The experience of historical consciousness as a factor of rethinking the problems of gender identity in modern education

Authors

  • Alexey S. Plotnikov SPb GBOU SOSH No. 160

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.25726/o0593-9576-4046-h

Keywords:

the experience of historical consciousness, the formation of gender identity( FGI), the gender approach in pedagogy, the anthropological turn in gender studies, the anthropological approach, the individual-typological approach

Abstract

The article considers the question of the significance of the experience of historical consciousness and the history of science for the analysis of modern problems. Modern education is going through a difficult moment. The individualization of education, which is increasingly spreading in the modern world, makes the gender approach to pedagogy, which arose in the second half of the XIX – early XX centuries and has accumulated some educational experience, in demand. The issue of considering and using gender differences is raised in modern science and regulatory documents, including in international studies (PISA), Attention is drawn to the one-sidedness of the existing pedagogical model of gender approach, the lag in responding to the challenges of the modern era, the weak consideration of historical experience by pedagogical science. This model is focused on the psychological, social, cultural aspects of behavior, and the problem is to consider a person holistically in the process of education and upbringing. At one time, the anthropological approach was widely used in pedagogical science and educational practice at the  turn of the XIX – XX centuries. The problem of gender identity is controversial and very important within the framework of the gender approach. A model of gender identity formation in the educational process is proposed. In this regard, some problems of modern education and approaches to their solution are noted. The role of gender identity in the socialization of the younger generation, maladaptive socialization, ways of activity (feminine and masculine ways of activity) is shown. This is all the more important, because in modern conditions, many negative factors (mass media, the Internet, mass culture) affect socialization. The proposed analysis of the problems of gender identity will help to understand the difficult tasks facing modern society.

References

Ананьев Б.Г. Человек как предмет познания. СПб.: Питер, 2001. 288 с. (3-е издание).

Вейнингер О. Пол и характер. Ростов-на-Дону. Изд-во «Феникс», 1998. 608с.

Гендерные исследования в образовании: проблемы и перспективы: Сб. научных статей. Волгоград: Изд-во ВГПУ «Перемена», 2009. 342 с.

Кант. И. Антропология с прагматической точки зрения // Сочинения в шести томах (Под общ. ред. В.Ф. Асмуса, А.В. Гулыги, Т.И. Ойзермана). Т.6. М.: Мысль, 1966. С.350-558.

Кузнецов А.М. Антропология и антропологический поворот современного социального и гуманитарного знания // Личность. Культура. Общество. 2000. Т.2. № 1(2). С.49-67.

Основные результаты международного исследования PISA-2015. http: //www.centeroko.ru.

Плотников А.С. Введение в гендерную проблематику философии образования: генезис гендерного подхода в отечественной педагогике в конце Х1Х – начале ХХ вв.// Credo new.2019. № 1. С.114-122.

Плотников А.С. Гендерный подход к результатам образования как акмеологическая проблема (ЕГЭ по обществознанию в Санкт-Петербурге в 2009-2017 гг.) / Психологические проблемы смысла жизни и акме: Электронный сборник материалов XXIII Международного симпозиума / под ред. Г.А. Вайзер, Н.В. Кисельниковой, Т.А .Поповой. М.: ФГНУ «Психологический институт РАО». 2018. С. 229-235.

Хвостов В.М. Женщина накануне новой эпохи. Два этюда по женскому вопросу / Мужские ответы на женские вопросы в России (вторая половина XIX – первая треть ХХ вв.). Антология. Сост. и общ. ред. В. Успенская. ФЕМИНИСТ ПРЕСС, Тверь, 2005. С. 173-242.

Anderson, G. L. (2009). Advocacy leadership: Toward a post-reform agenda in education. New York: Routledge.

Benner, D. (2005). Tekster til dannelsesfilosofi – mellem etik, paedagogik och politik. (Essays on philosophy of Bildung – between ethics, pedagogics and politics). Århus: Klim.

English, A. (2014). Herbart, Johann F. In D. C. Phillips (Ed.), Encyclopedia of educational theory and philosophy (pp. 373–376). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Genschel, P., & Seelkopf, L. (2015). The competition state. In: S. Leibfried, E. Huber, M. Lange, J. D. Levy, & J. D. Stephens (Eds.), The oxford handbook of transformations of the state. Oxford Handbooks Online. doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199691586.013.12.

Kelley, C., & Halverson, R. (2012). The comprehensive assessment of leadership for learning: A next generation formative evaluation and feedback system. Journal of Applied Research on Children: Informing Policy for Children at Risk, 3(2), 4.

Mason, T. C., & Helfenbein, R. J. (2012). Ethics and international curriculum work. The challenges of culture and context. Charlotte: IAP.

Moller, J., Eggen, A., Fuglestad, O. L., Langfeldt, G., Presthus, A. M., Skrøvset, S., & Vedøy, G. (2005). Successful school leadership: The Norwegian case. Journal of Educational Administration, 43(6), 584–594

Published

2021-08-15

How to Cite

1.
Плотников АС. The experience of historical consciousness as a factor of rethinking the problems of gender identity in modern education. УО [Internet]. 2021Aug.15 [cited 2024Jun.30];11(4):19-27. Available from: https://emreview.ru/index.php/emr/article/view/120