming his/her life strategy. To understand the nature of the life path it is important to identify its discrete points - the moments of transition from one phase of life to another. These discrete points are moments of choice of ways of life in new conditions of individual and social existence, there are points of accumulation of a complex of reasons (objective and subjective, biographical and societal) leading to changes in the course of life, in life trajectories.
Life trajectories should be considered in diachronic and synchronic perspectives.
Diachronic (temporary) characteristics include the main life phases (periods) of social existence of young people. They are, first of all, age phases, which are at the same time phases of formation and development of a young person.
Diachronic analysis involves the study of sequential change of the main institutional life phases: kindergarten, school, vocational college, higher education.
Synchronic characteristic is the characteristic of connection between institutional life phases of a young person with other biographical circumstances and events: the influence of the social environment, marriage, the army, etc.
Life trajectories of young people is a relatively new and insufficiently developed direction in youth research. Moreover, a common methodological approach to the analysis of life trajectories of young people does not exist.
However, there are a number of researchers whose works may well be used as a research tool for analysis of life trajectories of young adults. In particular, we can highlight the works of Russian scientists such as V.T. Lisowskiy, V.G. Nemirovskiy, V.V. Semenov, L.A. Koklyagin, I.A. Potemkin, T.V. Sinyugin, Ju. Novak and others.
Among foreign scientists, the works of F. Znaniecky, J. Halasinsky, L. Krivitsky, W. Grabski, J.-P. Almodovar, P. Thompson and others, deserve attention. There are a number of approaches to the study of life trajectories.
1. The deterministic approach. Life trajectories are caused by conditions of the social environment and, above all, the material conditions.
2. The status-role approach. The aim of this approach is to identify the dependence of the choice of life strategies of young people on socio-status positions acquired in the process of socialization.
3. The institutional approach is connected with the peculiarities of institutional resources which are supposed to ensure realization of the potential of young people, access of young people to these resources, readiness of young people
to build life strategies on the basis of the existing institutional resources and possibilities.
4. The value-based approach focuses on the needs, values and aims of young people as the main inner determinants of building of a life strategy.
5. The psychological approach. This approach focuses on the study of internal motivation of young people in their choice of life strategies.
6. The synergetic approach. Using this approach allows to consider life trajectories in complex dynamics in which various subjective and objective factors are involved; to study either subtle, latent mechanisms creating the environment in which human capital is circulating, or spontaneously appearing elements that have a destructive effect on the use of human capital.
We believe that all approaches have their value. However, the most appropriate methodological approach to the study of life trajectories of young people is the systematic approach combined with the phenomenological approach.
We believe that optimal solutions to the problems of life trajectories should be looked for in the synthesis of the systemic and phenomenological approaches. The social system is inseparable from individuals constituting it. The structure of the system is not something external to individuals, but is an objective discrete aspect of their life practices. That is, young people do not just choose life trajectories and their institutional phases. They are active participants (social actors) that create these trajectories, change them, as well as human capital that circulates within them.
The most important channel of socialization and social mobility of young people is education. It is education that is responsible for formation
of young people's life strategies that allow them to confidently engage in independent living, minimizing errors and risks in making vital decisions.
Life strategies are projected on life trajectories determining them. There are some typical models of life paths (life trajectories):
1. The linear model. This model was "inherited" from the Soviet Union. The essence of the model is quite simple: there is a system of institutional channels which broadcast, select and distribute socially important information. In order to be successful and socialized one needs to successively go through certain educational phases: kindergarten, school, vocational college, higher education. The cumulative effect is that each channel has its own legitimate opportunities, its own level of competence. Having coped with educational resources at a certain level, a young man has the right to go to a higher level. A person with higher education should have the knowledge and competencies obtained at lower stages of socialization. Today, the linear model has not lost its relevance, but has certain problems. In particular, due to a decline in the quality of teaching in schools and universities, there is leveling of differences between secondary and higher education. Secondary education is increasingly becoming "not up to much" and higher is often, at best, similar to secondary education. The cumulative effect is being lost: the transition from, for example, school to university is often not accompanied by a qualitative restructuring in the young person's mind. Freshmen do not differ much in the level of their intellect from high school students. In the modern linear model accumulation of knowledge in the chain: "kindergarten - school - colleges - high school" is extensive in nature, not involving qualitative transformation of consciousness and behavior strategies.
2. The traditional model. This model is a modification of the linear model. Young people who use this model base on the traditionalist strategy: to act like everyone else, "as a normal person should do". In this model, the main motivation of studying is prestige, tradition. Prestige is the very reason why many young people enter higher education institutions.
3. The virtual model. It is connected with a strategy of overcoming frustrated states of consciousness, inferiority complexes caused by social injustice, low social status, with the help of simulative, virtual resources. Almost all young people want to be successful and rich, not realizing that many of them do not have any material or educational resources for this. However, this strategy is very popular and is in demand among the young. You can talk about a class of young people, who are characterized by "heightened demands, but who do not have material resources to meet their demands" (Pasovets, 2010). The main channel of socialization is the Internet.
4. The modular (network) model. This model does not deny the linear model of life trajectories. But it is based on a fundamentally different life and educational strategy. Its essence is that the generator and the selector of the necessary information is a young person him/herself. The cumulative effect (accumulation of educational capital) is not so much due to the absorption of the dosed information (knowledge) coming from educational channels (school, college, university), but due to the fact that the young man himself is searching for relevant information, partly through the named sources (channels), and partly through other educational channels (participation in conferences, business games, visiting lectures by leading experts in different fields, training in different profession simultaneously, etc.). A characteristic feature of this model is that the main channel of getting information is the
person himself/herself. The network principle of organizing of this model is that a young person is involved in various information networks (connections) .
In this case, he/she is not a passive consumer of information, but is involved in the development and updating of information and education networks, thanks, in particular, to the Internet-based resources.
5. Perhaps we should also mention the marginally-escapist model, which is, in fact, a variant of the virtual model. Its essence is that many young people try to get away from reality through such channels as the Internet, youth subculture.
Still, the main channel of socialization is education.
The education system is a multi-tiered system, from primary education to higher.
It is a sort of combination of lifts, each of which gives its "passengers" the opportunity to get to a certain floor. However, one must make effort in order to take advantage of these opportunities.
The main problem of education, in our opinion, is in total (at all levels) discrepancy between instrumental aspects of education (professional knowledge, skills, abilities) and status and personal aspect (outlook, knowledge, general and humanitarian culture.)
The problem of education as a channel for realization of the life trajectory of a young person is also in the absence of connection
between different levels of education. So, there is no necessary cumulative effect. Logically, each stage of education marks a certain level of socialization of a young man, his formation as a personality. But in practice, many young people who have graduated from institutions of higher education do not differ considerably in their life experience and erudition from those who do not have higher education. Higher education is not always a "stepping stone" to the achievement of strategic objectives and social goals.
Results
Summing up, it should be said that education is undergoing a crisis, especially in view of the fact that it does not fit into the structure and dynamics of development of the regions of the country, including such perspective in terms of modernization region as Eastern Siberia. The fact that modern education is not fully integrated into socio-cultural and economic space of the regions of the country makes it ineffective, dysfunctional. All this creates serious obstacles to modernization, because modern education is poorly involved in the formation of its human, and above all, youth potential. (Nemirovskiy V.G., Nemirovskaya A.V., Khamidullina, 2012)
Educational resource of a person should be integrated into his/her other resources. Only in this case we can talk about effectiveness of education at all levels.
References
1. Bourdieu, P. The beginnings. Moscow: Socio-logos, 1993a.
2. Bourdieu, P. Sociology of politics. Moscow: Socio-logos, 1993b.
3. Dewey, D. Democracy and Education. Moscow: Pedagogy Press, 2000.
4. Markov, B.V. Philosophical Anthropology: Essays on the History and Theory. St. Petersburg. "Lan", 1997.
5. Nemirovskiy, V.G. Features of socio-cultural identity of the population of Eastern Siberia / Sociological Research. N. 8. , 2011. S. 88-94.
6. Nemirovskiy, V.G. What teaches the sociology of future managers, teachers, researchers? / Sotsis, 2012, № 5 - p.48 - 58.
7. Nemirovskiy, V.G., Nemirovskaya, A. V., Hamidullina K.R. Social and cultural barriers to modernization of Eastern Siberia (at the example of Krasnoyarsk Krai and the Republic of Khakassia) / Sociological Research. N. 9. , 2012. S. 33-41
8. Pasovets Yu.M. To the social portrait of Russian youth: similarities and regional specifics of material states. / / Sotsis, 2010, № 3. S. 101-106.
9. Semenov V. E. Values and problems of education of the modern youth / / Sotsis 2007, № 4. S. 37-43.
10. Zubok, Yu.A. The problem of social development of young people under the conditions of risk. / / Sotsis 2003. N.4. S. 42-51
Образовательная среда молодежи
как составляющая социокультурного пространства
страны и региона
А.П. Павлов
Сибирский федеральный университет Россия 660041, Красноярск, пр. Свободный, 79
Предмет предлагаемой статьи - социокультурное пространство как сфера реализации человеческого капитала молодежи в современной России. В статье рассмотрена проблема эффективности ресурсов реализации молодежного человеческого капитала в социокультурном пространстве страны. Основное внимание при этом уделено образовательному ресурсу, роли образования в социализации молодежи.
Автор обосновывает, что с точки зрения социологии понятие образовательной среды шире понятия учебно-педагогической среды. Образовательная среда включает в себя весь комплекс условий (материальных, правовых, психологических, ценностных), не только побуждающих молодого человека учиться, но и формирующих его в качестве актора образовательного процесса в стране, регионе.
Социокультурное пространство, по мнению автора, не только связывает индивидов в пространственно-временном континууме, оно есть некий горизонт возможностей для реализации индивидами своих жизненных сил.
Автор предлагает собственную трактовку изучаемого феномена, обращая особое внимание «диахроническому» аспекту анализа: исследованию жизненных траекторий молодежи в социокультурном пространстве современного российского общества. Для реализации авторского подхода используется ряд понятий, которые в социологической науке практически не изучены: «модели жизненного пути», «репутационный и достиженческий» капитал молодежи.
Ключевые слова: социокультурное пространство, человеческий капитал, молодежь, образовательная среда, модель жизненного пути.
Работа выполнена при финансовой поддержке Российского гуманитарного научного фонда в рамках научно-исследовательского проекта РГНФ "Динамика социокультурных процессов в Восточно-Сибирском регионе в контексте современной модернизации России (на материалах социологических исследований в Красноярском крае)", Проект №: 13-03-00379.
