* translated into English with an online translation service, the original text can be found here
The modern period of social life is usually called a transitive period, that is, a period of dynamic changes in the socio-cultural space [Fedotova,2010]. M. G. Fedotova [Fedotova,2010], E. M. Dubovskaya [Dubovskaya, 2014] and others see in the ongoing TRANS-formations “transitivity” from one way of life to another, new, not yet defined. The thesis about “transition” includes the social optimism of the authors, which is conditioned by the habit of life or the desire to live in the relative certainty of social space.
It is possible that social life is becoming as dynamic as technological progress. Arguments in favor of transitivity as a stable characteristic are current events in the world and in the country that affect the lives of almost the entire population of the Globe. Social life cannot be the same after the collapse of the USSR, after the emergence of the world wide web, after the terrorist events, after the coronavirus with accompanying quarantines and self-isolation. “Variability is becoming more and more a constant characteristic of the current situation” [Dubovskaya, 2014].
Transitivity is characterized by the simultaneous existence of a set of socio-cultural contexts [Orestova, 2018], changes in behavior norms, re-evaluation of past events, and unstable orientations of the future. V. B. Agranovich provides a classification of nine features of such a society. Among them: the irreversibility of the character of social processes, innovative activity, Antinomianism of culture, the need to choose between conflicting value systems, an increase in the share of people with “market orientation” (E. Fromm), the identity crisis [Agranovich, 2005].
An important feature of the transitivity of social life is the perceived confusion, repeated intrapersonal conflicts of adults, their fears that there may be a perversion of the moral regulation of behavior.
How can the education system exist in a transitive environment? How can they (should they?) teachers prepare students for life with a wide range of value systems? What should parents take care of when bringing their children into the education system? We will focus on the problems of socialization taking place in school, its qualitative result-the formation of students ‘ identity.
The experience of one’s own identity, its integrity, correspondence to oneself in different periods of life, borders of identity with the world, is the most important sign of a person’s mental health. To experience a subjective level of well-being or happiness, identity must be positively evaluated, consistent in its main characteristics, stable and, at the same time, flexible.
During adulthood, the child’s identity is formed on the basis of its biological characteristics, along with the acquisition of social experience and environment. Identity can be in different degrees conscious, differentiated, fragmented. Since the time of E. Erickson, two main components of human identity have been identified: social identity and personal (reflexive) identity. Social identity – the experience of being a member of certain groups, experiencing a sense of community, inclusion, acceptance. Personal identity – awareness of their individual traits, their uniqueness, difference from others.
Among the components of social identity are biological (gender, age, race and ethnicity, appearance, family relations), based on direct interaction (friends, classmates, colleagues in the sports sector, etc.), based on common values or interests (flower lover, traveler, music lover, DotA player, liker), based on belonging to broad communities (urban identity, belonging to the country, civil identity, universal). Differentiated social identity, its multiplicity and multilevel nature makes a person more stable in situations of change or uncertainty, in situations of loss of one of their social statuses (for example, job loss).
Personal (reflexive) identity-ideas about one’s own personal qualities, interests, and features. The formed personal identity allows the child to feel confident in a situation when it is necessary to have their own opinion, personal position, in a situation of social comparisons, situations that require finding an original solution.
The school as an institution of socialization in the conditions of transitivity should not reduce social identity to the role of “student”, but, on the contrary, actualize multi-level components of social identity, which is the key to the formation of flexibility and stability of identity, sympathetic, not hostile, attitude of students to representatives of outgroups. The school’s emphasis on the formation of unified norms and behavior of students should be supplemented by support for the uniqueness of the child’s personality.
Teachers will be able to cope with such tasks only if they themselves have a differentiated multi-level identity, if their personal uniqueness is supported both in society and by specific heads of educational institutions.
The article was prepared with the financial support of the RFBR, project 19-29-07489 (MK).
- Agranovich V.B. Tranzitivnyj period razvitiya obshchestva i kache-stvo obrazovatel’nyh processov. Inzhenernoe obrazovanie, 2005, №. 3. S.158–163.
- Dubovskaya E.M. Tranzitivnost’ obshchestva kak faktor socializa-cii lichnosti // Psihologicheskie issledovaniya. 2014. T. 7, № 36. S. 7. URL: http://psystudy.ru (data obrashcheniya: 11.05.2020).
- Orestova V.R., Tkachenko D.P. Kino kak faktor stanovleniya identichnosti molodezhi v tranzitivnom obshchestve // Anan’evskie chteniya – 2018: Psihologiya lichnosti: tradicii i sovremen-nost’: materialy mezhdunarodnoj nauchnoj konferencii, 23-26 oktyabrya 2018 goda / Pod obshch. redakciej N.V. Grishinoj, S.N. Kostrominoj. Otv. red. I.R. Murtazina, M.O. Avanesyan – SPb.: Ajsing, 2018. S. 50-51.
- Fedotova M. G.K soderzhaniyu ponyatiya «Tranzitivnoe obshchestvo». Vestnik Vyatskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2010, №1 (4). S. 28-31.