The humanistic paradigm of education is characterized by the following feature. Humanistic (phenomenological) paradigm

In literal translation from Latin, the word "paradigm" means "example". In modern pedagogy, it is used as a conceptual model of education. There are a great many educational paradigms. I.A. Kolesnikova links their diversity with pedagogical civilizations; in her opinion, humanity has passed the stages of natural pedagogy and reproductive-pedagogical civilization and is entering a creative-pedagogical civilization.

Archaeological, ethnographic, anthropological and other evidence suggests that at the first stage, "pedagogical activity" was organically woven into the natural flow of life of an adult and a child. Each member of the community was involved in the transfer and acquisition of knowledge, skills, experience of relationships necessary to survive. In time, natural pedagogy corresponds to primitive society. Nature and man acted as an information sign. In the process of transferring the experience of labor activity, the formation of a human way of life was carried out. The child and his caregivers did not live in the past and the future, but “here and now”, using the knowledge, skills and abilities that were required at any given moment, performing only those social functions that the situation required. The regulation of behavior was regulated by instinct. There was no question of the content of education and upbringing.

As soon as there was a conscious differentiation of learning by gender, labor specialization, physical development, functions in the family, humanity continued its path already within the framework of a reproductive and pedagogical civilization. Its distinguishing feature is the purposeful transfer of the experience of "fathers" to "children" by means of a specially organized pedagogical process. Human communities began to invent, reproduce, improve the best ways for their conditions to transmit information from generation to generation. Instead of natural materials, on which primitive people imprinted their vision of the surrounding world, instead of sounds, gestures, smells, sign systems were proposed that coded life experience, facilitating its conservation and transmission.

To date, there has been an almost complete replacement of man's natural abilities to cognize the world with the help of himself with artificial devices, "inanimate" nature. As a result, since the end of the XX century. man is doomed to mediate in the acquisition of knowledge. Between him and the world there is a kind of "didactic wall", the degree of permeability of which in terms of "purity of information" is very different. There is a constant weakening, fading, distortion of information signals that originally connect man with nature. A conditional world has been created in which the measure of information that determined all the previous stages of the apprenticeship of a human individual is violated. The flow of information is constantly increasing. The content of the experience acquired in educational institutions is becoming more and more divorced from the real needs and requirements of the human individuality. Within the framework of the reproductive-pedagogical civilization, we are talking about the development of certain conditional, conventional requirements for the content of education and the criteria for education. Experts “agree” on how much knowledge, skills, attitudes, value judgments should be considered as reference, what are the behavioral norms that characterize the expected effect of good breeding, whether the quality of a person as a cosmo-bio-social phenomenon is preserved, no one in particular does not care, because at this stage of pedagogical civilization, the emphasis is primarily on the social tasks of education and upbringing. The natural, and even more so the cosmic beginnings recede into the background. As a result of the violation of the informational measure permissible for a person, the processes of his alienation from knowledge are growing. Protective mechanisms are included that protect against the redundancy of the proposed content of education. This is a kind of payment of human knowledge for the neglect of nature.

The internal resources of the reproductive-pedagogical civilization have been exhausted, and we are forced, according to I.A. Kolesnikova, to take a step forward into the next civilization - the creative-pedagogical one.

It can be assumed that in connection with the need to master the mechanisms of a holistic information and energy exchange in the "Man-Space" system, a reflexive culture will rapidly increase. Non-violent ways of solving conflicts of different levels in the "Man-Man" system should and will be mastered, environmentally friendly forms of interaction in the "Man-Nature" system have been found.

We believe that at the stage of creative-pedagogical civilization, the human community, taken as a whole, will be the cumulative subject-object of education. Thus, each individual will return to natural pedagogical activity as a co-creation of an adult and a child, a universal way of being, in the depths of which the comprehension and evaluation of innovative experience will be carried out. The pedagogy of events will give way to the pedagogy of Being. The era of the school of creativity in its broad, philosophical sense will come.

The transition to the third pedagogical situation will require a radical change in professional and pedagogical attitudes and stereotypes, the discovery of other meanings of the activity of a practicing teacher. A revision of all currently existing models of educational systems according to the criterion of "humanity" is coming. Having retained the possibilities opened up by scientific and technological progress, a person will inevitably have to regain the natural channels of interaction with Nature, with other people. Only then, perhaps, that measure of information will be regained, which gives a living volumetric knowledge necessary for harmony with the World. All this will lead to a radical revision of the content of education and the meaning of education.

In these searches, a kind of guiding star will be what is today called the pedagogical paradigm, the formation of which took place and is taking place as human communities master various ways of interacting with the world. None of the existing paradigms of education can be called the worst or the best. Each of them corresponds to one or another perception of the world and pedagogical objects, understanding of their essence, construction of the educational process.

Approaches to culture:

value (axiological);
activity: culture is interpreted as proven methods of activity to create material and spiritual values;
personal: culture is embodied in a certain type of personality, its properties.

Their corresponding paradigms of education:

traditionalist-conservative. The word "conservative" is used here in a positive sense (preservation, stabilization of culture through education);
rationalistic, which corresponds to the active approach in culture and is used to adapt a person to culture. Here, the focus is not on knowledge, but on skills, methods of action;
phenomenological (humanistic) relating to man as the main phenomenon of culture, as a subject of education.

That is, firstly, paradigms differ by goals which are placed before education; Secondly, on understanding the functions of the school; on ways to achieve goals; by the nature of pedagogical interaction especially on the position of the student in education. Each of these paradigms poses its own questions for education:

about the functions of the school as a social institution;
on the effectiveness of the education system;
about school priorities;
what are the socially significant goals of education;
what knowledge, skills and abilities are valuable and for whom, or what education should be like in the modern world.

A comparative assessment of various educational paradigms was given by V.Ya. Pilipovsky. The choice of the education paradigm is determined by binary oppositions:

It is known that personality education is based on various values:

transcendental (approximation of the educated to the absolute value - Truth, God);
sociocentric (freedom, equality, brotherhood, labor, peace, creativity, harmony, humanity, etc.);
anthropocentric (self-realization, hedonism, usefulness, sincerity, autonomy, individuality).

The choice of basic values determines the choice of the educational paradigm.

The paradigm in pedagogy can be considered in a more particular sense, which helps to concretize rather general concepts. As paradigms of traditional pedagogy, I.B. Kotova and E.N. Shiyanov consider the following:

formative education, according to which students purposefully acquire socially given and ideologically oriented qualities;
the student is the object of pedagogical influences, and the teacher is an executive subject with limited initiative within the framework of the directive instructions of the administrative bodies;
functional interaction in the pedagogical process, when each of its participants is assigned certain role responsibilities, the departure from which is considered as a violation of the normative foundations of behavior and activity;
external conditioning of the behavior and activities of the pupil, which becomes the main indicator of his discipline, diligence and which leads to ignoring the inner world of the individual in the implementation of pedagogical influence;
direct (imperative) style of managing the student's activities, which is characterized by a monologized impact, suppression of the initiative, creativity of pupils;
standardization of the educational process, in which the content and technology of education are focused mainly on the capabilities of the average student.

Traditional pedagogical thinking uses a set of these and other paradigms as an unshakable foundation of pedagogical activity. The concept of student-centered education, especially popularized by the Rostov Pedagogical University, is based on a set of paradigms that differ in their humanistic orientation, i.e. focus on pedagogical actions that do not harm the individual, as well as their variability, susceptibility to creative rethinking. In this regard, the scientific function of pedagogy acts as a prescription and regulator that has a provable basis and determines the development of pedagogical practice from the standpoint of recognizing the value of the human person.

2.2. Esoteric paradigm

This is the most ancient educational paradigm on our planet. Literally translated from Greek, "esoteric" means secret, hidden, intended exclusively for initiates (in religion, mysticism, magic). Its essence consists in the relation to Truth as eternal and invariable. Truth cannot be known, the supporters of this paradigm argue, it can be joined in a state of insight. The highest meaning of pedagogical activity consists in the release and development of the natural forces of the student for communication with the Cosmos, for entering superknowledge, while the protective function of the Teacher, who carries out the moral, physical, mental preparation and development of the student's essential forces, is especially important.

Comparing the Western and Eastern method of thinking, one of the representatives of esoteric knowledge, Rajneesh, said: “The Western method, called “logic”, explores the truth through thinking ... The path that we call “experience” or “wisdom” reveals all things at once like a flash of lightning, whereby the truth appears as it is, in its totality, leaving no room for change.

A teacher living in the esoteric dimension is, in fact, no longer a teacher, in the sense of “a slave leading a child”, but a true Teacher. He proceeds from the fact that Truth is unchanging and eternal. Teaching is the path leading to the Truth, which cannot be taught, it can only be joined. From here the pedagogical process is not communication, as in the scientific and technocratic paradigm, not communication, as in the humanitarian one, but familiarization with the Truth, as a result of which an understanding is born that "awareness is power." Moreover, this happens, according to the definition of N.K. Roerich, through an “educational blow”. In the esoteric paradigm, the person himself becomes the main organ of information interaction with the Universe.

Such a logic of work with a student does not imply the dynamics of scientific ideas or abstract knowledge. Here the dynamics of experience, states, experiences dominate. Since the Truth already exists and it is unchanging, it does not need to be proved, you can only “break through” to it through revelation, in a state defined in different ways: enlightenment, “eureka”, access to superconsciousness, insight. In the traditions of the esoteric paradigm, work is underway to change the "human quality", to extract the natural essence from under the cover of the personality, formed with the help of social mechanisms.

The cycle of search and preparation of a student is painstaking, “piece work”, requiring many years of gradual restructuring of the inner nature of a person.

Complete voluntary submission to the Instructor is envisaged. In esoteric training, the stage of obedience is obligatory, during which, in complete silence, the student must only try to understand, without asking questions, unquestioningly follow all the instructions of the Teacher.

In the esoteric paradigm, the evaluative aspect "disappears" in the usual sense for the teacher, since the object of evaluation, the personality, disappears. Dissolving in others, it becomes part of a single whole. The criteria of behavior are moving into the area of what is commonly called universal human values and what actually goes into the sphere of the suprahuman, into the area of cosmic ethics.

The esoteric paradigm was known to the ancient civilizations of Egypt, Babylon, India, and America. The school of Pythagoras was founded on it. Tibetan lamas, Orthodox saints, elders, bearers of spiritual traditions possessed esoteric techniques, mostly hidden from the uninitiated. Some of her techniques are partly known to us from auto-training exercises, neuro-linguistic programming, breathing techniques, etc.

2.3. Traditionalist-conservative (knowledge) paradigm

This paradigm is based on 3 postulates.

First postulate: education should be based on basic knowledge and relevant skills and methods of learning, skills. To achieve this, trainees must master the fundamental learning tools, i.e. reading, writing and math literacy.

Second postulate: the content of education should be really important and necessary, and not secondary knowledge, i.e. education must separate the wheat from the chaff. The education system should have an academic character and focus on the basic branches of science. School attention should be directed to what has stood the test of time and is the foundation of education.

Third postulate: humanistic. Much attention should be paid to ethical values. It's about human values. On the wave of innovation in the West, there was even a movement

"Back to the basics!" This is because the science faculties are already forgetting the basics of natural science and studying a bunch of new sciences. R. Ebel challenged new pedagogical ideas in the book “What is the school for?” He believes that the school:

this is not a custodial institution for distracting young people from the street, for familiarization with work;
this is not an adaptation center;
this is not the place for a social experiment.

The school, according to R. Ebel, is a place for learning, for gaining knowledge, in order to preserve the intellectual potential of the nation.

Although the school cannot be responsible for much, but, in his opinion, the school should create a favorable environment for learning, i.e.:

have qualified teachers
have an appropriate material and technical base.

N. Postman in the book "Teaching as a Saving Activity" in the 1980s. (he also wrote the book “Teaching as subversive activity” earlier) stands on traditionalist positions, arguing that the school should not adapt to the information sphere: television has a destructive effect on the intellect, because - like a school - it has its own program, its own system and methodology . The school must resist such an information environment. This is possible if the school gives children a good knowledge of history, language, arts, religion and the continuity of human aspirations. Such guidelines are defended as an increased emphasis on the foundations of education, the natural sciences, and especially history, as the heritage of science.

The traditionalist-conservative concept is recommended to schools by the US Congress and politicians. As early as 1983, the President of the United States appointed a commission on education, which prepared the report "A Nation at Risk". The President was concerned about the growing flow of dullness, the fact that the US school has lost the image of high standards. The risk lies in the ongoing "leakage" of representatives of intellectual thought, which began to be redistributed in the world in the same way as drugs.

A high level of education is the foundation of a democratic state that prides itself on pluralism. Therefore, in 1990, US President Bush delivered a report on national education to Congress, where he proclaimed its goals until 2000 (which are not global, but achievable, unlike the USSR and Russia):

schoolchildren must come to the 1st grade able to read;
90% of students must successfully complete secondary school in accordance with the standard of knowledge;
it is necessary at the end of grades 4, 8, 12 to arrange exams in social disciplines, English, mathematics, natural science, history and geography. In these subjects, translation exams are being introduced and the content is being updated. American society must be sure that the school prepares citizens who are able to enter into the normal life of the country in all spheres;
by 2000, American students were to take the 1st place in the world in terms of training in mathematics and science;
it is necessary to ensure the universal literacy of the population, which is important for the realization of their rights;
by the year 2000, all schools in the United States were to be drug-free, with an environment conducive to learning.

In essence, this is the American standard of education and the conditions for its implementation. It was backed by the best financial backing in the world. The problem with the aims of education, then, is to convey the most essential elements of culture and civilization. The school curricula should form a base of knowledge, skills and abilities that ensure the functional literacy and socialization of the individual.

The traditionalist-conservative paradigm of education is based on the idea of a “saving”, conservative (in a positive sense) role of the school, the purpose of which is to preserve and transfer to the younger generation the cultural heritage, ideals and values that contribute to both individual development and the preservation of social order. . Therefore, the content of school programs should be based on basic, time-tested knowledge, skills and abilities that ensure the functional literacy and socialization of the child. This is an academic direction that does not connect school with life.

In the USSR, the education system was based precisely on this paradigm, and its effectiveness is obvious: in the 50s. of the last century, in terms of the level of intellectualization, Soviet youth was in 2-3rd place in the world (UN data).

2.4. Technocratic paradigm

This paradigm was formed in professional consciousness and behavior as a derivative of the observed facts and phenomena of the scientific and technological revolution and its consequences. The paradigm is based on the idea of the truth, proven by scientifically based knowledge, proven experience. For teachers of this type, the motto “Knowledge is power” has been relevant for a long time, and only practice serves as a criterion for the truth of knowledge.

Under the conditions of the technocratic paradigm, any result of the educational process can be assessed in the system "yes - no", "knows - does not know", "educated - not educated", "owns - does not own". Here there is always a certain standard, ideal, standard, according to which the level of training, education, upbringing is checked. Understanding the quality of a person in a given plane is associated with an assessment of his readiness or unwillingness to perform a certain social function. The idea of proper knowledge, behavior is formed at the state level.

The value of a child is determined according to the principle "more - less", "better - worse", "stronger - weaker", which creates an atmosphere of competitiveness and competition in educational institutions. The choice of a teacher, as a rule, is done in favor of the "strong". In the logic of technocracy, there is a constant selection for further promotion of those who were “in shape” at the time of diagnosis, competition, testing.

Inequality is reproduced in the system "adult - child", "teacher - student". Since the bearer of reference knowledge and behavior is always an adult, the interaction of the participants in the pedagogical process is based on the principle of an informational message by the subject to the object in the genre of a monologue, no matter in what outwardly active forms this may take place.

The subject of such a monologue can be not only a person, but also a learning machine. Knowledge arises only on the side of the subject. Methods can also be different - from purely reproductive to interactive, but the meaning of the actions remains common: to find an algorithm that will allow you to “introduce” the normative content into the consciousness and behavior of the ward with the greatest accuracy and ensure its most complete and accurate reproduction.

Despite all the efforts and tricks, the leakage of information, its reduction, distortion, which is akin to the effect of a "broken phone", is inevitable here. The knowledge acquired in this way is always impersonal, averaged, limited by the already known, albeit scientifically substantiated. At the level of philosophical and pedagogical consciousness in the analyzed paradigm there is a “love for science and knowledge”. But love for a child turns out to be superfluous, because, in accordance with professional ethics, respect and exactingness completely replace it.

Freedom for the student and his mentor is realized only within the boundaries of accepted attitudes, standards and norms. Equality as such does not exist, since everyone is constantly compared to each other on the same parameters. Therefore, it is natural that the layer of social consciousness that obeys the rules of technocratic existence resists knowledge and ways of behavior that refute and question these rules.

The scientific-technocratic paradigm was originally built according to the logic of distrust in the equality of cognitive opportunities. Hence the emergence in the world pedagogical culture of various kinds of tests, rating series, education standards, its dead-end forms. At the same time, the verification of “compliance” with the standard is carried out, as a rule, without taking into account whether the conditions for the successful development of the child have been created, whether the proposed standard, the standard for the nature of a particular person, is organic. The norms of regulation of relationships within the framework of technocratic logic lie in the sphere of an external law, to a large extent removing from the teacher the burden of responsibility for the position in relation to the assessment of the student, and from the student - in relation to the quality of his knowledge.

However, not everything is so unambiguously negative in this paradigm. The fact is that, although it is built on distrust of the capabilities of the individual, it is to it that we owe many productive pedagogical technologies and interesting forms of work. These include: stenciled writing, the Bell-Lancaster learning system, algorithmization and programming, computer games, reference notes, and much more, which helps to streamline complex pedagogical processes, quantify them, and establish feedback.

In Russia, the technocratic paradigm was officially consolidated by the government school reform in 1958: the Constitution of the USSR (a course on the rights and duties of citizens), psychology (the science of the human soul), and logic (the science of human thinking) were removed from the curricula. Instead, technical and service labor and initial military training appeared in the schedule. The secondary school was officially declared a "labor polytechnic", although its main function is the formation of a person of culture. An echo of that reform is the “labor practice” that exists in the curricula of the modern school, which has turned everywhere into a labor service for cleaning school premises and the yard.

Despite all the shortcomings, the technocratic paradigm provides a high level of students' knowledge. It was during the years of its domination that our country was the first in the world to begin to explore outer space.

2.5. Behavioristic (rationalistic, behavioral) paradigm

Unlike the previous ones, this paradigm is based not on a knowledge or cultural, but on a psychological orientation - behaviorism.

Behaviorism is a psychological theory of behavior that considers it as a person's reaction to the influence of the external environment:

STIMULUS REACTION

Behaviorists describe less the inner world, its state, and more - external stimuli.

The rationalistic model of the school is connected with this theory. The model considers the school as a way of acquiring knowledge in order to shape the behavior of children, in other words, the school is an educational mechanism for adapting to the environment.

Supporters of this model love the definition of the school as a factory, for which the raw material and the result of processing are students. They are a finished product for life.

The leading principle of education is the regulation of the external conditions of the process and the reaction of students to it, who develop and acquire a behavioral repertoire (ie, a set of behaviors).

The goal of the school is to form in students an adaptive "behavioral repertoire" that corresponds to social norms, requirements and expectations of Western culture. Moreover, the term "behavior" denotes "all types of reactions characteristic of a person - his thoughts, feelings and actions" (R. Tyler).

This paradigm considers school as a way of mastering knowledge in order to form the optimal behavior of the student. The main motto is: “School is a factory for which students are “raw materials”.

The technocracy of the paradigm under consideration determines the need to formulate and detail the learning objectives in such a way that they clearly show what skills and abilities the student should have. The educational program is fully translated into the language of specific behavioral terms, the language of “measurable units of behavior”. R. Meydzher was the first who translated science into the language of behavior. In his opinion, this enriches both the student and the teacher. Even if the teacher does everything, then the student will have coordination and control. Major considers learning, training, test control, individual training, and correction as the main methods of teaching.

American psychologist B. Skinner introduced the concept of "social engineering". He revealed the meaning of behavior. Behavior is all kinds of reactions inherent in a person, i.e. his

In accordance with this, the structure of training is also proposed. All training comes down to the formation of specific skills and reactions:

How to make a phone call?
How to talk to a sick mother?
How to "get out" when you don't know the answer to a question?

This is a difficult but interesting task. For example, B. Bloom recommends the following intellectual operations in chemistry: knowledge, understanding, analysis, application, synthesis (only 5 levels-operations).

Any section of chemistry must be mastered at one or more levels (operations). To do this, you need to have measurable units of behavior. And development, and creativity of the student? There is a problem of a template and "drilling".

Hence, however, was born the concept of complete assimilation of knowledge. One of the conditions is the unlimited period of study.

Main phases (structure) of learning:

planning training based on a benchmark in the form of a set of observed actions of students;
diagnostic: a preliminary diagnosis of the initial level of knowledge, skills and abilities of students is needed;
prescription: programming of the desired learning outcomes, determination of conditions and selection of formative influences;
organizational: students are explained what they need to know, i.e. learning objectives and hands-on training;
evaluation of learning outcomes and their comparison with the originally intended standard; again, testing is underway.

So, training, individualization, diagnostics and the absence of a hard time limit are the main conditions for the complete assimilation of knowledge.

B. Bloom's concept is connected with this concept, the essence of which lies in a rather optimistic approach to students. He believes that almost all children not only can keep up, but also successfully learn. The student's optimal ability is determined under appropriate conditions and at his own pace of learning.

He identified the following categories of students:

incapacitated (~5%); they cannot acquire knowledge even with a long period of study;
talented (~5%), learn at a very high pace;
ordinary students (~90%). Their abilities are determined by the cost of study time.

All this formed the basis of B. Bloom's concept that approximately 95% of students will learn all the content of education when the time frame is removed and the appropriate approach to learning is taken.

Concept features full assimilation of knowledge by students according to Bloom:

fixing learning outcomes at a high level, mandatory for all students;
differences in learning outcomes will be seen beyond this overall high score;
the teacher must be imbued with the idea that all his students are able to fully assimilate the necessary educational material, and his duty is to organize the educational process.

The methodology is as follows:

The exact definition of the criterion for complete assimilation for the entire class, the entire course, on the basis of which the teacher will draw up a list of specific learning outcomes that need to be obtained. Tests are based on this.
Educational units are allocated, i.e. integral sections of educational material. Then the results of their assimilation are again revealed, current tests are compiled (which do not affect the final grade). The purpose of these tests is corrective (for the teacher).
Training for each of the training units in the direction of complete assimilation. Then - testing again. Evaluation of the completeness of assimilation of the material throughout the course.

It is important to explain to each student the meaning of assessment, as well as the learning objectives.

In the book Taxonomy of Educational Goals, B. Bloom suggests the following categories of goals:

knowledge,
understanding,
application,
analysis,
evaluation.

The intensive development of the abilities of average and weak students is the main meaning of Bloom's concept.

In fact, there is no hard line between different theories, concepts, paradigms.

What is "knowledge"?

That is, those who give knowledge do not know what knowledge is.

Knowledge- these are facts, concepts, rules, principles, patterns, laws, ideas, theories.

Here the compound distributed by degree generalization of the material.

There is an opinion that in Australia, Belgium, the USA, the Republic of Korea, the effectiveness of such a system justifies itself in grades 5-8. In mass experiments in Korea, 70% of students achieved such high results as with the conventional system - 10% of students.

In the USSR, this concept was most actively used in Estonia. But the paradigm of developmental education came into conflict with the rationalistic concept. Therefore, the Estonians combined something into one, adding to the rationalistic concept development opportunities. And they began to talk about the mandatory minimum of knowledge, especially in the humanities. And the Estonians limited the time of training. Achievement increased by 60%.

2.6. Humanistic (phenomenological) paradigm

Much earlier than the technocratic and behavioral paradigm, the humanistic paradigm began to take shape. It focuses on the development of the student, his intellectual needs and interpersonal relationships. Its core is a humanistic approach to the student, assistance in his personal growth, although attention is also paid to his preparation for life, adaptation, etc.

So, development and self-development, self-realization, creativity of the student, life-creation, subjectivity - that's what this model of education is based on, and not subject-object relations (as in other models). Here partnerships of cooperation.

Development- the transition of students to a higher level of activity and independence in solving tasks.

According to the well-known psychologist L.S. Vygotsky, development is determined by the measure of assistance that must be provided to the child in his education.

According to Vygotsky:

actual development zone- the knowledge, skills and abilities that a person has mastered and can use independently;
zone of proximal development- those knowledge, skills and abilities that a person can use only with the help of an adult (senior).

Distinguish development:

general (universal abilities, including physical ones);
special (associated with abilities, giftedness);
cultural development (we turn to culture again).

The highest level of development is self-development.

The main way of structuring knowledge is cultural approach to education. It is based on the integration of academic disciplines, the creation of a holistic image of the era, culture, on understanding the relationship between culture and civilization, understanding each field of knowledge in the formation of culture, etc.

We lack psychologists, sociologists, primary school teachers and other specialists. So we have not yet begun to humanize education.

At the international seminar "Human Rights" in Azov in November 1993, there was a discussion about teaching the course "Man and Society" at school. Professors from Italy and England said that it should be introduced in all schools and universities in order to implement the 3rd paradigm. This subject must be studied continuously:

elementary schools - talks about human rights;
teenagers - teaching "Civic Studies";
senior schoolchildren - "Human rights and the foundations of democracy."

Western scholars believe that the school should be a model of a legal society, which is difficult to implement in an authoritarian post-Soviet school.

In the context of the implementation of the humanistic paradigm of education, the main thing is that every person finds the truth, i.e. paths of knowledge. The motto of this paradigm in its inner meaning is “Knowledge is power!”. The pedagogical process is based on the principle of dialogue or polylogue and is rich in improvisation. There is no normative, unambiguous truth here, therefore the result of communication, the exchange of spiritual values is defined in the sense of "yes-yes."

One of its main principles is the value-semantic equality of a child and an adult, not in the sense of the sameness or equivalence of knowledge and experience, but in the right of everyone to know the world without restrictions. Hence the famous position of Ya.A. Komensky "to teach everyone everything." The starting point in the school of measuring the quality of pedagogical activity is the person and his movement in time and space relative to himself. In this context, the teacher is primarily interested in the dynamics of individual-personal properties and manifestations, each student is interested. The experience of the existence of a teacher in the humanistic paradigm has long been well known. It suffices to refer to the activities of Socrates, teachers and thinkers of the Renaissance, to the ideas of J.-J. Rousseau, J. Dewey and many others.

The humanistic paradigm forms relations according to the “subject-subject” type. The teacher and students jointly develop the goals of the activity, its content, choose the forms and evaluation criteria, being in a state cooperation, co-creation. Diagnostic changes in the state of the "object" of pedagogical influence do not serve as a means of selection, selection, educational discrimination. Low educational indicators are not the basis for judging the normative qualities of a person, they are only a starting point for assessing the prospects and opportunities for professional work. The space of evaluation criteria moves to the plane of interpersonal relationships. The ethical position of the teacher and student is changing, and they take on moral responsibility for the free choice of one position or another in interaction.

The speed of learning in the humanistic paradigm is determined by the individual ability of subjects to penetrate the essence of a cognitive or life problem. To do this, you must at least be able to see and hear the other. The teacher gets the opportunity to enrich himself all the time, professionally interacting with the student.

In the humanistic paradigm, love for a person, for a child is an attribute of professionalism, which is why many authors of books that have now become classics discuss the question “How to love and understand a child?” Love generates faith in the creative abilities and capabilities of everyone, and tolerance bestows pedagogical wisdom. I. G. Pestalozzi, J. Korchak, K. N. Wentzel, L. N. Tolstoy, S. T. Shatsky, V. A. Sukhomlinsky left examples of this in history.

Representatives of the humanistic paradigm do not differ in unity of views. Within its framework, various models of education coexist. In a single direction, they are united by a value attitude towards the child and childhood as a unique period in a person's life, recognition of the development of the child as the main task of the school. Each educational system operating within the framework of the humanistic paradigm conducts a creative search and finds its own content, methods, means of education and upbringing. The humanistic direction implies the freedom and creativity of both students and teachers.

The humanistic paradigm entered the educational space of Russia after 1991 not on the orders of the ministry, but on the initiative of local teachers. It is very relevant for our country, as it glorifies a person - a phenomenon of culture, education and nature.

It is believed that this paradigm is temporary for us, until an adequate self-esteem is formed in society, until we learn the main values of Russian humanistic philosophy of the late 19th - early 20th century. and democratic society. In all likelihood, sooner or later we will return to the knowledge paradigm that ensures the high intellectual potential of school graduates. But the truth is known: there is nothing more permanent than temporary! And, apparently, the humanistic paradigm will be in demand with us for more than a decade.

Bhagawan Shri Rajneesh. Pulsation of the Absolute. M., 1993. P.11.

User, since you got to this line, you found something interesting or useful for yourself here. I hope you've viewed the site in a Firefox browser, which alone correctly reflects the formulas found on the pages. If you like the content, help the site financially. Please turn off your ad blockers and click on a couple of banners at the top of the page. It will cost you nothing, you will see only what you have already searched for or are looking for, and you will help the site stay afloat.

Modern pedagogical technologies are being developed by Russian scientists and practicing teachers within the framework of the humanistic paradigm. The educational (pedagogical) paradigm is interpreted by domestic scientists as a set of theoretical and methodological guidelines adopted by the scientific pedagogical community as a model for solving pedagogical problems at a certain stage in the development of education (Kodzhaspirova G.M. Dictionary of Pedagogy (interdisciplinary). M .: March, 2005 pp. 233). Thus, the educational paradigm contains a certain set of ideas, rules and norms that serve as guidelines for the creation of pedagogical systems, concepts, theories, technologies for the interaction of participants in the educational process at a particular stage of the development of society.

Russian researchers distinguish different types of pedagogical paradigms, focusing on certain aspects of pedagogical reality. The analysis of publications of famous scientists E.V. Bondarevskaya, G.B. Kornetov, E.N. Shiyanov, E.A. practice of student-centered education Rostov n/D, 2000; Kornetov G. B. Universal pedagogical paradigms in the theory and history of education // School technologies, 2002. No. 6; Shiyanov E. N. Pedagogy: general theory of education. Stavropol, 2007 pp. 362-391 Yamburg EA School for all: adaptive school (theoretical foundations and practice of implementation. M., 1996).

Within the framework of the traditional paradigm, the teacher focuses on the intellectual development of students. The leading goal of education is deep and solid knowledge, and not the spiritual essence of a person. The organization of the content of education is based on the model of consistent accumulation of knowledge. Among the forms of education, the class-lesson system is a priority. The teacher forms a personality with predetermined properties, guided by the ideological guidelines of the state. The educational process is focused on the average student, the individual characteristics of children are leveled.

A maturing person is alienated from participation in the development of his own educational route. The upbringing does not include mechanisms for developing initiative among young people, striving for personal success. Given these characteristics, domestic scientists call the traditional paradigm authoritarian-imperative (Sh.A. Amonashvili), cognitive (E.A. Yamburg), knowledge-oriented (V.V. Serikov, E.N. Shiyanov), socio-oriented (E. V. Bondarevskaya) and believe that such a paradigm was characteristic of the Soviet education system.

Of course, not all teachers of the Soviet Union were guided in their professional activities by these guidelines, but as an official norm, as a model, such a paradigm was recognized and approved by the pedagogical community. Without belittling the merits of the Soviet education system, which was fundamental, purposeful, systematic, ideologically justified and effective for its time, it should be recognized that in the current conditions of development of the Russian state and the world community, this system does not work. Therefore, many scientists and practicing teachers talk about the crisis of education, the way out of which is carried out within the framework of a new paradigm of education (Bondarevskaya E.V. Anti-crisis orientation of modern education // Pedagogy. 2007. No. 3. P.3-14).

The following can be distinguished as the basic ideas of the modern humanistic paradigm: the desire of the teacher to turn the student into a like-minded person, an equal participant and co-author of his own education. The leading role in the pedagogical process is assigned to the formation of social and professional competencies. The teacher creates conditions for the development of subjective personality traits, guided by the interests of students and the demands of society.

The pedagogical process is built on the basis of cooperation, trust and mutual respect. The ideas of "understanding" another's point of view, dialogue, joint action come to the fore. Interactive methods are widely used in training and education. Students take an active part in the development of their educational route. The basic characteristics of the modern paradigm of education testify to its humanistic orientation, which is why it is increasingly being defined as humanistic in the Russian pedagogical community.

Today, few teachers doubt the need to implement the provisions of humane pedagogy in the pedagogical process. In general, the pedagogical community recognized the idea of humanism as a model for solving pedagogical problems. At the theoretical level, there have been significant changes in this regard. Ideas about the goals of pedagogical research are changing, in which not the externally conditioned formation of certain qualities of students, but the design and modeling of the future states of the objects under study, the conditions and ways of their development, comes to the fore.

The position of the scientist is changing, who becomes an active transformer of the processes being studied. The personality of the child (pupil, student) is placed in the center of scientific research of the picture, new concepts are introduced. “The pedagogical thesaurus has firmly included such new concepts for traditional science as values and personal meanings, subjectivity, personal development, the world of childhood, a multicultural educational space, the cultural and information environment of the school, the type of education, the model of education, differentiation, individual learning trajectory, pedagogical support, psychological and pedagogical support, interactive technologies and many others that testify to humanization, informatization, globalization, multiculturalism, communication, corporatism as signs of pedagogical reality "(E.V. Bondarevskaya. Paradigm as a methodological regulator of pedagogical science and innovative practice // Pedagogy , 2007. No. 6. P.6).

However, in practice the situation is much more complicated. According to our observations and the results of interviews, more than 50% of working teachers still limit their professional activities to familiarizing students with the basics of a certain science and do not use the entire arsenal of pedagogical tools for the development of the subjective beginnings of the personality. But the solution of this problem can significantly improve the quality of training for both schoolchildren and students. Some teachers and lecturers are trying to implement the ideas of humanization in the educational process, but do not have the appropriate pedagogical mechanisms. An increasing number of teachers are beginning to realize that the humanization of the school is not just a beautiful slogan, but also a rather difficult problem that needs to be solved based on new conceptual approaches and using modern pedagogical technologies. The implementation of psychological and pedagogical approaches developed within the framework of the humanistic paradigm helps to solve this problem.

Humanistic paradigm

Completed by a student of 352 groups

Makarova Nadezhda

Direction history.

The humanistic paradigm emerged in the United States in the late 1950s. It was formed as a union of scientists who share some common views on the person and on the methodology of psychological research, and the basis for this union was in many respects a protest against two approaches - psychoanalysis and behaviorism. In these approaches, just the higher essential manifestations specific to a person remain outside the scope of consideration. It was they who were put at the center of their interests by the emerging humanistic psychology. The founders of humanistic psychology set the task of constructing a new, fundamentally different from the natural science methodology of human cognition. But the dissonance within the current itself gave rise to difficulties on the path of consolidation, therefore, according to D.A. Leontiev, "opposition to behaviorism and psychoanalysis to this day remains the only cementing basis of the movement." Humanistic psychologists themselves point to differences in the views of the founders of humanistic psychology. So in the late 1980s. J. Rowan in his article "Two humanistic psychologies or one?" drew attention to the fact that within humanistic psychology, at least two directions can be distinguished, differing in their view of the image of a person, (cited by Leontiev D.A.) This is existential psychology and conditionally designated "personally centered". But today we can already say that existential psychology has separated from humanistic psychology and has become independent of it.

Humanistic psychology is a trend in Western psychology that recognizes as its main subject the personality as a unique holistic system, which is not something given in advance, but an open possibility of self-actualization inherent only in man. ""The American Association for Humanistic Psychology in the early years of its existence put forward the following, vague definition: “Humanistic psychology can be defined as the third main branch of psychological research (the other two branches are psychoanalytic and behavioral), which deals primarily with those human abilities and potentialities that have not found their place either in positivist or behaviorist theory, or in classical psychoanalytic theory, for example, creativity, love, self, development, organism, satisfaction of basic needs, self-actualization, higher values, being, becoming, spontaneity, play, humor, attachment, naturalness, warmth, transcendence e th, objectivity, autonomy, responsibility, psychological health and related concepts. This approach can also be represented by the works of K. Goldstein, E. Fromm, K. Horney, K. Rogers, A. Maslow, G. Allport, A. Engyal, S. Bueller, K. Moustakas, etc., as well as some aspects of the works of K. Jung, A. Adler.

Three theories are considered in the humanistic paradigm: the theory of personality by C. Rogers, the theory of personality by Abraham Maslow, the concept of personality by G. Allport.

^ Theory of personality by K. Rogers.

In his theory of personality, Rogers developed a certain system of concepts in which people can create and change their ideas about themselves, about their loved ones. In the same system, therapy is also deployed to help a person change himself and his relationships with others. As with other representatives of humanistic psychology, the idea of the value and uniqueness of the human person is central to Rogers. He believes that the experience that a person has in the process of life, and which he called the "phenomenal field", is individual and unique. This world, created by man, may or may not coincide with reality, since not all objects included in the environment are perceived by the subject. The degree of identity of this field of reality Rogers called congruence. Violation of congruence leads to an increase in tension, anxiety and, ultimately, to neurotic personality. The withdrawal from one's individuality, the rejection of self-actualization, which Rogers, like Maslow, considered one of the most important needs of the individual. Developing the foundations of his therapy, the scientist combines in it the idea congruence with self-actualization. Speaking about the structure of the Self, Rogers attached particular importance to self-esteem which expresses the essence of man, his self. Rogers insisted that self-esteem should not only be adequate, but also flexible, changing depending on the situation. At the same time, Rogers not only spoke about the influence of experience on self-esteem, but also emphasized the need for openness to experience. Rogers emphasized in his theory the meaning of the present. People must learn to live in the present, to realize and appreciate every moment of their lives. Only then will life reveal itself in its true meaning, and only then can one speak of full realization, or, as Rogers called it, full functioning of the personality. Rogers, respectively , had its own special approach to psycho-correction. He proceeded from the fact that the psychotherapist should not impose his opinion on the patient, but lead him to the right decision, which the latter makes on his own. In the process of therapy, the patient learns to trust himself, his intuition, his feelings and impulses more. As he begins to understand himself better, he understands others better. As a result, that "enlightenment" occurs, which helps to rebuild one's self-esteem, " restructure the gestalt" as Rogers says. This increases congruence and makes it possible to accept yourself and others, reduces anxiety and tension.

^ Abraham Maslow's theory of personality.

Maslow almost did not conduct global, large-scale experiments that are characteristic of American psychology, especially behaviorism. His small, pilot studies did not so much grope for new paths as they confirmed what he came to in his theoretical reasoning. That's how he approached the study" self-actualization"- one of the central concepts of his concept of humanistic psychology. Maslow believed that it was necessary to study human nature "by studying its best representatives, and not by cataloging the difficulties and mistakes of average or neurotic individuals." Only in this way can we understand the limits of human capabilities, the true nature of man, which is not fully and clearly represented in other, less gifted people. The group he chose for the study consisted of eighteen people, nine of them were his contemporaries, and nine were historical figures (A. Lincoln, A. Einstein, W. James, B. Spinosaidr). These studies led him to the idea that there is a certain hierarchy of human needs, which looks like this: physiological needs food, water, sleep, etc.; the need for security - stability, order; the need for love and belonging - family, friendship; need for respect - self-respect, recognition; the need for self-actualization - the development of abilities. One of the weaknesses of Maslow's theory was that he argued that these needs are in a rigid hierarchy once and for all, and higher needs (for self-esteem or self-actualization) arise only after more elementary ones are satisfied. Not only critics, but also followers of Maslow showed that very often the need for self-actualization or self-respect was dominant and determined human behavior, despite the fact that his physiological needs were not satisfied, and sometimes prevented the satisfaction of these needs. Subsequently, Maslow himself abandoned such a rigid hierarchy, combining all needs into two classes: need needs(deficit) and development needs(self-actualization). Self-actualization is associated with the ability to understand oneself, one's inner nature and learn to "attune" in accordance with this nature, to build one's behavior based on it. This is not a one-time act, but a process that has no end, it is a way of "living, working and relating to the world, and not a single achievement." Maslow singled out the most significant moments in this process that change a person's attitude to himself and to the world and stimulate personal growth. It can be a momentary experience - a "peak experience" or a long-term experience - a "plateau experience". Describing a self-actualizing personality, Maslow said that such a person is inherent in the acceptance of himself and the world, including other people. These are, as a rule, people who adequately and effectively perceive the situation, centered on the task, and not on themselves. At the same time, they also tend to strive for solitude, for autonomy and independence from the environment and culture. Thus, Maslow's theory includes the concepts alienation identification, although these mechanisms have not been fully elucidated. The scientist believed that it was conscious aspirations and motives, and not unconscious instincts, that constituted the essence of the human personality. However, the desire for self-actualization, for the realization of one's abilities, encounters obstacles, misunderstandings of others and one's own weaknesses. Many people retreat before difficulties, which does not pass without a trace for the individual, stops its growth. Neurotics are people with an undeveloped or unconscious need for self-actualization. Society, by its very nature, cannot but impede a person's desire for self-actualization. After all, any society strives to make a person its stereotyped representative, alienates the personality from its essence, makes it conformal. At the same time, alienation, preserving the "selfhood", the individuality of the individual, puts him in opposition to the environment and also deprives him of the opportunity to self-actualize. Therefore, a person needs to maintain a balance between these two mechanisms, which, like Scylla and Charybdis, guard him and seek to destroy him. Optimal, according to Maslow, are identification in the external plan, in communication with the outside world, and alienation in the internal plan, in terms of the development of self-consciousness. It is this approach that gives a person the opportunity to effectively communicate with others and at the same time remain himself. This position of Maslow made him popular among intellectuals, as it largely reflected the views of this social group on the relationship between the individual and society. Assessing Maslow's theory, it should be noted that he was perhaps the first psychologist who paid attention not only to deviations, difficulties and negative aspects of the personality. One of the first, he explored the achievements of personal experience, revealed the ways for self-development and self-improvement of any person. Also in his works, he did focus on mental health. He focused on a mentally healthy person and understanding such a person from other positions than comparing him with a mentally ill person. He was convinced that we cannot understand mental illness until we understand mental health. Maslow strongly advocated the study of self-actualizing mentally healthy individuals as the basis for a more universal science of psychology.

^ Gordon Allport's concept of personality.

One of the main postulates of Allport's theory was the proposition that personality is open and self-developing. Man is primarily a social being and therefore cannot develop without contacts with the people around him, with society. Hence Allport's rejection of the position of psychoanalysis on antagonistic, hostile relations between the individual and society. At the same time, Allport argued that communication between the individual and society is not a desire to balance with the environment, but mutual communication, interaction. Thus, he sharply objected to the postulate generally accepted at that time that development is an adaptation, an adaptation of a person to the world around him, proving that it is precisely the need to explode the balance and reach new heights that is characteristic of a person. Allport was one of the first to speak about the uniqueness of each person. Each person is unique and individual, as it is the bearer of a peculiar combination of qualities, needs, which Allport called trite - a trait. These needs, or personality traits, he divided into basic and instrumental. The main features stimulate behavior and are innate, genotypic, while the instrumental ones shape the behavior and are informed in the process of life, i.e. are phenotypic formations. The set of these traits is the core of the personality.

Important for Allport is the provision on autonomy these traits that develop over time. The child does not yet have this autonomy, since his features are still unstable and not fully formed. Only in an adult who is aware of himself, his qualities and his individuality, features become truly autonomous and do not depend either on biological needs or on the pressure of society. This autonomy of a person's traits, being the most important characteristic of his personality, gives him the opportunity, while remaining open to society, to maintain his individuality. So Allport solves the problem identification-alienation, which is one of the most important for all humanistic psychology. Allport developed not only his own theoretical concept of personality, but also his methods of systematic research of the human psyche. For this purpose, he creates multi-factor questionnaires. The questionnaire of the University of Minnesota (MMPI), which is currently used (with a number of modifications) for the analysis of compatibility and professional suitability, has become most famous. Over time, Allport came to the conclusion that the interview provides more information and is a more reliable method than the questionnaire, because it allows you to change questions during the conversation, observe the state and reaction of the subject. The clarity of the criteria, the availability of objective keys for deciphering, the consistency distinguish all the developed
Allport methods of personality research from the subjective projective methods of the psychoanalytic school.

Basic laws.

C. Rogers

Self-actualization is a process that involves the healthy development of people's abilities so that they can become what they can become, and therefore live meaningfully and perfectly.
Congruent personality. A person tells others that what is happening around, and what he is aware of in what is happening, more or less coincide with each other.

Abraham Maslow

hierarchy of human needs: seven step pyramid
identification of alienation, although these mechanisms have not been fully disclosed. The scientist believed that it was conscious aspirations and motives, and not unconscious instincts, that constituted the essence of the human personality.

^ Gordon Allport

personality is open and self-developing. Man, first of all, is a social being and therefore cannot develop without contacts with surrounding people, with society.
the uniqueness of each person. Each person is unique and individual, as it is the bearer of a peculiar combination of qualities, needs, which Allport called trite - a trait.

Ways and methods of work

helping clients to become fully aware of their feelings in the “here-and-now” situation;

showing clients how to reject cognitive interpretations and explanations for their difficulties;

helping clients achieve integration;

emphasizing the feelings experienced by clients and their internal processes of change and development;

helping clients gain a deep inner sense of truth;

use of physical exercises and physical emotional release techniques

intentionally putting yourself at risk in order to experience a different mode of existence;

caring and open attitude towards clients, which serves as a model for them to caring and open attitude towards other people;

helping clients achieve an unconditionally positive self-image or total self-acceptance, authenticity, self-honesty and candor;

Rogers created "encounter groups", or meeting groups, are one of the most common technologies for psycho-correction and training today. "Encounter" ("meeting"): equal participation in the dialogue; Rogers "encounter groups", or meeting groups, are one of the most common technologies for psycho-correction and training at present.

experiments or games;

dramatization or acting out feelings.

Conclusion

The humanistic paradigm is one of the special paradigms of psychology, in which the main place is given to human feelings, based on the idea of self-actualization and self-expression of the individual. This paradigm is based on the client's responsibility for experiencing life experience and making decisions, as well as on the client's awareness of his feelings, emotions, that is, on self-change. The most important concept that humanistic psychologists have drawn from existentialism is the concept of becoming. Man is never static, he is always in the process of becoming. The main concepts of this paradigm are the concepts of congruence (a person tells others what is happening around, and what he is aware of in what is happening, more or less coincide with each other), K. Rogers identified the concept of authenticity (a person’s ability to communicate in communication to abandon various social roles, allowing the manifestation of genuine thoughts, emotions and behavior peculiar only to this person) and self-development of the personality. The provision of psychological assistance to clients is based on non-directive psychotherapy. The direction of psychotherapy developed by C. Rogers, characterized by the rejection of many "traditional" methods of psychotherapy, such as diagnosis, interpretation. By all means an atmosphere of warmth, acceptance and understanding is created.

The term "paradigm" ( from Greek paradigma - example, sample) means a strictly scientific theory, embodied in a system of concepts that express the most essential features of reality. Its second meaning is used to characterize generally recognized scientific achievements that give the community of specialists a model for posing problems and solving them over a certain period of time. It is in this sense that it is used in pedagogical theory to designate conceptual models of education.

In the course of the historical development of society and education as its most important institution, various paradigms of education have developed. Therefore, today we can say that there is a certain set of paradigms of education, among which the following are the most common:

1) traditionalist-conservative (knowledge paradigm);

2) rationalistic (behavioristic, behavioral);

3) phenomenological (humanistic paradigm);

4) technocratic;

5) non-institutional paradigm;

6) humanitarian paradigm;

7) learning “through discovery”;

8) esoteric paradigm.

These paradigms differ in their approaches to choosing the main goal of education, to understanding the role and purpose of education in the system of public institutions, to its vision in the system of preparing a person for life, shaping the general and professional culture of the younger generations. Let us consider in more detail the characteristic features of each of the above paradigms of education.

1. Knowledge traditionalist paradigm . The main goal of the knowledge paradigm is to transfer to the younger generation the most essential elements of the cultural heritage of human civilization and its experience. This transfer is carried out on the basis of a body of knowledge, skills and abilities that has stood the test of time, as well as moral ideals and life values that contribute to both individual development and the preservation of social order, allowing to ensure functional literacy and socialization of students.

2. Behavioral rationalistic paradigm education involves, first of all, ensuring the assimilation of knowledge, skills and practical adaptation of the younger generation to the specific conditions of the existing society. The educational program is fully translated into the language of specific behavioral terms, into the language of “measurable units of behavior” (R. Major). The main term of this paradigm is: “The school is a factory for which the student is the “raw material”. The paradigm is based on the concept of social engineering by B. Skinner, according to which the goal of the school is to form in students an adaptive “behavioral repertoire” that corresponds to social norms, requirements and expectations of Western culture. The main methods of such training are teaching, training, test control, individual training, and adjustment.

The disadvantage of both the traditionalist and rationalist models of education is their weak humanistic orientation. In accordance with them, the student is considered only as an object of pedagogical influence, and not as a subject of life, a free self-sufficient person capable of self-development and self-improvement. The rationalistic model of education lacks creativity, independence, responsibility, and individuality.

3. Humanistic (phenomenological) paradigm education considers both the teacher and the student as equal subjects of the educational process. Its main goal is the personal nature of learning, taking into account the individual psychological characteristics of students, creating conditions for the development and self-development of the student, providing him with freedom of choice to maximize the realization of his natural potentials and for self-realization. The humanistic paradigm implies freedom and creative search for both students and teachers. It is focused on the creative, spiritual development of the individual, on interpersonal communication, dialogue, help and support in the self-education of a person and his self-improvement.

4. Technocratic paradigm of education proclaims as its main goal the transfer to the younger generations and their assimilation of the “accurate” scientific knowledge necessary for the further improvement of practice. “Knowledge is power”, therefore the value of a person is determined by his cognitive abilities. A person is valuable not in itself, as a unique individuality, but only as a specialist, a carrier of a certain reference (averaged, standardized) knowledge or behavior. Certain elements of this paradigm are, unfortunately, inherent in our system of engineering education, which is aimed primarily at the professional training of a specialist, and not at his personal formation.

5. Non-institutional paradigm of education is focused on organizing education outside of traditional social institutions, in particular schools and universities. It involves getting an education by a person with the help of the Internet, in the conditions of the so-called "open schools", distance learning, etc. If there are certain advantages of such education (choosing a convenient time, individualization of the training regime and its content), this paradigm, at the same time, deprives the student of the main condition for successful education and personal development - direct contact with a teacher or lecturer. And as quite rightly emphasizes V.G. Kremen, “even if we use the most advanced computer systems, high communication technologies, which, without a doubt, stimulate the dynamics and effectiveness of the educational process, increase the interactivity of the educational environment, no one and nothing can completely replace and replace the art of direct pedagogical dialogue “teacher - student ". Therefore, the training of highly professional pedagogical and scientific-pedagogical workers becomes especially important.

6. Humanitarian educational paradigm (according to I.A. Koesnikova), the center of which is not the student, assimilating ready-made knowledge, but the person who knows the truth. But since there is no unequivocal truth, it is not the truth itself that is important, but the attitude towards it. At the same time, subject-subject interactions and relations between the participants in the pedagogical process are based on the principles of cooperation, co-creation, dialogue, exchange of opinions and mutual responsibility for the free choice of one's position, knowledge of the world through the exchange of spiritual values.

7. Discovery learning paradigm (Jerome Brunner). In accordance with this paradigm, students should learn about the world, acquire knowledge through their own discoveries, requiring the tension of all cognitive forces and at the same time fruitfully influencing the development of productive thinking. Creative learning, according to Brunner, differs both from the assimilation of “ready-made knowledge” and from learning by overcoming difficulties in that students, based on the accumulation and evaluation of data on a specific problem, form appropriate generalizations and even identify patterns that go beyond the studied material.

Today, many practitioners and scientists often turn to divine providence, to the world mind, cosmos, insight and illumination. In this regard, it is impossible not to mention one of the paradigms of education based on the recognition in one form or another of the existence of the world mind.

8. Esoteric paradigm of education , according to I.A. Kolesnikova, reflects the highest level of human interaction with the outside world. The essence of this paradigm is in relation to truth as eternal and unchanging, which a person cannot understand, but can be joined to it in a state of special insight.

The highest meaning of pedagogical activity, according to the supporters of this paradigm, lies in the release of the natural, essential forces of a person for communication with the cosmos, for the development of cognitive abilities, meaning creation, spirituality and moral self-improvement.

However, this paradigm is based on only one area of human interaction - the noosphere. But in order to harmonize the relationship of a person with the world of the planet Earth and the cosmos, with society and himself, it is obviously necessary to take into account the totality of his interactions with the sociosphere and psychosphere.

AT modern education In general, there are two main paradigms: formative (traditional) and personality-oriented (humanistic). The formative paradigm, in turn, has two varieties, one of which is knowledge-oriented, and the second - activity-oriented approach to the content and technologies of education.

Consideration of modern paradigms of education and approaches to its organization allows us to conclude that today for a person education is not just a certain amount of knowledge, skills and abilities, but also a psychological readiness for their continuous accumulation, renewal, processing, in other words, for constant self-education, self-education, self-development and improvement of the personality.

The analyzed paradigms exist in the education system, which is a global object of pedagogy, since it combines the processes of education and upbringing and represents the internationalization of those socio-cultural values of society that are shared by its members.