- The authors:
Larisa Yu. Logunova
Antonina N. Utkina
- Issue: July 24-26th, 2019
- Pages: 502-510
- Section: EDUCATION, SCIENCE AND CULTURE IN A DIGITAL SOCIETY
- URL: http://conference-ifl.rudn.ru/502-510/
Abstract. Human centricity is determined by an understanding of the value
of knowledge preservation and transmission. An adaptive and successful
person is socially demanded by modernity. Reforms of the education system
suggest that changing the content and methodology of learning processes is
possible on the basis of the principle of the organized centricity of relations
between teachers and students. The organized centricity meanings converts
the education field into a market type of sociality.
The education system correlates with the realities of life: if society is
conservative, the education system functions within the framework of
traditions. If society positions itself as «progressive», ready for reforms, the
education system is filled with new meanings, focusing on the social order:
the formation of a citizen open to innovations, creative, able to work with
information; make independent decisions, capable of communication, etc.
Human centricity of education is historically determined; each element of
the process has passed the selection of culture, the test of time and common
sense for availability. The organized-centric orientation is justified by
management structures and market needs, where benefits are understood
and welcomed, but the risks associated with the loss of education as a
cultural basis for the functioning of society are not counted.
An educational service changes the relationship between teacher and
student. The interaction of the master and adept acquire the meaning of
communication between the seller and the buyer. The incompatibility of the
quality improvement goal of education and the methods for achieving the
goal (pursuit of ratings, technical re-shaping of educational programs, and
mechanical increase of publication activity) is obvious. The pedagogical
practice is limited by standards, instructions, dependence of the teacher’s
work on the amount of «funds attracted by him». The process of acquiring
knowledge and personality self-disclosure of the student and teacher is left
out of this activity. This creates a threat to the social order of society: the
positions of interaction between the teacher and the student are violated; the
requirements for fulfilling the «indicators» block the meanings of the
process of social inheritance, transfer training from the culture to the market
relations. The process of transferring knowledge and experience takes on the
characteristics of a bargain. The confrontation between human-centric and
organized-centric meanings of educational processes reflects the dichotomy
of culture and civilization.
The article examines the contradictions (incompatibility) of the organizedcentric requirements and the traditional (culture-centric) values of
education, based on enlightenment, familiarizing the younger generation
with the eternal values of humanity that are part of the content of true
knowledge. Using the methods of sociocultural and hermeneutic-semantic
analysis, content analysis, the basic meanings of the traditional values of
education and organized-centric positions that change these meanings are
The authors studied 11 documents regulating the work of the education
system at the federal, regional and municipal levels. The units of analysis
are the meanings of the distribution of managerial categories of the
organization of the work of educational institutions, which are characterized
by belonging to the «human centricity – organized centricity» dichotomy.
The interpretation of value concepts of education as the acquisition of
knowledge and the management process has become the central procedure
for hermeneutically semantic analysis. The sociocultural analysis fixes the
social «binding» of the functioning of the processes of human-centric and
organized-centric education subsystems. It is based on the search for
sociocultural contradictions – points of social tension.
Modern education is seen more in the categories of pragmatism than
unselfishness and service. Modifying the value core of human centricity,
reformers introduce the gene of economics into the structures of pure
knowledge. Such a genetically modified product also generates knowledge,
but in their perverted form. This is no longer a service to the values of
Truth, Love, and Mercy. In the Russian pedagogical community, the idea of
a successful professional as a person is actively cultivated; the meaning of
his career is to achieve high «indicators», victories in professional
competitions that are indirectly related to the socialization of new
generations. The existing education system today cultivates dependence on
the success of all participants in the educational process, stimulates activity
buildup to enhance the image of an educational institution, and conflicts
with the goal of educational processes. Focusing on the success of
professional activity is associated with a loss of logic in the fulfillment of
the mission of educating the young generation. Today the graduate is an
effective consumer, ready to work in the organizational structures of
society. For a merciful, generous man and a woman capable of loving, there
is no place in such structures. Representatives of the new generation will
adequately address important organizational tasks. But can they love each
The authors emphasize the rationality of organized centricity as rules for
organizing the learning process and controlling its financing. However,
reforms bring a positive effect when they are not carried out based on
reason, but with the help of reason. Such a position means a balance of
human-centric processes meanings of knowledge transfer and organizedcentric structures that regulate these processes. At the same time, the
primacy of the person-centered orientation of education is preserved: the
preservation of the national and cultural traditions of the functioning of the
institution of education, the formats of interaction between the teacher and
Keywords: Human centricity and organized centricity of education,
educational services, culture-centrism
Larisa Yu. Logunova1, Antonina N. Utkina2
Kemerovo State University, Kemerovo, Russia,
ORCID ID: 0000-0001-8417-913X
Belovsky Institute (branch) of Kemerovo State University,
Belovo, Russia, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
ORCID ID: 0000-0002-9025-3065
Becker, G.S. 1975. Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysys,
with Special Reference to Education. URL:
http://www.nber.org/chapters/c3730 [Accessed January 12 2019].
Bourdieu, P. 2002. The Field of Science. Almanac of the Russian-French
Center for Sociology and Philosophy of the Institute of Sociology of the
Russian Academy of Sciences. Moscow: Institute of Experimental
Sociology, 42 pр.
Donskih, O.A., Logunova, L.Yu. 2019. Teacher and student: the happiness
of human communication. Higher education in Russia4: 60-70.
Durkheim, E. 2007. Sociology of education. Direct Media, Moscow, Russia,
Khagurov, T.A. 2011. Higher education: between servanthood and service.
Higher education in Russia 4: 47-57.
Kogan, L.N. 1992. Sociology of Culture. Ekaterinburg: Ural State
University, 120 pp.
Logunova, L. Yu., Golovatsky, E. V., Mazhenina, E. A., Natyatina, N. V.
2018. «Smart technologies» in the life support system of Kuzbass cities:
socio-political and socio-cultural contexts: monograph. Kemerovo: KemSU,
Pokrovsky, H.E. 2005. On improving the teaching of theoretical and
sociological disciplines. Sociological research10: 69-76.
Schultz, T. 1971. Investment in Human Capital: The Role of Education and
of Research. New York: Free Press, 272 рp.
Shpak, L. L. (ed.) 2016. Political Consciousness and Behavior: Evolution
and Mobilization: A Collective Monograph. Kemerovo: LLC «INT»,
Shpak, L. L. 2006. Sociology of Russian education. Kemerovo:
Kuzbassvuzizdat, 254 pp.
Sukhomlinsky, V.A. 1974. I give my heart to children. Kiev: Radyanska
School, 288 pp.
Zborovsky, G.E. 2000. Education: scientific research approaches.
Sociological research 6: 21-29.