Sokhranov-Preobrazhenskiy Vladimir Vasil'evich, Doctor of pedagogical sciences, professor, head of sub-department of pedagogy and psychology of professional education, Pedagogical Institute named after V. G. Belinskiy, Penza State University (40 Krasnaya street, Penza, Russia), email@example.com
Borzenko Ol'ga Viktorovna, Postgraduate student, Pedagogical Institute named after V. G. Belinsky, Penza State University (40 Krasnaya street, Penza, Russia), firstname.lastname@example.org
Background. The Russian educational system’s dynamic development updates the problem of innovative self-determination. The difficulty of components realization of the Russian educational complex reveals itself mainly in the new understanding of the education essence. “It is an integrated purposeful process of education, which is a socially important good and is accomplished in the interests of a person, a family, society and state. It is also a combination of knowledge, skills, values, experience and competence of certain volume and complication for intellectual, mental and moral, creative, physical and professional person’s development, satisfaction of his/her educational needs.” Social and educational importance of the problem is supplemented by a psychological and pedagogical conflict between the adolescents’ readiness to self-determination and a lack of knowledge, skills and competences necessary for that as a result of a lack of sense formation experience. The main purpose of this study is to reveal a correlation of sense formation and the adolescents’ self-determination process.
Materials and methods. In the process of development of a youth self-determination model it is essential to concentrate on a subject paradigm of sense formation (I. Abakumova, A. Brushlinski, K. Abulkhanova, L. Antsiferova, V. Zankov), a subject-activity theory pioneered by S. Rubinstein, theoretical provisions and research principles of the self-determination problem, presented in Russian and foreign studies (S. Rubinstein, B. Ananiev, K. Abulkhanova-Slavskaya, A. Maslow, V. Frankl and others). To solve the goals and test the research hypothesis the authors used the following methods: observation, survey, discussion; “Values questionnaire” of S. Schwartz, essay writing, making the picture “I see the meaning of life in...”, “Purpose of life” method of D. Leontiev, a questionnaire for achievement motivation measuring of A. Mehrabian. The researchers also used mathematical statistical measures, a qualitative analysis of the results (content analysis).
Results. The results of the study allow to identify a model of substantial and functional impact of sense formation on the process of youth self-determination. The following tasks were solved: 1) determination of quality of value-semantic human world options, including terminal values system, and self-determination correlation; 2) revelation of an impact of youth sense formation self-regulation on sense forming self-determination; 3) revelation of a quality impact of solution search particularity, the procedural nature of cognitative activity, the critical analysis of actions on quality of youth sense forming self-determination; 4) determination of a monitoring basis of senior learning activity.
Conclusions. Consideration of personality’s capabilities in sense forming self-determination allows to conclude as follows: 1) Sense formation motives are the main reason of personality’s motivation to activity. Its basis is purpose identification, and also the choice of means and ways of its achieving based on a certain quality of motivation. 2) Sense formation motives are ranked higher in the motives hierarchy than motives-stimulus. 3) Verbal reinforcement, marks that characterize student learning activity play a significant role in the learning motives formation. 4) To estimate students’ actions properly the motives thereof should be understood first. They can be different even if apparently the same actions have been performed, the same goals have been achieved.
1. Frankl V. Chelovek v poiskakh smysla; per. s angl. i nem. [Person insearch of sense; translation from English and German]. Moscow: Progress, 2010, 366 p.
2. Sokhranov-Preobrazhenskiy V. V. Izvestiya vysshikh uchebnykh zavedeniy. Povolzhskiy region. Gumanitarnye nauki [University proceedings. Volga region. Humanities]. 2013, no. 3, pp. 162–169.
3. Abakumova I. V. Obuchenie i smysl: smysloobrazovanie v uchebnom protsesse [Teaching and sense: sense formation in the education process]. Moscow: Logos, 2005, 412 p.
4. Rodzhers K. Vzglyad na psikhoterapiyu. Stanovlenie cheloveka; per. s angl. [View of psychotherapy. Person formation: translation from English]. Moscow: Progress; Univers, 2004, 480 p.
5. Asmolov A. G. Psikhologiya lichnosti [Personality psychology]. Moscow: MGU, 2000, 336 p.
6. Leont'ev D. A. Psikhologiya smysla: priroda, stroenie i dinamika smyslovoy real'nosti [Psychology of sense: nature, structure and dynamics of sense reality]. Moscow: Smysl, 1999, 487 p.