The paper studies ethnopedagogical and ethnopsychological aspects of moral education. The study notes the moral concepts in the formation of person morality and regulation of their behavior. A theoretical analysis is made on the problems of moral education in conventional education system. The ideas of inseparable connection between the Russian pedagogical system with ethnopedagogy and ethnopsychology of peoples of Russia are justified. The survey of psychological and pedagogical literature on the topic under consideration shows that the ethnopedagogical and ethnopsychological approaches to moral person education are determined by such factors as ethnic group and family, while the level of person morality directly binds with moral behavior of parents or other authoritative adults in the family. The level of moral person development depends on digestion of morality and correlation of own views, individual behavior with moral norms and principles of the society. The cultural potential of each ethnic group created by them at different historical development stages is the most important means of moral education. The basis of morality is the general system of views and beliefs that reflects in specific moral ideal. Using the principles of Unified Concept of spiritual and moral education and development of the younger generation of the Chechen Republic the paper highlights that the cultural traditions of Chechen people keep up to date national historical memory, ensure the continuation of panhuman and cultural progress. The work concludes on the difference of
The ideas of ethnopedagogy and ethnopsychology still remain topical primarily due to their basis on spiritual and moral values of a folk. Ethnopedagogy and ethnopsychology connect past, present and future of the people, make reconsider the inferiority of the education system so the next generation does not make the same mistakes. Spiritual, moral and ethnocultural values of each folk have been forming for thousands of years, which keeps contemporary the task of their communication to new generations. The humanity have been always facing the challenge of how to educate a highly-moral character. Every human requires development, self-fulfillment regardless of sociocultural context.
Every ethnic group during its development determines a certain ideal character. Self-fulfillment is the way to development of mature character connected with real ego of a person. Under the conditions of contemporary social processes, the weakening of such essential traits as spirituality, morality and culture manifests especially strong. That is why Russian pedagogical culture should be considered in the context of ethnopedagogy and ethnopsychology of its peoples. In the Unified Concept of spiritual and moral education and development of the younger generation of the Chechen Republic, the paper highlights that the cultural traditions of Chechen people keep up to date national historical memory, ensure the continuation of panhuman and cultural progress, introduce the cultural and historical live of the people, raise up the sense of patriotism and responsibility (Ilyicheva, 2006). The urgency of the problem under study is conditioned by the necessity to account ethnocultural context i moral education and reveal ethnopedagogical and ethnopsychological peculiarities in the formation and development of a person.
The afore stated problems determined the goal of theoretical conceptualization of ethnopedagogical and ethnopsychological experience of Chechen people in moral person education.
Purpose of the Study
According to the study goal, the work states the task of theoretical analysis of the moral education problem in contemporary humanitarian discourse. The conceptualization and practical application of cultural experience of an ethnic group in formation and development of a person.
The work is based on the analysis of psychological, pedagogical and historical literature. We also have used such basic methods as content-analysis and general scientific ones as composition and description.
The intersubject connection of ethnopedagogy and ethnopsychology are determined by dialectic unity of general and specific in the culture of ethnic groups. The general contains panhuman moral values, while the specific expresses as ethnopedagogical and ethnopsychological peculiarities of ethnophor as a representative of specific ethnic group.
The methodology of ethnopedagogy as self-contained branch of scientific knowledge was developed by its founder G. N. Volkov, who believed that the ethnical education culture is the basis for the formation of person morality (Volkov, 1999). G.N. Volkov deemed that the unveiling the specific affluence of ethnopedagogical culture is not just the comparison of some peoples with others, while sometimes it unfortunately takes place. The main commandment of ethnopedagogy is the faithfulness to the memory and vows of ancestors, worshipping to mother, love to children. Over thousands of years, original ethnopansophistic environment has been forming, techniques, means, methods and technologies for educating rising generations have been elaborated that still preserve their importance (Volkov, 2009).
The diversity of ethnopedagogical and ethnopsychological peculiarities of peoples makes topical the uniqueness and versatility of ethnical culture as an inherent part of the world's civilization. Noteworthily, the national education systems are not identical. Every national education systems set their priorities in goals and means of personality formation. The history of the global community has a plethora of examples when the disregard for ethnopedagogical and ethnopsychological peculiarities had reverse effect leading to the intensification of ethnocentric trends in society. The analysis of education cultures of different peoples allows stating their panhuman basis conditioned by the dialectic “general-specific”, i.e. the variety of specific gives birth to general. According to G. N. Volkov, one of the critical tasks of ethnopedagogy is generalization of human wisdom in education; this is where pansophism of ethnopedagogy is enclosed.
One cannot help but agreeing with an outstanding Russian teacher B.T. Likhachyov telling that the education introduces a child into the world of inevitable objective realities to provide them with means of survival in the society and also forms a certain social personality. The laws of organism development and external natural environment functioning, formation of social relations and forms of social consciousness predetermine the establishment of a human personality (Likhachev, 2010).
In the national education system of every people, the issues related to the formation of morality hold key positions. Morality is the core, a peculiar code regulating the interpersonal relations and behavior in the society. The works of Russian scientists aimed at studying the problems of moral education, interconnection of morality and spirituality determine the morality as a combination of ethical requirements that an individual should set for themselves (Volkov, 2009). Morality and spirituality comprise the nature of a person, while the spirituality is the goal and result of person’s development. The spirituality, according to the definition given by I.M. Ilyicheva, is the potential nature of a person that provides their comprehensive development and self-development, digestion of social experience to transform their own nature (Ilyicheva, 2006).
The survey of psychological and pedagogical literature on the topic under consideration shows that the ethnopedagogical and ethnopsychological approaches to moral character education are determined by such factors as ethnic group and family, while the level of character morality directly binds with moral behavior of parents or other authoritative adults in the family. The level of moral person development depends on digestion of morality and correlation of own views, individual behavior with moral norms and principles of the society.
The cultural potential of each ethnic group created by them at different historical development stages is the most important means of moral education. The basis of morality is the general system of views and beliefs that reflects in specific moral ideal.
In this sense, the role of folk pedagogy is important, which—according to Sh.M-Kh. Arsaliev—turned out to be a living core, a so-called nucleus of pedagogy in terms of theory and practice, its the most viable spiritual heart, which even requires no special argumentation. Twenty four deported nations would had been eradicated, if it were not for folk pedagogy. The most cruel historical and social experience of massive physical and spiritual annihilation of nations suddenly turned out to be a kind of “natural ethnopedagogical experiment”, which peremptorily proved the viability and irreplaceable strength of folk pedagogy (Arsaliev, 2007).
The problems connected with the fundamental role of moral education in the formation and development of personality have been long since conceptualized and raised by the pedagogical science. Work (Platonova, Kolodeznikova & Parofenova, 2013) makes a stress on that a teacher should realize that a child of any age should be considered as a person and recognize his right for demand, wishes, interests and some certain individual world.
The education system of an educational institution should be targeted on the formation of such moral relations as:
– understanding of moral and spiritual values; realization of personal involvement to the fate and history of the country; striving for justice and democracy;
– love for ethnical culture, fatherland; acceptance and respect to the culture of other nations; culture of international relations;
– respectful attitude towards all people regardless of their nation and confession; community spirit and sense of mutual aid;
– self-esteem; sense of responsibility for actions; realization of public duty; adherence to principles.
The listed relations should comprise the essence of life of a high-moral person. It is also clear that the morality is an internal and point-blank imperative of personality. An outstanding teacher A.S. Makarenko wrote, “... An action alone, how a student acts when there is no one around and no control. Their morality can be estimated only when they behave properly due to internal motivation (necessity), when the control is conditioned by their own views and beliefs. The elaboration of such views and beliefs and corresponding behavior habits comprises deep personality of moral education” (Soloveychik, 2018).
It is well known that the main component in the education system of the rising generation is school. At the contemporary development stage of Russian education, the teachers face a complex problem to convert socially necessary demands stated by the society into internal stimuli of each student's personality. V.A. Sukhomlinsky wrote, “A real person is the one in whose soul occur and consolidate noble wishes that stimulate behavior, give rise to passion and actions... As many as possible actions stimulated by noble wishes, striving of a person to moral ideal is one of the golden rules for education of teenagers” (Sukhomlinskiy, 1987).
The moral education is multidimensional, and for the culture of each folk it is a determinative for formation and development of personality. Work (Volkov, 1999) notes that a folk from the beginning of time have been elaborating own moral patterns and spiritual culture. For Chechen traditional culture, the basic values, ideals of morality and virtues laid as a rule in the family, are harmonious with education systems of other folks due to commonality of their historical development.
The traditional education system of the Chechen includes mental, physical, spiritual, moral, aesthetic, ecological and other kinds of education. However, according to (Chechen State University, 2003; Volkov, 1999), the distinctness of the education culture of the Chechen is in the dominating formation of resolute and moral traits, which is conditioned by environmental, geographical, social and political factors. Also, the role of personal example in the Chechen education system should be outlined. Personal example is the basic dominant idea in the formation of person's morality in Chechen community. The model of interpersonal communication, relation of parents to their parents, their brothers and sisters, other adults is adopted by children on the genetic level.
Every ethnic group during its historical development has elaborated the regulators of sociotypical behavior which essence is in the moral norms, i.e. the system of understandings of right and wrong behavior demanding one actions and forbidding others (Muskhanova, 2014).
It is well known, that the basis of morality are concepts that determine norms and rules of personal behavior in society. The moral concept is national image, ideal and symbol complicated by the indicators of individual understanding (Muskhanova & Batchaeva, 2015). In Chechen culture, the regulators of moral behavior of a person are such concepts as kyonkhalla, evyazalla, gIillakkh, yakh, and other. The present work tries to analyze yakh concept in the context of ethnopedagogical and ethnopsychological aspects of moral education as the basis for formation of personal morality in Chechen society.
Yakh concept has no analogues in the English language. It can be approximately interpreted as some motive to be better, striving to be first in everything: study, aid, support of others, in work, actions; internal demand for self-fulfillment and self-development. The quintessence of traditional education system of the Chechen is education of “yakh yolu stag”, education of a person with responsibility, tolerance, striving for moral growth, “ozdangallim baram”. The Chechen say, “yakh yotsu stagakh a, zudchunakh a da xIuma dats”, i.e. the absence of yakh underlines the disability of a person in terms of morality, responsiblity and reliability. Yakh makes a person to avoid bad behavior so not to defile their name and that of their ancestors. Yakh yolu stag wherever he is in every community understands that he is a representative of his people and thus makes everything so his behavior corresponds to norms and morale of both panhuman and ethnocultural values. Yakh yolu stag in a critical situation is ready to give life, while making this not for tsIar-khazman, i.e. not for self-display, but whole-heartedly, because he cannot behave differently; he sees his purpose to serve people and community, it is his internal desire.
Concept yakh is bound to concept iman. Work (Beltimerzaeva, & Kerimov, 2012) outlines, that the islam concept is connected with the spirituality of a person, presence of God's spirit which is a soul nucleus, the understanding of which means the presence in the person of iman, morality. A moral person is primarily a conscientious person. The presence of conscience is the witness of knowledge, since the conscience is the factor that accompanies the connection of a person to God; this is conscience. This definition shows the connection of such traits as spirituality, morality, conscience, which as a whole determines the presence of yakh in a person. Yakh is an indicator of developed personality, a high substance determining the personal self-awareness and civic position.
Our internet-survey of youth has shown that 78% determine yakh as honor and dignity, 12% connect yakh with pride, internal rather than showy, and 10% of respondents believe that it is competitiveness, the striving to align to the best people from their environment.
Yakh concept has wide semantic field. Yakhye valar, yakh khilar, yak dia tsa yalar, yakh yozhar, yakh yatsar and others The essence of this concept is good will, it has positive sense.
Thus, despite the definitions allowing interpreting the
- Arsaliev, Sh.M-Kh. (2007). Ethnopedagogy of the Chechen. Moscow: Gelios.
- Beltimerzaeva, M. M., Kerimov, M. M. (2012). Relation of religion and knowledge: religious-philosophical analysis, Islamovedenie, 3, 4-10.
- Chechen State University. (2013). Unified Concept of spiritual and moral education and development of the younger generation of Chechen Republic. Grozny.
- Ilyicheva, I. M. (2006). Introduction to spirituality psychology. Мoscow: MPSI.
- Likhachev, B.T. (2010). Education philosophy: special course. Мoscow: VLADOS.
- Muskhanova, I .V. (2014). On certain peculiarities of communicative culture of the Chechen. Humanitarian, social and economical sciences. Pan-Russian scientific journal, 1, 291-296.
- Muskhanova, I. V., Batchaeva, Kh. Kh. (2015). Personality. Spirituality. Morality. Monograph. Grozny: Knizhnoye izdatelstvo.
- Platonova, R. I., Kolodeznikova, M. G., Parofenova, M. I. (2013). Interaction as a scientific and pedagogical category, Science and education, 4 (72), 95-100.
- Soloveychik, S. L. (2018). Pedagogy for everebody: guide for future parents (in Russian): Reissued in 1989, 2001 and 2018. Moscow. : Izdatelstvo AST.
- Sukhomlinskiy, V. A. (1987). On education. Мoscow: : Prosveshcheniye,.
- Volkov, G. N. (1999). Ethnopedagogy: teaching guide for stud. of higher pedag. instit. Мoscow, Akademiya Press.
- Volkov, G.N. (2009). Ethnopedagogical pansophistics. Elista: Kalmykiya State University.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
About this article
29 March 2019
Print ISBN (optional)
Sociolinguistics, linguistics, semantics, discourse analysis, science, technology, society
Cite this article as:
Muckhanova, I., Boltaeva, L., & Yakhyaeva, Z. (2019). Ethnopedagogical And Ethnopsychological Aspects Of Moral Person Education. In D. K. Bataev (Ed.), Social and Cultural Transformations in the Context of Modern Globalism, vol 58. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences (pp. 2669-2674). Future Academy. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2019.03.02.310