CC BY
55
Copyright © 2019 by Academic Publishing House Researcher s.r.o.
K " *
I
Published in the Slovak Republic Media Education (Mediaobrazovanie) Has been issued since 2005 ISSN 1994-4160 E-ISSN 1994-4195 2019, 59(3): 418-424
DOI: 10.13187Zme.2019.3418 www.ejournal53.com
Transformation of Theoretical and Methodological Foundations
of Russian Media Literacy Education in the "Perestroika" Period (1984—1991)
Elena Muryukina a > *
a Rostov State University of Economics, Russian Federation
Abstract
The changes that took place in the years of "perestroika" had a significant impact on modern media education in Russia, changed and expanded the methodological foundations of media pedagogy, determined the trends in the development of this sector of education in accordance with changes within the country (political, social, economic, etc.) & global experience. Transformation processes touched upon the broadening of methodological and theoretical conceptions. For this purpose, there were objective prerequisites created that may be summed up as follows: practical activities are often ahead of theoretical research and generalization in the field of media education; the era of perestroika brought our country out of isolation in relation to the Western world, so the theory of the dialogue of cultures has gained relevance; access to foreign research works was gained, all that influenced the development of media education in the USSR. The changes that took place in the years of "perestroika" had a significant impact on modern media education in Russia. Along with the transformation processes that affected the methodological and theoretical foundations of Russian media education, the 1980s are characterized by the penetration and integration of Western ideas into the educational environment of the USSR.
Keywords: reforms, history, theoretical foundations, methodology, USSR, media education, perestroika.
1. Introduction
A new stage in the study of the history of state policy for the development of the Russian educational system including the "perestroika" period began in the conditions of radical reforms of the 1980s and continues to the present. The change of the state-political system in Russia, the processes of liberalization in the economic, social and spiritual spheres of society have radically changed the situation in the educational sphere. Reforming the educational system is one of the important indicators of the need for serious changes in society. The reform of education has led to fundamental changes in media education that was caused by the crisis in its structure.
Transformation processes in the domestic media education in the period of "perestroika" are associated with the historical and pedagogical analysis of the domestic media education in the study of philosophical and methodological foundations, content, organizational forms, main directions, analysis of the main media education models.
The main problem of the study is determined by the contradiction that has developed in connection with the vast theoretical and methodological experience gained by the Soviet media education of the 1980s, and the lack of consistent and conceptual study of this heritage in domestic
* Corresponding author
E-mail addresses: murjukina@yandex.ru (E.V. Muryukina)
418
pedagogy. The models of media education developed during the perestroika period are partially implemented in the modern pedagogical system. Therefore, it is important to analyze their relevance, methodological and theoretical conceptions, practical activities of media education in the period of perestroika and to identify potential applications in the modern educational environment, which is also "going through" a deep reform. To solve the revealed contradiction, it is necessary to conduct a historical and pedagogical analysis, which will be based on the principles of science, integrity, through the historical and pedagogical approach in terms of studying the conceptual framework, goals, objectives, directions, organizational forms and possibilities of use in modern educational space.
Today, modern researchers are interested in the study of historical and educational processes that stimulate the transformation processes in the conceptual platform of media education, which initiated the latest developments in this area, synthesized domestic and international experience.
2. Discussion
In the period of perestroika along with reforms in other spheres (economic, political, etc.), educational reforms were initiated, which revealed crisis phenomena in media pedagogy as a branch of pedagogical knowledge. So, addressing the participants of the Founding Congress of the Society of Friends of Soviet Cinema in 1988, I.V. Weisfeld said: "It is no exaggeration to say that the situation with the film education is in a state of crisis. The focal form, reliance on the enthusiasm of teachers and film critics have already become exhausted. There is only one real solution based on the small "islands" of what has already been achieved: to introduce film education nationwide into the general education system with the active participation of the Friends of Cinema Association to actively influence the whole process, to assist public education bodies and scientific institutions. The programme for the restructuring of public education in the country, the attention it gives to humanitarian and aesthetic education, opens up the prospects of new thinking in this area, a true understanding of the scope of the task before us" (Weisfeld, 1988: 6).
The changes that took place in the years of "perestroika" had a significant impact on modern media education in Russia, changed and expanded the methodological foundations of media pedagogy, determined the trends in the development of this sector of education in accordance with changes within the country (political, social, economic, etc.) and global experience.
In the 1980s, many books, articles, research works on the problems of education on the material of various types of media were published in Russia (L.M. Bazhenova, O.A. Baranov, E.A. Bondarenko, I.S. Levshina, S.N. Penzin, G.A. Polichko, A.V. Sharikov, A.V. Spichkin, Y.N. Usov, etc.). The flow of media education research works has increased significantly, especially since "perestroika", when political, social and economic life in the USSR underwent changes. However, works reflecting the study of the history of media education, transformation processes that stimulated the quantitative and qualitative growth of works and practical work in this field of pedagogy are still relatively rare. Foreign researchers (first of all - L. Masterman, C. Bazalgette, A. Hart, D. Buckingham, B. Bachmair, etc.) investigated the problems associated with the history and theory of media education in Europe, however, they have always been limited to the analysis of the Western European experience, without analyzing the situation in the USSR.
Media literacy education in Russia today is gaining more and more supporters, both at the local level (teachers in schools, University staff, etc.) and at the state level. Thus, in the year 2002 specialization № 03.13.30. "Media education" was opened in Taganrog State Pedagogical Institute. It was approved and registered by the Educational and methodical department of pedagogical education of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation. It should be noted that the research works are carried out both on a theoretical and practical levels.
Such media pedagogues as O.A. Baranov, A.V. Fedorov, E.N. Gorukhina, I.S. Levshina, O.F. Nechai, S.N. Penzin, Y.M. Rabinovich, Y.N. Usov, I.V. Weisfeld, etc. were engaged in studying the experience of media education in the USSR. We can state that in the literature we have studied there is no analysis, which shows a complete picture of the changes in the media education sphere, including the prerequisites that predetermined the transformation processes. So, Y.N. Usov in his doctoral research in 1988, S.N. Penzin in the monograph of 1987 attempted to analyze the educational and socio-cultural situation in the country, but these works were not devoid of political conjuncture.
In the 21st century an attempt to consider the milestones in the development of media education in the twentieth century, including the perestroika period was made in the monograph
written by A.V. Fedorov (Fedorov, 2007; 2011; 2015; 2016; 2019; Fedorov et al., 2007; 2015; 2018; Fedorov, Levitskaya, 2015) and I.V. Chelysheva (Fedorov, Chelysheva, 2002). But the research framework did not allow the authors to study the legal documents of that time to synthesize the generalized model that would reflect the unity of implemented in the era of restructuring of media education models, which confirms the origin of the system in the time period under review.
In foreign science, research works on this issue are also fragmentary due to the long closed nature of the Soviet society and pedagogical science. In the period of "perestroika" the communication of domestic media teachers with foreign colleagues was quite active, which had an impact on the development of the media educational movement.
Western scientific research works in the field of media education by M. McLuhan, D. Buckingham, etc. have become available to Soviet scientists. This allowed not only to exchange experiences, but also to come to the understanding that, for example, the artistic image is understood and interpreted differently in the Russian and Western conceptions of media education. G.A. Polichko wrote: "We begin where they end, namely, at the approaches to aesthetic, evaluative communication about the artistic content of the cinematographic work. The language of the screen narration and the analysis of how it is woven, for our domestic film pedagogy is only the first step to its analysis, then the main thing begins - the analysis of what for, for what purpose it was created. The Western conception, particularly the English system of cinematographic education, has in its learning sets something else. As our colleague, M. Phillips, from the English College in Devon, put it, "the evaluation of a work is not a pedagogical problem, but a problem of a person's personal choice" (Polichko, 2006: 82-83).
Agreeing with the position of G.A. Polichko, we can note that another distinctive feature of Western models of media education from Russian is the orientation of European media pedagogues to individual forms of work with students. In the Russian media educational practice, along with such forms of training, group tasks were actively used. Thus, S. Benhamdi, A. Babouri, R. Chiky state that media texts are based on the thesis that "all students are similar. So they can't respond to each student's needs"(Benhamdi et al, 2017).
Though in the analysis of some Western sources we find not only differences, but also similarities. Thus, the American media pedagogues (Guo Ming Chen, 2007) lay the foundation of their activities for the ideological theory, cultural theory, safety theory as well as the theory of critical thinking. These theories were also relevant for media education in the period of "perestroika" in the USSR. Guo Ming Chen notes that they are based on such actions as interpreting, analyzing, evaluating and creating your own media texts (Guo Ming Chen, 2007).
The study of the Western conceptions' influence on the domestic media education of the "perestroika" period is also poorly studied in Russian science.
Thus, in modern pedagogical science there are no studies that comprehensively reveal the essence of the transformation of the domestic media education in the perestroika period. Scientists have not attempted to carry out a comparative analysis of media educational models implemented at this time.
3. Materials and methods
We rely on the following methodological approaches and principles:
- activity orientated principle. A.N. Leontiev wrote that in order to master the achievements of human culture, each new generation must carry out activities similar (though not identical) to those behind these achievements. Therefore, the study of transformation processes, the essence of the media educational activity of the perestroika period provides for the results-based support of the media pedagogues' activity (scientific articles, monographs, creation of scientific schools, etc.);
- historiosophic approach. The basic definition was put forward by N.A. Berdyaev, according to which the philosophy of history, historical knowledge, is one of the ways to the knowledge of spiritual reality;
- anthropological approach. Range of problems and the subject of pedagogical anthropology, according to B.M. Bim-Bud, consists of three problems: human science in general and pedagogical in particular; upbringing of the person by society and the society - by the person; upbringing of the person by the person.
Methods: study of scientific literature on philosophy, pedagogy, psychology, journalism, sociology, cultural studies, art history; historical and pedagogical, and comparative analyses, synthesis, generalization, classification, theoretical modeling.
4. Results
The history of Russian media education was considered by many Russian authors in different historical periods of the country: O.A. Baranov, I.V. Chelysheva, A.V. Fedorov, I.S. Levshina, S.N. Penzin, G.A. Polichko, A.V. Sharikov, A.V. Spichkin, Y.N. Usov, I.V. Weisfeld, A.A. Zhurin, L.S. Zaznobina, etc.
The analysis of transformational changes in the theoretical and methodological foundations of media education, the integration of the ideas of M.M. Bakhtin, V.S. Bibler, L.S. Vygotsky, Y.M. Lotman with Western theories of M. McLuhan, L. Masterman, D. Buckingham will allow:
- to expand the theoretical and methodological foundations of the domestic media pedagogy of the "perestroika" period,
- to justify the integration of Western conceptual theories - socio-cultural, the theory of critical thinking that having synthesized with aesthetic, practical, etc. "caught on" in the Russian educational space and continue to be used today.
It was the "perestroika" period, the time of the methodological base of the Russian media literacy education formation, which was reflected in the works of S.N. Penzin (Penzin, 1987), Y.N. Usov (Usov, 1989), I.V. Weisfeld (Weisfeld, 1988: 6), and others. The formation of the methodological foundations of media literacy education, the extension of conceptions was justified by the challenges of time. That is, in media literacy education there is a contradiction between the existing results of practical work (integrating knowledge of psychology, art history, pedagogy, etc.), and its methodological and theoretical foundations. So, D.N. Abramyan (Abramyan, 1994) wrote that the absence of fundamental works on the psychology of art and artistic creativity in the domestic psychology hinders the effective promotion of our psychologists, philosophers, sociologists and teachers in this field, slows down the process of deepening of the interdisciplinary ties and comprehensive research of artistic creativity and aesthetic education. That is actually the field of media literacy education, which was a comprehensive knowledge at the intersection of such sciences as philosophy, psychology, film studies, pedagogy and aesthetics.
Analyzing the views of scientists of the period under consideration, we can state that media education was largely based on the ideas of the dialectical-materialistic conception of consciousness, which was developed by K. Marx and F. Engels, and then adapted to the Russian reality by V.I. Lenin. Of course, reliance on Marxist-Leninist teaching was the necessary component for the development of pedagogy of the 1980s. It acted as the official doctrine in the Soviet state and had to be reflected in scientific works. This was the ideological component, which was present in the theoretical and methodological basis. At the same time, media scholars begin to write about the importance of dialogue in the organization and implementation of media education. In particular, the dialogical form of communication is considered as the basis of the relationship between students and teachers.
I.V. Weisfeld, in his speech to the media teachers in 1988, said that dialogue should become "a form of communication between the teacher and the audience and cultivating the culture of relationships in the team. Nowadays, the concept of "pedagogy of cooperation", which opposes the pedagogy of coercion, has become widespread. This concept has an ancient origin. We will find its origins in the works of Socrates and Plato, Kamensky and Ushinsky. What if not a dialogue is shown in Makarenko and Sukhomlinsky's methods? Today we turn to this wonderful heritage and try to develop these traditions, to understand their rightful place in a radically reconfigurable pedagogical theory" (Weisfeld, 1988: 10).
Thus, the dialogue becomes one of the backbone components of the media education system, in the future, going beyond the scope of the pedagogical concept only. In later works of media pedagogues, dialogue becomes the philosophical category that permeates not only pedagogical interaction, but also gives meaning to the media texts, which can be revealed to the audience only if the dialogue with the author is possible. The conception of a dialogical form of culture (including media culture) has been developed by M.M. Bakhtin since the 1920s (Bakhtin, 1979).
His conception was contrary to the official Marxist doctrine, so it was unclaimed for a long time. Only perestroika processes in the Soviet Union in the 1980s, for example, the emergence of pluralism of opinions, allowed to study the works of M.M. Bakhtin, having determined their importance for science.
That is, to the transformation processes in the media education of the 1980s can be attributed the change of the philosophical paradigm itself: from dialectical materialism to the
existence of other conceptions of the world, including idealistic ones, which include the teachings of M.M. Bakhtin and V.S. Bibler.
During the perestroika period, our country ceased to be isolated from the world community and became accessible to the dialogue of simultaneously existing cultures. But the current political and economic prerequisites (of the perestroika era) for dialogue revealed the unwillingness of the audience to cultural dialogue. The inability to understand, "penetrate" into another culture caused either its complete denial and rejection or direct imitation of external trappings, by manifestation, without the knowledge of the inner meanings. Thus, one of the transformation processes in the methodological basis of Russian media education in the perestroika period was the realization of the need to correlate the existing foundations in accordance with the already established tradition of media education practice.
The "perestroika" period became a kind of specific period for Russian media pedagogues that allowed:
- to carry out activities aimed at consolidating the efforts of media pedagogues;
- to summarize and analyze the previously scattered experience of media pedagogues in the regions;
- in accordance with the obtained data, to concentrate their efforts on updating the methodological foundations of media education, which should reflect both the specific objectives and the principles, aims of the reform of the USSR educational system.
The study and analysis of methodological conceptions, which formed the basis of media educational activity, lead us to the conclusion that media pedagogues based their works on the teachings of:
- Marx, Engels, Lenin - as the founders of the official philosophical doctrine, within which were all the spheres of human activity in the USSR, including research in the educational system;
- L.S. Vygotsky (Vygotsky, 1963), who in the work The Psychology of Art presented the analysis of the structure of the work without distraction from the content, but penetrating into it. He believed that the content of the work of art is not a material, not a plot, but an effective content that causes aesthetic experiences, determining its specific character;
- M.M. Bakhtin, V.S. Bibler, whose works became available only during the period of perestroika. The appeal of media pedagogues to the dialogical conception of culture as the basis of life creation and development of human self-consciousness significantly expanded the scope of knowledge and methodological base;
- scientists of semiotics (Y.M. Lotman, etc.), who largely explained the specific features of audiovisual texts and their perception by the audience;
- pedagogues who defended the humanistic foundations of education through their activities and views. Y.N. Usov argued (based on the goals and objectives of education reform) that in the 1980s "film education can act as a means of humanization of the educational process, as a system of aesthetic education and artistic development of students. By means of screen arts this system models the elements of the structure of the general theory of aesthetic education, the foundations of which are laid in the works of P.P. Blonsky (Blonsky, 1961), B.T. Likhachev (Likhachev, 1989), V.A. Sukhomlinsky (Sukhomlinsky, 1979), K.D. Ushinsky (Ushinsky, 2000), S.T. Shatsky (Shatsky, 1980) and others. The concept of the film education is close to the definition of aesthetic education as the purposeful process of formation of the child's "essential forces" providing the activity of aesthetic perception, creative imagination, emotional experience, and the formation of spiritual needs as the system of action, generating the system of feelings, tastes, ideals, and creative abilities of the individual" (Usov, 1989: 26-27).
Along with the transformation processes that affected the methodological and theoretical foundations of Russian media education, the 1980s are characterized by the penetration and integration of Western ideas into the educational environment of the USSR. It should be noted that socialist countries have collaborated quite closely in the field of education, as reflected in the literature (Vrabec, 1975). Media educational experience of the capitalist countries was not available for the domestic scientist. Only in the period of perestroika do the Soviet media pedagogues have the opportunity to study the ideas and conceptual foundations of Western states.
Y.M. Lotman's teaching (Lotman, 1973) was given a special role by media pedagogues, but in fact it was of secondary importance in the general number of theoretical conceptions. We connect this position with the fact that the semiotic theory did not meet the main objectives of media education aimed at aesthetic education, comprehensive development of the individual on the
material of mass media. But the analysis of Western ideas "raised a tide" of interest in Lotman's theory.
An important role in the consolidation of domestic and foreign experience belongs to A.V. Sharikov (Sharikov, 1990), who introduced Russian scientists to the world experience of media education:
- he translated works of Western media pedagogues;
- on the basis of the received materials he formulated the basic conception, directions, forms of media education in the world.
We believe that the achievement of his activities was not only in the study of foreign experience, but also the critical analysis of the main ideas in relation to the Russian educational space. It seems important to us that A.V. Sharikov tried to study and analyze not only the experience of specific media pedagogues, but also the main ideas, philosophical platforms, within which this or that media educational model was formulated.
5. Conclusion
During the perestroika period, the media pedagogues of our country made an attempt to summarize and analyze the existing media educational experience. Their work contributed to bringing to a "common denominator" the empirical experience of media pedagogues, the development of common methodological and theoretical foundations of media educational activities. That is, at this time the consolidation of media pedagogues takes place, the prerequisites for the creation of a system of media education in the USSR are set.
Transformation processes touched upon the broadening of methodological and theoretical conceptions. For this purpose, there were objective prerequisites created that may be summed up as follows: practical activities are often ahead of theoretical research and generalization in the field of media education; the era of perestroika brought our country out of isolation in relation to the Western world, so the theory of the dialogue of cultures has gained relevance; access to foreign research works was gained, all that influenced the development of media education in the USSR.
The 1980s are characterized by the possibility of media pedagogues to study the experience of their Western colleagues. Consideration of foreign models of media education, comparative analysis with Soviet models became possible.
Media pedagogues of the perestroika period based their methodological foundations on the teachings of K. Marx, F. Engels, V.I. Lenin, L.S. Vygotsky, Y.M. Lotman, M.M. Bakhtin, V.S. Bibler. The study of transformation processes in the methodological basis of media education during perestroika, allow us to argue that it is the expansion of scientific knowledge in the field of media, the integration of theoretical conceptions of philosophers, psychologists, teachers, art historians, allowed media pedagogues to formulate the main trends in the development of media education.
6. Acknowledgements
This research was funded by the grant of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (RFBR, project No. 19-013-00597) at the Rostov State University of Economics. Project theme: "Transformation processes in the domestic media education of the period of "perestroika". Head of the project is E.V. Muryukina.
References
Abramyan, 1994 - Abramyan, D.N. (1994). General psychological basis of artistic creativity. Moscow, 322 p.
Bakhtin, 1979 - Bakhtin, M.M. (1979). Aesthetics of verbal creativity. Moscow, 412 p.
Benhamdi et al., 2017 - Benhamdi, S., Babouri, A., Chiky, R. (2017). Personalized recommender system for e-Learning environment. Education and Information Technologies, 22 (4): 1455-1477. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9504-y
Blonsky, 1961 - Blonsky, P.P. (1961). Selected pedagogical works. Moscow, 695 p.
Fedorov, 2015 - Fedorov, A. (2015). Media stereotypes analysis in the classroom at the student audience. European Journal of Contemporary Education, 12 (2): 158-162. DOI: 10.13187/ejced.2015.12.158.
Fedorov, 2016 - Fedorov, A. (2016). Autobiographical analysis on media education classes for student audience. Asian Journal of Social and Human Sciences, 1(1): 14-18.
Fedorov, 2019 - Fedorov, A. (2019). Schools and universities in audiovisual media: experts' opinions. Communication Today, 10 (1): 110-122.
Fedorov, 2019 - Fedorov, A. (2019). The heritage of Yuri Lotman, Umberto Eco and Vladimir Propp in the context of media literacy education. Media Education, 59 (2): 243-248. DOI: 10.13187/me.2019.2.243.
Fedorov et al., 2018 - Fedorov, A., Levitskaya, A., Gorbatkova, O. (2018). The structural model of the contents of audiovisual media texts on school and university topic. Media Education,
1: 197-203.
Fedorov, Levitskaya, 2015 - Fedorov, A., Levitskaya, A. (2015). The framework of media education and media criticism in the contemporary world: the opinion of international experts. Comunicar. 2015, 23 (45): 107-115.
Fedorov, Chelysheva, 2002 - Fedorov, A.V., Chelysheva, I.V. (2002). Media education in Russia: a brief history of development. Taganrog: Poznanie, 266 p.
Guo Ming Chen, 2007 - Guo Ming Chen (2007). Media Education in the United States. Media Research, 3 (3): 87-103.
Likhachev, 1989 - Likhachev, D.S. (1989). Letters about the good and the beautiful. Moscow: Znanie, 122 p.
Lotman, 1973 - Lotman, Y.M. (1973). Semiotics of cinema and problems of film aesthetics. Tallinn: Eesti Raamat, 138 p.
Penzin, 1987 - Penzin, S.N. (1987). Cinema and aesthetic education: methodological problems. Voronezh: Voronezh. State University, 176 p.
Polichko, 2006 - Polichko, G.A. (2006). Film language explained to the student: artistic and pedagogical dialogues. Moscow - Ryazan: Russkoe slovo, 201 p.
Sharikov, 1990 - Sharikov, A.V. (1990). Media education: world and domestic experience. Moscow: Publishing house of Academy of Pedagogical Sciences, 66 p.
Shatsky, 1980 - Shatsky, S.T. (1980). Selected pedagogical works. Moscow: Pedagogika, 414 p. Sukhomlinsky, 1979 - Sukhomlinsky, VA. (1979). To children I give my heart. The birth of a citizen. Chisinau: Lumina, 621 p.
Ushinsky, 2000 - Ushinsky, K.D. (2000). Man as the object of education: Educational anthropology. Moscow: Karapuz, 256 p.
Usov, 1989 - Usov, A.V. (1989). Film education as a means of aesthetic education and artistic development of students. PhD. Dis. Moscow.
Vrabec, 1975 - Vrabec, Y.N. (1975). The art of cinema at school (theoretical problems). Newsletter of the International Relations Commission. No. 76: 116.
Vygotsky, 1963 - Vygotsky, L.S. (1963). Psychology of art. Moscow: Znanie, 122 p. Weisfeld, 1988 - Weisfeld, I.V. (1988). The development of film education in the context of the restructuring. Moscow: Publishing House of the Society of Friends of Soviet Cinema, 21 p.
