DOI: https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2024.78.06.10
How to Cite:
Aryabkina, I., Spiridonova, A., Belonogova, L., & Kazakova, L. (2024). Sociocultural education as a key to fostering social responsibility in modern youth. Amazonia Investiga, 13(78), 113-123. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2024.78.06.10
Sociocultural education as a key to fostering social responsibility in modern youth
Социокультурное образование как ключ к воспитанию социальной ответственности у современной молодежи
Received: April 27, 2024 Accepted: June 13, 2024
Written by:
Irina Aryabkina
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8765-2153
WoS Researcher ID: AAG-1303-2019
Scopus Author ID 57219127993
Doctor of pedagogical sciences, professor of the Ulyanovsk State University of Education, Russian Federation.
Anastasia Spiridonova
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6211-6779
WoS Researcher ID: AAF-4034-2019
Candidate of Pedagogical Sciences, docent of the Ulyanovsk State University of Education, Russian Federation.
Ludmila Belonogova
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0840-2034
Scopus Author ID 57190182073
Candidate of Pedagogical Sciences, docent of the Ulyanovsk State University of Education, Russian Federation.
Larisa Kazakova
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5792-1041
WoS Researcher ID: AAF-6572-2019
Scopus Author ID 57193311464
Candidate of Pedagogical Sciences, docent of the Ulyanovsk State University of Education, Russian Federation.
Abstract
This study investigates the importance of developing social responsibility in youth within the context of sociocultural education, a pedagogical approach fostering social values and civic engagement. We analyze this issue from philosophical, pedagogical, and psychological perspectives, emphasizing the need for young people to develop qualities like empathy, adherence to social norms, and responsible decision-making.
A comprehensive review of literature from the 20th and 21st centuries reveals the complexity and relevance of "social responsibility" and its formation. We conducted a psychological and pedagogical experiment involving schoolchildren, students, and teachers to assess levels of social responsibility. The results demonstrate positive shifts in social responsibility levels following the implementation of a sociocultural education program, with significant increases in participants exhibiting high and average levels of social responsibility. Qualitative data from participant statements further support the effectiveness of the program in fostering a stronger sense of social responsibility among youth. This study contributes to the field by offering empirical evidence for the effectiveness of sociocultural education in promoting socially responsible behavior in young people.
Keywords: social responsibility, young generation, modern society, sociocultural education.
Аннотация
Это исследование изучает важность развития социальной ответственности у молодежи в контексте социокультурного образования, педагогического подхода, способствующего развитию социальных ценностей и гражданской активности. Мы анализируем этот вопрос с философской, педагогической и психологической точек зрения, подчеркивая необходимость развития у молодых людей таких качеств, как эмпатия, соблюдение социальных норм и ответственное принятие решений.
Всесторонний обзор литературы XX и XXI веков показывает сложность и актуальность понятия «социальная ответственность» и его формирования. Мы провели психолого-педагогический эксперимент с участием школьников, студентов и учителей для оценки уровня социальной ответственности. Результаты демонстрируют позитивные сдвиги в уровнях социальной ответственности после внедрения программы социокультурного образования, со значительным увеличением числа участников, проявляющих высокие и средние уровни социальной ответственности. Качественные данные, полученные из высказываний участников, дополнительно подтверждают эффективность программы в формировании более сильного чувства социальной ответственности среди молодежи. Данное исследование вносит вклад в эту область, предоставляя эмпирические доказательства эффективности социокультурного образования в развитии социально ответственного поведения у молодых людей.
Ключевые слова: социальная ответственность, молодое поколение, современное общество, социокультурное воспитание.
Introduction
In the sociocultural space of the modern world, great attention is paid to the formation and development of human potential, in which social responsibility occupies one of the central places: there is a need to create conditions for the formation of a developing personality, who has the readiness and ability to make decisions independently and responsibly, to consciously relate to their own activities in different spheres and areas of life, to the acceptance of social responsibility (responsibility for themselves and others) as a personal value.
The problem of developing social responsibility in the younger generation is multifaceted and complex. It is, in essence, an interdisciplinary scientific category that requires a comprehensive approach to understand its implications fully.
This article aims to:
The article is structured as follows: First, we will review the relevant literature on social responsibility, exploring different perspectives and definitions. Next, we will describe the methodology of our study, including the design of the sociocultural education program and the assessment tools used to measure social responsibility. Then, we will present the results of our experiment, analyzing the impact of the program on students' levels of social responsibility. Finally, we will discuss the implications of our findings for educational practice and suggest directions for future research.
Generalization of philosophical and psychological-pedagogical concepts presented in the works of Russian scientists (N.V. Antipina (Antipina, 2004), A.V. Belov (Belov, 2011), I.E. Bulatnikov (Bulatnikov, 2019), M.D. Lapteva, Zimnyaya (Lapteva & Zimnyaya, 2012), K. Muzdybaev (Muzdybaev, 2010), V.N. Podshivalov (Podshivalov, 2009), S.L. Sidorkina (Sidorkina, 2010), D.I. Feldstein (Feldstein, 1997), etc.) and foreign scientists (L. Kohlberg (Kohlberg, 1986), R. Merton (Merton, 1968), R. May (May, 1961), R. Selman (Selman, 1980), S. Smiles (Smiles, 1871), R.J Spadey. (Spadey, 2006), V. Frankl (Frankl, 2017), A. Fromm (Fromm, 1969), etc.), allows us to define the concept of "social responsibility" as a system of personal qualities associated with the implementation of a person's ability to recognize himself as the cause of the actions he commits and their consequences for himself and others, that is, to be responsible for them. In addition, it is social responsibility, on the one hand, that underlies the sociocultural education of each person, on the other hand, it should be the main goal and result of sociocultural education.
An analysis of the publications of Russian and foreign scientists published in recent years concerning the psychological and pedagogical aspects of social responsibility shows that the authors, when determining social responsibility and the possibilities of its formation, refer mainly to the works of recognized scientists of the middle and second half of the 20th century. At the same time, there is currently an increasing interest of scientists from different countries in the formation of social responsibility as a psychological and pedagogical problem (Dima etc., 2013; de Moraes Abrahão etc, 2024; Kobylarek, 2019; Yan, 2020; Alfrević et al., 2023; Alsaeed, 2022; Terentyeva & Nikitina, 2019), and we have not found any special differences in their positions on this issue. Rather, in their works we find an analysis of various facets of such complex and, in their opinion, relevant phenomena as: "social responsibility of the individual" and "formation of social responsibility of the individual". Some differences in the interpretations of these concepts by different researchers are largely determined by the mental characteristics of citizens of a particular country and the legislative documents adopted in it. Their study expands and enriches the understanding of the problem stated in this article.
Theoretical framework
The current situation in the world requires the intensification of the dialogue of cultures, the harmonization of political and economic contacts between states, which increases the pragmatic significance of the sociocultural education of the younger generation, by which we mean the purposeful creation of conditions for the development of moral, aesthetic, organizational, communicative, economic, ecological, gender and other social abilities in each young member of society. The success of sociocultural education helps to develop qualities that give rise to actions and behavior and, ultimately, shape a person's character (Aryabkina et al., 2019). Social responsibility is a special pedagogical phenomenon that underlies sociocultural education and is one of its main goals.
First of all, let us turn to the philosophical dictionary, which states that social responsibility is a category of “ethics and law, reflecting a special social and moral-legal attitude of an individual to society, which is characterized by the fulfillment of one’s moral duty and legal norms” (Malyshevsky, 2004). In the Dictionary of the Russian Language we read: “Responsibility is an obligation imposed on someone or taken by someone to account for any of their actions and to accept the blame for their possible consequences” (Evgenieva, 1985).
The article by I.N. Timoshina, I.V. Aryabkina (Timoshina & Aryabkina, 2022) analyzes the works of Muzdybaev, devoted to the analysis of the phenomenon of social responsibility. Summarizing various psychological concepts that consider social responsibility as a personal quality, K. Muzdybaev (Muzdybaev, 2010) comes to the conclusion that responsibility is a generalized psychological property of a person. The importance of this quality is difficult to overestimate, since the organization of a person's cognitive and social activity, his emotional reactions, achievement of success in life, etc. depend on its formation (Timoshina & Aryabkina, 2022). K. Muzdybaev attributes the main signs of responsibility to "accuracy, punctuality, loyalty to the person in the performance of duties and readiness to act and readiness to be responsible for the consequences of one's actions" (Muzdybaev, 2010).
Responsibility, according to V.G. Hvorostovskaya, is a personal quality that is interconnected with its independent ability to recognize the significance of its actions and deeds (Hvorostovskaya, 1981). According to V.N. Myasishchev, responsibility acts as a stable system of relationships of the individual to different aspects of the surrounding reality. It manifests itself in typical ways of expressing these relationships in everyday behavior (Myasishchev, 1995). B.G. Ananiev considers it as a system of personal properties, subjective relationships to people around and to oneself, which is constantly manifested in the behavior and lifestyle of a person (Ananiev, 2018).
Important from the point of view of sociocultural education is the position of V.A. Sukhomlinsky, who believed that the formation of responsibility in children and young people as the highest form of human activity is directly connected with the formation of citizenship, morality, duty to society, which, in turn, requires the implementation of self-assessment, self-control and at the same time increases the sphere of influence of the individual on the surrounding world (Sukhomlinsky, 1979).
The dictionary of terms in general and social pedagogy defines responsibility as “the ability of an individual to understand the correspondence of the results of his actions with the set goals, social, moral and legal norms and rules accepted in society or a group, as a result of which a feeling of involvement in a common cause arises, and in case of non-compliance – a feeling of unfulfilled duty” (Voronin, 2006).
In philosophical and psychological-pedagogical literature it is emphasized that the complexity of the content of responsibility determines its various types, among which scientists especially highlight social responsibility (Timoshina & Aryabkina, 2022). The development of this type of responsibility at the scientific level began not so long ago, in the 70s of the 20th century.
Social responsibility is considered by K. Muzdybaev in three components (Muzdybaev, 2010). The scientist attributes to it:
In this understanding of social responsibility, a conditional differentiation of personal and social responsibility is traced. According to the scientist, personal responsibility is characterized by awareness of one's duty to others and society. Social responsibility is based on understanding and awareness of the tasks that are set before society, specified by regulatory requirements that facilitate the choice of courses of action. According to D.I. Feldstein, social responsibility is one of the complex integral personal qualities, which finds its expression "in the deep interconnection of the objective need to comply with social norms, internal readiness to bear responsibility for oneself and others and the active implementation of this readiness in any life situations" (Feldstein, 1997).
I.E. Bulatnikov views social responsibility as a complex system of professional qualities: each person’s awareness of the importance of their own work, a lasting interest and love for their chosen profession, a sense of pride in their work, the ability for emotional-volitional self-regulation of behavior and attitudes in the professional environment (Bulatnikov, 2019).
Social responsibility is expressed “in the totality of diverse relationships between the individual and society, in all spheres of human life, in all forms of social consciousness of the individual (Abulkhanova-Slavskaya & Gordienko, 2001). The complexity of social responsibility as a complex social phenomenon is determined by the reflection in this concept of both the objective laws of social development and public interests, and the subjective activity of each person, his values, needs, interests and assessments.
Formed social responsibility is a certain “maturity”, self-sufficiency of the individual, the ability and desire of a person for self-realization (Rean, 2004).
In the psychological and pedagogical works of K.A. Abulkhanova-Slavskaya, E.V. Gordienko (Abulkhanova-Slavskaya & Gordienko, 2001), N.V. Antipina (Antipina, 2004), A.V. Belov (Belov, 2011), L.B. Itelson (Itelson, 1972), A.V. Mudrik (Mudrik, 2011), V.N. Podshivalov (Podshivalov, 2009), E.L. Sidorkina (Sidorkina, 2010) and others, the main directions of forming social responsibility in the younger generation are revealed.
Thus, we have identified the complex multi-aspect nature of the concept of “social responsibility”, which is manifested in the interrelation of cognitive-evaluative, emotional-volitional and behavioral components.
The cognitive-evaluative component of social responsibility includes a person's knowledge about himself, about the rules and norms of behavior, as well as the ability to comprehend what a person is responsible for. The implementation of this component is carried out in the identification and self-realization of a person through his responsible act.
The emotional-volitional component of social responsibility is the presence of a person's motivation for socially significant activities; organization, the ability to focus on solving a particular emerging moral problem (Timoshina & Aryabkina, 2022).
The behavioral component of social responsibility is responsible behavior and activity; fulfillment of moral obligations, including those that go beyond immediate duties but concern the well-being of other people (Timoshina & Aryabkina, 2022). “This component is associated with the function of self-realization through responsible action” (Lapteva & Zimnyaya, 2012).
The problem of social responsibility as a relevant issue is addressed not only by Russian but also by foreign authors. Thus, V. Frankl (Frankl, 2017) emphasizes that a person’s responsibility lies in his choice between those opportunities that exist at a certain moment and which he can either realize or not realize. Thus, responsibility is associated by the scientist with the concept of “choice” and the activity of a person in making a choice: it is responsibility that is recognized by the scientist as the decisive factor in decision-making. R. May (May, 1961) emphasizes that “responsibility” is a person’s acceptance of the consequences of the choice he has made (a person must be aware of the consequences and be aware of what he is doing).
The study of psychological, pedagogical and philosophical literature allows us to conclude that there is a wide range of understanding of this phenomenon (Aryabkina et al., 2021). R.J. Spadey considers social responsibility through personnel management processes (Spadey 2006); L. Kohlberg - as a result of moral judgment (Kohlberg, 1986); A. Fromm - as a manifestation of discipline (Fromm, 1969); V. Frankl - as one of the existentials of human existence (Frankl, 2017); S. Smiles - as self-activity (Smiles, 1871); R. Selman - as a component of social intelligence (Selman, 1980), R. Merton - as an indicator of social competence (Merton,1968).
Thus, we can conclude about the pedagogical relevance of social responsibility as an important criterion for the sociocultural education of an individual, the formation of awareness and understanding of the personal value of socially responsible behavior in the younger generation.
For our research, it was significant to study the works of foreign colleagues devoted to the study of various aspects of the formation of social responsibility among the younger generation at the present stage of society development.
So, Dima, A. M., Vasilache, S., Ghinea, V., & Agoston, S. исследуют социальную ответственность в академической среде: «Social responsibility in the academic environment is not only a challenge, it must become a purpose of the academic environment, as young people’s formation also means to create a high level of awareness about involving the members of society in solving social problems. After extensive literature review and content analysis of tertiary data, we found that the concept of social responsibility is not properly addressed in the Romanian scientific research, although actions undertaken by the Romanian universities, with significant social impact, abound» (Dima et al., 2013, p. 25). Their proposed model of social responsibility in the Romanian universities based on six main dimensions: alumni-oriented projects; inter-university cooperation; university – high schools / other institutions cooperation; community-oriented university – business environment cooperation; community-oriented international cooperation; sociocultural and ecological projects. We are close to the conclusions made by these scientists from Budapest who note that «good will is not enough for creating a vibrant environment and for stimulating the real implementation of the social responsibility including sustainable development practices, in companies, or universities. Social campaigns in universities should be approved by the university’s board (university’s Senate and rectors), by the professors, the auxiliary personnel and, last but not least, by the students. Otherwise, their aim is not a realistic one, mainly because of the great variety of culture and values displayed by the faculties and students. However, if these individuals educated at university will behave and work in their future lives according to sustainability principles taught in universities (e.g. separating waste and saving energy, walking, cycling or using public transportation instead of commuting by car), then the university is acting as a positive actor in the community» (Dima et al., 2013, p. 31).
Spanish scientists consider an important aspect of the formation of social responsibility as an essential component of social education Viviane de Moraes Abrahaoa, María Vaquero-Diegoa, Rosa Curras Mostoles. В статье «University social responsibility: The role of teachers» читаем: «In terms of training, the study highlights the need for greater investment in facultytraining so that they can connect the content of their courses withcurrent issues of social responsibility and have a greater impact onthe environmental awareness of undergraduates. Likewise, a greaterconnection with external agents in social management and knowledge production would be necessary, as would the implementationof communicative actions aimed at making teachers more aware ofthe campaigns carried out by their university to promote socialresponsibility values and participation in volunteer actions.Thus, in addition to responding to these social demands throughknowledge production, higher education institutions must train students to become professionals who are aware of their social impact.Teachers—the backbone of the higher education system—must striveto perform their role as educators in its entirety, aiming to includesuch topics in their subjects as relevant, necessary, and objectivecompetencies. Only in this way will it be possible to narrow the exist-ing gap between the content of the curricula and the trainingdemanded by the current global context » (de Moraes Abrahão et al., 2024, p.7).
Polish scientist A. Kobylarek considers a very interesting and relevant aspect of social responsibility: responsibility to science and in science through responsibility to knowledge. In his article, the author writes: «Social responsibility can be viewed in various ways. For the purpose of this article let us assume that it is a prosocial fundamental, related to voluntary activities on the behalf of others. In the case under discussion we can talk about social responsibility in relation to science in its strictest sense (knowledge), toscientists, and to educational institutions. In turn, these three areas can also be considered in relation to the activities themselves, whether explicit or implicit. In examining the explicit approach we should consider what socially responsible science is, what are the qualities which characterise the socially responsible academic, and how educational institutions should shape their activities in carrying out their idea of social responsibility. In turn, in analysing implicit social responsibility in science, we should be looking at how particular areas (knowledge, academics, educational institutions) can or should Àt in with the needs of the non-scientific community. It is probably easiest to define what should characterise socially responsible science. Above all it is a thorough and expert verification of knowledge which can be the starting point for practical action – designing and altering reality, correcting errors, avoiding mistakes, predicting, constructing comfort zones, and finally making further development of the world possible (Kobylarek, 2019, pp. 6-7).
Important for our experimental work was the study of Yan Wenjuan, from Xi'an University, who writes about the value system of modern adolescents and the need to form a conscious attitude towards their social responsibilities (Yan, 2020).
Scientists from the University of Sarajevo Nikša Alfrević, Maja Arslanagić-Kalajdžić, Žan Lep (Bosnia and Herzegovina) analyze the potential infuence of the higher education institutions (HEIs) at which they study to support prosocial behaviors: «Prosocial behaviors are generally defned as voluntary behaviors aimed at helping others. Tey can be as direct as helping a person in need or as broad as volunteering for the (perceived) beneft of society at large. In the psychological literature, prosocial behaviors can be operationalized by considering their underlying mechanisms, for example, motivation to help, perceived norms, internalized prosocial value orientations, moral reasoning, and social competence. Tus, the concept of prosocial behavior comprises a broad spectrum of actions such as helping, cooperating, sharing, comforting, empathy, altruism, volunteering, and donating, which could be both private and public, or spontaneous or planned» (Alfrević et al., 2023, р. 1).
A researcher from Saudi Arabia, Huda Al saeed, notes: «Social responsibility has become a contemporary global trend. Within an educational context, this concept can be understood as the practices adopted by developed countries that aim to activate the partnership between public sector schools and the communities they serve» (Alsaeed, 2022, р. 2758).
Indisputable, in our opinion, is the statement of I. Terentyeva, & T. Nikitina that «socialization of youth is a subjective formation of personality on the basis of assimilation of sociocultural values, inclusion in socially significant activities the result of which is social competence. We define social competence as an integrative personal education, including knowledge, skills, abilities that are formed in the process of socialization and allow a person to quickly and adequately adapt in society and effectively interact with the social environment» (Terentyeva & Nikitina, 2019, р. 823).
Thus, we come to the conclusion that:
The above positions of various scientists have allowed us to organize experimental work on the problem of sociocultural education as a key factor in strengthening social responsibility in the modern youth environment.
Methodology
The authors of this article paid much attention to the use of theoretical methods (synthesis, analysis, systematization, abstracting), empirical methods (observation, questionnaires, tests), and impact methods of the obtained empirical data (mathematical and statistical).
The choice of research methods was based on their validity and reliability, the possibility of obtaining the maximum amount of information about the recipient in accordance with the characterized criteria for the formation of social responsibility, the ability to assess the dynamics of personality development and, based on this, make a forecast about its prospects and possible adjustments to the program of pedagogical interaction with students.
The respondents in the research process were students of Russian pedagogical universities – future teachers and already practicing primary school teachers (since it is this category of teachers who professionally interact with primary school age, which is sensitive for the formation of social responsibility as a system of personal qualities necessary for every member of modern society), as well as schoolchildren studying Russian in schools in Egypt.
The following diagnostic methods were used in our study: Questionnaire "Level of Subjective Control" by E. F. Bazhin, E. A. Golynkina & A. M. Etkind, Locus of Control (questionnaire by D. Rotter (1984), Questionnaire of Subjective Control" (OSK) by O. A. Osnitsky (2007), Methodology for Assessing Social Responsibility by V. L. Marishchuk & V. Evdokimov (2001), анкеты авторов статьи по выявлению уровней социальной ответственности обучающихся.
These research methods take into account the diverse age of respondents (since schoolchildren, students, and teachers took part in the study) and were aimed at determining the level of formation of respondents' social responsibility according to the following criteria: cognitive (respondents' knowledge of social responsibility, its role in the life of modern society as a whole, and each of its members, in particular in particular); motivational (willingness and striving for conscious socially responsible behavior and the formation of such behavior in pupils), emotional and value-based (the ability to feel empathy, to come to the aid of someone who needs it), active (participation in socially significant actions and projects (sociocultural and educational)).Using the above diagnostic techniques, the subjects also revealed the level of subjective control over a variety of life situations, which is absolutely necessary for a modern person to adequately socialize and exclude antisocial behavior.
The questions and tasks contained in the diagnostic materials meet all the ethical requirements for materials of this kind. Diagnostic tests were conducted individually, confidentially, and voluntarily.
Results
The use of theoretical research methods allowed us to develop and implement in the educational practice of 3 universities of the Russian Federation (Ulyanovsk, Glazov, Cheboksary), also Teaching Center «Botanik» Educational Center (Cairo) and "World of Knowledge" (Hurghada) in the Arab Republic of Egypt the Program of sociocultural education of children and youth and, in accordance with it, educational, scientific-methodological and educational activities were carried out (including with the aim of forming the social responsibility of the younger generation). This Program is based on universal spiritual values, taking into account the national characteristics of various peoples and their cultural traditions and includes classes in the form of interactive lectures, master classes, debates, business games, quests, round tables, presentations of modern practices of sociocultural education.
The content of the Program includes topics related to charity, the need for volunteer gratuitous activities to help the elderly, sick people, children left without parental care, birds and animals and anyone who needs this kind of help.
Classes were held in various forms: debates, round tables, master classes, trainings, lectures, seminars, creative living rooms.
450 schoolchildren and students of various fields of study took part in the pedagogical experimental work.
During the implementation of this Program, its effectiveness was monitored in accordance with the identified criteria for the formation of a person's social responsibility: cognitive-evaluative, emotional-volitional and behavioral and a diagnostic complex developed by the authors.
The cognitive-evaluative component is characterized by the volume, depth, and nature of recipient's social and moral ideas. Understanding the basic concepts of "good", "evil", "benefit", "good", "moral / immoral act" determines the qualities of a socially responsible person: the desire to help, the ability to provide gratuitous assistance, caring for animals, indifference to someone else's misfortune and etc.), awareness of the situation of social responsibility, the degree of meaningfulness of judgments about the essence and significance of socially responsible behavior, the criticality of its assessment. This component also includes the recipient's correct assessment of the social and moral norms of behavior established in society.
The emotional-volitional component is characterized by an attitude to the world, reflected in the human mind through the prism of values and expressed in moral feelings (empathy, sympathy). It determines the stability of beliefs in the importance of a value attitude towards others, the importance of accepted socially responsible behavior, the ability to emotionally experience the moral aspects of the surrounding world and human relationships.
The behavioral component characterizes the degree of the recipient's involvement in matters significant for society, attitude towards them, awareness of oneself as a subject of socially responsible behavior. In addition, the characteristics of this component include the presence of awareness of one's own decisions and corresponding actions. The behavioral component determines a person's lifestyle and activities, rules and norms of his behavior, the level of independence in relation to moral choice in overcoming emerging problems based on humanistic values and moral requirements and rules accepted in society.
The results of the monitoring, carried out for five years, indicate that, in almost every group of students included in our experiment, according to all three criteria we identified, there was a positive trend in the levels of social responsibility of students (by the end of the pedagogical experiment, which consisted in the implementation of the Program sociocultural education of children and youth, schoolchildren, students with a high (sustainable) level of formation of social responsibility turned out to be 65% (which is 25% higher than at the beginning of the experiment), with an average (situational) level - 24% (which is 12% higher than in beginning of the experiment), with a low (passive) level - 11% (which is 37% lower than at the beginning of the experiment). Monitoring the level of subjective control over various life situations of each of the respondents participating in the experiment also shows positive dynamics (studies conducted individually with each respondent of this important personal quality show that trainings, actions and projects conducted within the framework of the Program of sociocultural education of children and youth allow to activate introspection, reflection of all participants, a more serious and conscious attitude towards their personal and (in the case of teachers and students-future teachers) professional responsibilities in society).
For example, answering the question about the essence of the concept of "social responsibility of a teacher", many students – future teachers associated it with responsibility for the quality of work performed and implied a high-quality level of teaching students in various subject areas, the strength of knowledge (Here are some examples of answers to this question: "This is a professional and ethical quality, which is expressed in the ability and willingness to anticipate the results of pedagogical activity and hold it accountable", "The social responsibility of a teacher is the ability and willingness to anticipate the results. The ability to adapt to the educational environment, use available resources and transfer knowledge to your colleagues"). There were answers related to the creation of conditions for the successful socialization of the child (The social responsibility of the teacher is "The responsibility of the teacher for how the student will go into society; "The teacher, first of all, must prevent antisocial behavior of children). We especially note the answer, which revealed the worldview and motivational and value component of the student's social responsibility as his professional quality: The social responsibility of a teacher is "Understanding that a teacher is an image of the world around him", "Responsibility for his behavior and the behavior of his students", "Duty to society".
The implementation of the Program developed by the authors of this article allows us to conclude that its implementation gives a positive educational effect if: - take into account the interests, needs, mental, age and individual characteristics of each respondent; -to create a creative educational environment in an educational institution based on trusting, friendly, respectful relationships; - to include each pupil in socially significant active and conscious activities based on the principles of voluntariness and conscientiousness.
Conclusion
The relevance of social responsibility as the most important criterion of sociocultural education of the younger generation in modern society is increasingly growing and is a unique and necessary characteristic of each person's personality, since he constantly interacts in different social roles with other people. At the same time, we are talking about a special understanding of responsibility - responsibility not just for oneself, but for oneself in a common cause, responsibility for a common cause and for other people. The basis for the formation of social responsibility is the unity of knowledge, experience, emotional experiences of a person and the assignment of social responsibility as a personal value.
The experimental study on educating students' social responsibility was conducted in several stages:
Thus, the results of the psychological and pedagogical experiment show that the effectiveness of educating students on social responsibility depends on the following implementation of the following pedagogical conditions:
The article was written within the framework of the Additional Agreement No. 073-03-2024-060/3 dated 05/27/2024 to the Agreement on the provision of a subsidy from the federal budget for financial support for the implementation of the state assignment for the provision of public services (performance of work) No. 073-03-2024-060 dated 01/18/2024, concluded between the Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education "UlGPU named after I.N. Ulyanov" and the Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation.
Bibliographic References
Abulkhanova-Slavskaya, K.A., & Gordienko, E.V. (2001). The idea of a person about the attitude of significant others towards her. Psychological journal, 5(22), 28-132. (In Russian)
Alfrević, N., Arslanagić-Kalajdžić, M., & Lep, Ž. (2023). The role of higher education and civic involvement in converting young adults' social responsibility to prosocial behavior. Scientific reports, 13(1), 2559.
Alsaeed, H. (2022). The Role of Public Education Schools in Developing Social Responsibility in the Light of Contemporary Global Trends. Creative Education, 13, 2754-2780. - https://www.scirp.org/pdf/ce_2022091315325735.pdf
Ananiev, B.G. (2018). Man as an object of knowledge. SPb.: Peter. ISBN 978-5-496-02299-6.
Antipina, N.V. (2004). Formation of social responsibility in the professional self-determination of high school students: (Ph.D. dis. … cand. ped. Sciences) Kaliningrad State University. Kaliningrad. (In Russian)
Aryabkina, I.V., Medvedeva, I.A., Bulynin, A.M., Lebedeva, N.V., & Zharkova, G.A. (2021). Sociocultural design as a means of moral educati on of schoolchildren in the conditions of modern education. Revista Eduweb, 15(3), 295-311.
Aryabkina, I.V., Spiridonova, A.A., Kapranova, O.V., Savaderova, A.V., & Maiorova, N.I. (2019). Development of personal cultural and aestheti c perception by means of performing art. Amazonia Investiga, 8(19), 514–520. Retrieved from https://amazoniainvestiga.info/index.php/amazonia/article/view/261
Bazhin, E.F., Golinkina, E.A., & Etkind, A.M. (1984). Method of investigating the level of subjective control. Psychological Journal, 5(3), 152-162. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1987-12286-001
Belov, A.V. (2011). Social responsibility: content and implementation mechanisms (Ph.D. dis. … cand. Philosophical Sciences). Volgograd State University. Volgograd. (In Russian)
Bulatnikov, I.E. (2019). Responsibility education. Kursk: Dream.
de Moraes Abrahão, V., Vaquero-Diego, M., & Móstoles, R. C. (2024). University social responsibility: The role of teachers. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 9(1), 100464. https://acortar.link/ZYayja
Dima, A. M., Vasilache, S., Ghinea, V., & Agoston, S. (2013). A model of academic social responsibility. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 38, 23-43.
Evgenieva, A.P. (1985). Dictionary of the Russian language in 4 volumes. Moscow: Russian language.
Feldstein, D.I. (1997). Social development in the space-time of childhood. Moscow: Flint. ISBN 5-89502-009-7
Frankl, V. (2017). The Doctor and the Soul: Logotherapy and Existential Analysis. Moscow: Alpina non-fiction. (In Russian)
Fromm, E. (1969). Escape from Freedom. New York: Avon Books.
Hvorostovskaya, V.G. (1981). Education of responsibility in younger adolescents in the pioneer detachment (abstract of the thesis. dis. … cand. ped. Sciences) Chelyabinsk State Pedagogical Institute, Chelyabinsk. (In Russian)
Itelson, L.B. (1972). Lectures on modern problems of the psychology of learning. Vladimir: Vladimir State Pedagogical Institute. P.I. Lebedev-Polyansky. (In Russian) There is no ISBN
Kobylarek, A. (2019). Social responsibility of science. Journal of Education Culture and Society, 2, 5-19.
Kohlberg, L. (1986). Сonsensus and controversy. Philadelphia: Falmer Press.
Lapteva, M.D., & Zimnyaya, I.A. (2012). Teaching students’ responsibility and independence. Education of schoolchildren, 1, 26-35. https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=17271209
Malyshevsky, A.F. (2004). Philosophical and terminological dictionary. Kaluga: Vulture. (In Russian)
Marishchuk, V.L., & Evdokimov, V.I. (2001). Human behavior and self-regulation under stress. St. Petersburg: Publishing house "September", 260. (In Russian)
May, R. (1961). Existential Psychology. New York: Random House.
Merton, R.K. (1968). Social Theory and Social Structure. Enlarged edition. N.Y.: The Free Press.
Mudrik, A.V. (2011). Human socialization: textbook. allowance. Moscow: MPSI; Voronezh: MODEK. ISBN 978-5-9770-0511-1
Muzdybaev, K. (2010). Psychology of responsibility. Moscow: LIBROKOM. ISBN 978-5-397-01478-6
Myasishchev, V.N. (1995). Psychology of Relations: Selected Psychological Works. Moscow: MPSI; Voronezh: MODEK. (In Russian).
Osnitsky, A.K. (2007). Regulation of activity and orientation of personality. M.: Publishing House Moscow. an economic linguist. in-ta, 232 p. ISBN: 5-9220-0035-7
Podshivalov, V.N. (2009). Social responsibility of the individual: philosophical and anthropological aspect (dis. …cand. Philosophical Sciences) Ural Institute of Business. Ekaterinburg. (In Russian)
Rean, A.A. (2004). Psychology of personality: socialization, behavior, communication. St. Petersburg: Prime Eurosign. ISBN 5-93878-123-X.
Selman, R.L. (1980). The growth of interpersonal understanding. London: Academic. ISBN: 0126364508
Sidorkina, S.L. (2010). Formation of social responsibility in adolescents through socially significant activities (dis. ... cand. Psychological Sciences). Nizhny Novgorod State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering. Nizhny Novgorod. (In Russian)
Smiles, S. (1871). Character. London: John Murray.
Spadey, R.J. (2006). In Search of Enlightened Leadership. The Civilization of Tomorrow: New Management Theory in Action. Kursk: ROSI Publishing House.
Sukhomlinsky, V.A. (1979). Birth of a citizen. Moscow: Young Guard. (In Russian)
Terentyeva, I. A., & Nikitina, T. A. (2019). Motivation for socially significant activities as a condition for successful socialization of personality. Amazonia Investiga, 8(23), 821-829. Retrieved from https://amazoniainvestiga.info/index.php/amazonia/article/view/936
Timoshina, I.N., & Aryabkina, I.V. (2022). Education of social responsibility of student youth as a topical pedagogical problem. Economic and humanitarian studies of regions, 3, 49-54. (In Russian).
Voronin, A.S. (2006). Glossary of terms in general and social pedagogy. Ekaterinburg: GOU VPO USTU-UPI. (In Russian).
Yan, W. (2020). Research on Teenagers’ Sense of Social Responsibility Under the Background of Network Micro Era. In 2020 International Conference on Modern Education Management, Innovation and Entrepreneurship and Social Science (MEMIESS 2020) (pp. 99-102). Atlantis Press.