Select your language

author: Svitlana Kutsepal


Urgency of the research. The world of the 21st century subjects a person to a test with its speed and fluidity, resulting in the transformation of habitual cognitive skills and exploratory strategies. There are also changing ways of finding and retrieving information, resulting in the transformation of forms of cognition and thinking, the individual loses the habitual content of reality, plunges into the alluring world of virtual existence that awaits a person behind the flickering screens of various gadgets. Chats and forums, blogs and YouTube channels are confidently pushing the margins of everyday life the direct communication with friends and family, familiar educational models and techniques, which undoubtedly have a negative impact on personality formation. However, at the same time it also has a positive load, because it opens up the opportunities for self-education and self-improvement New communication models are being formed in the cognitive, intellectual, and spiritual spheres, which are implemented in the theory and practice of educational activities of the “knowledge society”,

Target setting. The challenges of the present are being experienced by all links in the educational chain – from elementary school to higher education. The situation is further complicated by the fact that the cognitive needs of the individual can be met through the capabilities of the computer world, while the educational component of educational process is beyond the machine’s control. The Creator of personality is the Educator, who has one’s own values, social and political preferences, experience of victories and defeats.

Analysis of recent research and publications. Understanding cognitive strategies in the context of globalization shifts and postmodern transformations of the society is the focus of scientific, theoretical and methodological studies both in Ukraine and abroad. The aspects of these issues have been highlighted in the publications by V. Andrushchenko, T. Andrushchenko, V. Vashkevych, V. Voronkova, L. Horbunova, A. Yermolenko, A. Kravchenko, V. Kremen, O. Kyvliuk, M. Kultaieva, V. Muliar, I. Predborska, N. Radionova, A. Sakun, I. Stepanenko, D. Svyrydenko, S. Terepyshchyi and others.

The research objective implementing the socio-philosophical reflection of innovative strategies in education and identifying ways to improve the effectiveness of educational process.

The statement of basic material. The educational realities of the 21st century are changing significantly under the influence of information technologies, the use of Internet resources and virtual practices in the educational process, the introduction of new standards of knowledge transfer. As a result, a polyspace of communication appears, where a confident and comfortable person who has broken the shackles of the Modern worldview, has abandoned the narratives and limitations of the Modern.

One can observe a specific anthropo-axiological turn in education, which is a sign of the increasing role of the subjective factor. This necessitates qualitative changes in the educational process, the widespread use of innovative technologies and the latest methodological approaches, the attraction of information technologies capable of providing training for highly qualified specialists, which will ensure the prosperity and well-being of the country. However, only the changes in the educational process are not enough, since there is a need to form a new image of educator, who is aware of the cognitive, axiological, praxeological needs of the generation born in the age of globalization, postmodernism and total consumption, and capable of perceiving significant amounts of information, but requires the skills for its analysis. That is why the search-and-problematic thinking style, the ability to analyze information and to highlight the main point of interest are of great importance.

The main guideline of modern education is the intellectual development of a person capable of productive cognitive activity, constant self-improvement and self-education. Therefore, methods of creative learning, acquisition and production of knowledge, the ability to formulate and solve problems, and independently search for necessary information in finding the answer to the problems posed by the teacher or the students themselves become especially relevant and required.

Conclusions from this study and prospects for further research. The consequence of rapid socio-cultural change is the transformation of the content of education, methods of translation and assimilation of knowledge, the problems of formation of competencies necessary for successful self-fulfillment and career growth.

The trend of modern education should be its transformation in the humanistic direction, so that a personality should become the center of educational intentions. Moreover, it should be not just an educated personality, but also a creative one, able to find the opportunity to create new ideas and projects in any situation, devoid of stamps and stereotypes in the process of transformation of the world and self-improvement.

Keywords: education, information, innovations, knowledge, educational paradigm.

 

References:

  1. Sakun, AV., 2013. ‘Etos osvity v prostori «suspilʹstva znanʹ» : monohrafiya (The Ethos of Education in the Space of the “Knowledge Society” : A Monograph)’, Donetsʹk : Don NUET, 263 s.
  2. Popov, S., 1994. ‘Organizatsionno-deyatel'nostnyye igry : myshleniye v «zone riska» (Organizational-Activity Games : Thinking in the “risk zone”)’. Rezhim dostupa : <http://www.ckp.ru/biblio/p/popov/odi_mvzr.htm> [Data obrashcheniya 11 Avgusta 2019].
  3. Sobolʹ, OM., 1997. ‘Postmodern i maybutnye filosofiyi (Postmodern and the Future of Philosophy)’, K. : Naukova dumka, 164 s.
  4. Maksymenyuk, M., 2017. ‘Nova osvitnya paradyhma sotsiohumanitarnoyi osvity v umovakh informatsiynoho suspilʹstva ta napryamy yiyi modernizatsiyi (A New Educational Paradigm of Socio-Humanitarian Education in the Conditions of Information Society and Directions of Its Modernization)’, «Stanovlennya i rozvytok informatsiynoho suspilʹstva yak osnovy zabezpechennya konkurentospromozhnosti Ukrayiny u sviti ta staloho rozvytku suspilʹstva i derzhavy» : Materialy Mizhnarodnoyi naukovo-praktychnoyi konferentsiyi 23–24 lystopada 2017 roku, Zaporizhzhya, S. 145-150.
  5. Krymsʹkyy, SB., 2010. ‘Mezha tysyacholitʹ – zmina vymiriv istoriyi (Millennium – Changing Dimensions of History)’, Pro sofiynistʹ, pravdu, smysly lyudsʹkoho buttya. Zbirnyk naukovo-publitsystychnykh i filosofsʹkykh statey, K., S. 273-289.
  6. Kyvliuk, OP., 2017. ‘Neformalʹna osvita v kontseptsiyi lifelong learning (Non-formal education in lifelong learning concept)’, Osvitniy dyskurs : zbirnyk naukovykh pratsʹ, Vypusk 1, Kyyiv : «Vydavnytstvo «Hileya», S. 22–34.
  7. Maklyuen, M., 2004. ‘Sredstvo samo yest' soderzhaniye (The Tool Itself is Content)’, Informatsionnoye obshchestvo. Sb. st., M. : OOO «Izdatel'stvo AST», S. 341-348.
  8. Mokhnatyuk, IO., 2009. ‘Osoblyvosti suchasnoyi osvity : sotsiokulʹturno-tsinnisnyy vymir (Features of Modern Education : Socio-Cultural Value Measurement)’, Filosofsʹki problemy humanitarnykh nauk (Zbirka naukovykh pratsʹ), Kyyiv, 500 s.
  9. Bekh, Yu., 2017. ‘Smyslohenez yak systemoutvoryuyuchyy chynnyk morfolohiyi merezhevoho suspilʹstva (Meaning as a System-Forming Factor in the Morphology of a Network Society)’, Nova paradyhma, Vyp. 132, S. 3-14.
  10. Sakun, AV., 2019. ‘Elitne znannya v konteksti osvitnʹoho protsesu (Elite Knowledge in the Context of the Educational Process)’, Osvitniy dyskurs, Vyp. 10 (1-2), S. 17-25.
  11. Druker, P., 2007. ‘Epokha razryva : oriyentiry dlya nashego menyayushchegosya obshchestva (The Age of Break : Guidelines for Our Changing Society)’, M. : OOO «I.D.Vil'yams», 336 s.
  12. Ziman,, 2003. ‘Non-Instrumental Roles of Science’, Science and Engineering Ethics, Vol. 9, Issue 1, P. 17-27.
  13. Vatkovsʹka, MH., 2018. ‘Samorealizatsiya osobystosti : sproba filosofsʹkoho uzahalʹnennya (Self-Realization of the Personality : An Attempt at a Philosophical Generalization)’, Hileya, Vyp.134, S. 261-264.