Family And Educational Institutions In The Formation Of Value Orientations Of Youth

Abstract

On the basis of empirical studies in the Republic of Bashkortostan, the authors of the article show the decisive role of the family in shaping the values of young people, including in the choice of educational institution and profession. At the same time, family dysfunctions also affect the moral and professional self-determination of an individual. The authors believe that educational institutions, transmitting knowledge to an individual, will not be able to take on the role of the family and at the same time do without it. The level of intellectual and spiritual development, the profession and the degree of parents’ wealth are essential factors that determine the parameters of socialization of high school students and school graduates. Also, the subjective attitude of parents to the education of their children exerts no less influence on this process. The successes or failures of students are largely determined by the degree of cooperation in the form of family and educational institutions partnership. The connections of each student’s parent with the school are natural and coincide in the main things - in training and education. No one else but them will be able to create the necessary social and moral-psychological conditions for the development of youth, consistent with social and family interests. However, the majority of parents transfer the functions of upbringing and training to an educational institution, and teachers cannot or even do not try to involve them to the educational process.

Keywords: Educational institutionsfamilysocial partnershipvalues

Introduction

Among institutions and practices that have a decisive influence on the formation and development of personality, family and education dominate as the facts of modern Russian reality indicate. Ancestry, parents, a people - the concepts of one root in Russian (rod, roditely, narod), everything begins in the family, the purpose of which is both to need satisfaction and the social and spiritual reproduction of new generations. In the social context, the family is a space of people union. Here, the patrimonial is transformed into the social and spiritual, since it is in the family that the individual begins to assimilate the principles of human society, moral and legal norms, the formation of social qualities that determine the specificity of his lifestyle, career guidance, that is, the continuity of generations is carried out. Educational institutions, transmitting knowledge to an individual, will not be able to take on the role of the family and at the same time do without it.

Problem Statement

Institutes of education and the family largely perform common functions: educational (transfer of certain information, skills); educational (formation of worldview, values, personal qualities); normative control over the content of the student’s life; socio-status (being the subject of inheritance, the family plays a significant role in the formation of the social structure of society and, together with the school, consolidates this structure in the process of reproduction of new generations); economic (the development of the direct producer of public goods acts as the production of fixed capital of society, and the development of scientific and educational potential determines the nature and the level of production, the family is increasingly becoming the investor of the latter). However, the nature and content of the interaction of these institutions with a developing personality are significantly different. If in institutions of secondary and higher education a certain formalization of relations prevails, expressed in consistency, regularity, standardization, then the family is dominated by natural factors of life proceeding, as a rule, spontaneously. If a school, college, or university produce and transmit mainly theoretical knowledge, then the family is dominated by life practice, the specificity of which is determined by the level of intellectual development, education, culture, and the spiritual essence of parents. As a result, a person is formed who is aware of the “rules of the game" imposed by the society. At the same time, one should not ignore the active role of the personality itself, which can influence social norms, eventually achieving their transformation, but this activity can also “mature” in the family by obtaining certain knowledge, skills transferred from parents to children, from elder to younger ones. Theoretically, the individual is being reproduced, adapted to life in a certain natural and social environment, but also able to keep, increase and promote the positive development of society. It is important to understand that family functions are historical and related to current socio-economic conditions, therefore both the nature of these functions and their hierarchy change over time. As the most ancient social institution that ensures the transfer of social experience accumulated by previous generations, the family performs a selective function - the selection, assimilation, processing of existing experience, based on the interests and needs of individuals. In addition, the family performs the function of adapting both positive and negative social experience accumulated by previous generations, already to the new conditions. For example, bad habits (alcohol abuse, smoking, etc.), immorality, lack of physical culture are laid in the basis of the individual’s behavior also largely due to the family.

Thus, ensuring the physical reproduction of the society, family is actively involved in social reproduction, but it can transmit both positive and negative experiences, increasing the pathological burden in the population. Whether there is a social partnership of the family and educational institutions in the formation of students values, it is necessary to clarify the materials of specific sociological studies and theoretical analysis of their functions.

In the interests of the state, it is the school that acts as the coordinator of the activities of all institutions and subjects of students socialization. However, the cooperation of teachers with parents and other relatives of students is often limited by the financial and domestic spheres. As for the intellectual and professional potentials and life experience of parents, relatives, all scientists and practitioners interested in the educational process, it is practically not used at school (Bikmetov, 2007). All this necessitates a deeper study of the influence of family and education on the socialization of the younger generation. In the light of the cardinal changes of recent decades in Russia, this problem has become even more urgent, as there have been significant changes in the structure and functions of both these institutions and their forms of interaction. In modern conditions, the quantitative and qualitative reproduction of society involves the formation of new generations of citizens who are capable, on the one hand, of creation, creativity and innovative activity, and, on the other, of a conscious choice of values, norms and patterns of behavior that meet the interests of human development. The institutions of family, education, and upbringing are key in this process; together they form not only the intellectual, but also the value-normative basis for the development of the society.

Research Questions

At the present stage of Russian society’s development, the issue of the need for social partnership in various fields and institutions is being updated. It becomes the main tool of modern social policy, solving acute social problems and rational use of the potential of the constituent forces of the society. It is through social partnership that “it is possible to activate and set in motion certain parts of the complex mechanism of the social and economic structure of society, to ensure interaction taking into account the interests of everyone” (Grantseva, 2014, p. 128). The very idea of ​​social partnership has historically emerged in the social and labour sphere of economic relations as a forced reaction of entrepreneurs to exacerbate the contradictions between labour and capital, which was expressed both in absolute and in relative deterioration in the standard of employees living. Going beyond the framework of the traditional approach, some scientists define social partnership as a specific institution, the purpose of which is to find a balance of interests of government, business and society in the process of solving especially significant socio-economic problems. Within this approach, social partnership can be considered as a special type of social relations inherent in civilized markets, through the implementation of which stability in society and sustainable socio-economic development are achieved (Kivarina, 2015, p. 109). Social partnership is a special type of social relations between subjects of power, business, professional, social groups, public organizations and the population, focused on coordinating the diverse interests and goals of these social subjects in cooperation, as well as the creation of conditions for the reproduction of human resources, the solution of socially significant issues in various social strata and the consolidation of society (Kuchkovskaya, 2015). Based on the fact that “the main task of school education is to transmit the social experience to the younger generation in the form of knowledge, skills, visual and sensual representations, etc. in order to educate and develop” (Benin & Ryabova, 2018, p. 75), the social partnership of the family and educational institutions can be defined primarily as the integration and complementarity of functions to form the values of young people in vital issues of self-determination: professional choice and attitude to basic values. The policy of social partnership is the search for ways to coordinate interests, in which an optimal balance is achieved and a certain compromise is arranged in realizing the interests of the subjects of social relations as free and responsible partners. The principle of social partnership as a mutually beneficial, mutually necessary interaction between the educational organization and interested groups in which each of the parties is objectively interested cannot be realized outside the process of understanding and mutual understanding. Partnerships help to regulate the interaction of institutions, socialization agents, and expand the interested cooperation of all subjects involved in the socialization of adolescents and youth (family, educational institution, mass media, state and public organizations).

The problem of value orientations of youth is, in its turn, also in the focus of attention of modern sociologists (Baryishnikova, 1998; Hagström & Gamberale, 1995; Karpukhin, 1995; Karvonen, Young, West, & Rahkonen, 2012; Kosharnaya & Afanasyeva, 2008; Lisovskiy, 2002; Selezneva, 2007; Selivanova, 2017; Semenov, 2007; Robb & Thomson, 2010; Zubok, 2003, etc.), which is understandable: values are always social in nature. They are formed on the basis of social practice, individual activity of a person, within the framework of certain specific historical social relations and forms of people communication. In philosophy, value is interpreted as a manifestation of social being. It is formed in the process of practice, that is, has a social nature. The values-based orientations of youth are the structural elements of personalities, formed and reinforced by life experience in the course of socialization; they limit the shared significant from the insignificant. They characterize the system of preferences or rejection of certain meanings that determine motivation, strategies and programmes of behavior, activities and communication as a means of achieving goals. Values-goals and values-means of realization of aspirations, as shared by most young people, underlie the system of values-based orientations. According to the results of sociological studies (Gorshkov & Sheregi, 2010), the following generally recognized values shared by an absolute majority of the country's adult population ​​are consistently included in the list of basic ones: health and longevity, family and children, income and well-being. However, it should be noted that the actual behavior of young people, as a rule, is at variance with the declared values.

The personality values ​​of a young person act as the basis for the formation of a life strategy and in many respects determine the line of his/her professional development. The main contradictions of a value character associated with the transformational type of social evolution are manifested in a certain rotation in the system of values ​​of Russians, in which the positions of terminal and instrumental values ​​are changing, and the data are alarming, though fitting perfectly into the new paradigm of social development according to the capitalist principle. Alarming trends are observed, first of all, among young people, which leads to a high scientific interest in the problem of value dynamics among young people. Institutions of family and education are directly related to this process.

It is important to understand that young people have specific traits that characterize them as an independent socio-demographic group. Youth is a kind of “third world” that exists between childhood and adulthood, since biological maturation is complete, but in social terms it is not an independent adult yet. Youth serves as a period of making responsible decisions that determine the whole future life of a person: choosing a profession and their place in life, choosing the meaning of life, developing a worldview.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the research and theoretical analysis is to identify the significance of the family and educational institutions in the process of forming vital values for students. It is important to determine the extent to which the institutional characteristics of the family and education make it possible to realize an effective social partnership, primarily in matters of choosing a profession and attitudes toward learning.

Research Methods

The results of empirical studies and theoretical insights of domestic researchers in the field of sociology of education and youth (Gorshkov & Sheregi, 2010), carried out over the past thirty years on a national scale and in the Republic of Bashkortostan, indicate the decisive influence of the family on the choice of profession and life orientations of high school students. The authors studied the degree of influence of various agents on the socialization of the young generation and the formation of its moral values, the way of students’ life. The distribution of respondents ' answers to the question about the factors influencing their choice of University or other educational institution for vocational training looks like confirmation of the above (see Table 01 ). This question was asked to students of grades 9-11 of secondary schools in Ufa. In total, 746 people took part in the questionnaire. The sample is multi-stage and cluster.

The table above shows a certain trend in the responses of the respondents. If we take the sum of the “choice according to their recommendation” and “choice approved by them” data, then it turns out that mothers come first, then fathers come, then friends, relatives and teachers come in the last place. Thus, the significance of the opinions school graduates’ and high school students’ parents, in fact the main members of the family, prevailed throughout the entire period of research. Emphasizing the role of the family in the process of socialization, it is necessary to dwell on those characteristics of the family that are factors in the formation of the moral, intellectual and subsequently professional qualities of high school students and graduates. A comparative analysis of the research results showed that the majority of parents engaged in the intellectual field prefer high school to their children, which, while remaining mainly an educational institution, nevertheless determines the possibility of continuing education in higher education. The authors note that in the initial stages of social and professional socialization, the values-based orientations of the parents play a decisive role, which allows to significantly expand the boundaries of the formation of the personality, constantly increasing the sociocultural space of opportunities for it. The focus of students on study as a labor activity (studying at the same time their main work) increases with the growth of the share of parents’ intellectual work in the professions. Here we do not mean only the level of parents’ education, which to one degree or another determines both the degree of awareness of the educational role of labour in the formation of the young person’s personality, and differences in lifestyle, due to the nature and content of labour, as well as the type of settlement (s)he lives in.

When comparing social affiliation and parents’ education, some characteristic features are revealed. With the growth of education and the intellectualization of parents’ labour, the positive attitude of children to learning and their social activity increase. At the same time, fathers with a low level of education, although sufficiently qualified in their profession, as a rule, reduce their family responsibilities to the functions of providing material wealth in the family, traditionally considering themselves the “bread-earners”. Mothers in such families are more overloaded with households, and therefore do not have the necessary time to bring up their children.

The material prosperity of the family, its financial opportunities alone do not educate, but are only a condition for education. Underestimation of the importance of the intellectual, moral factor leads to socially negative consequences in the process of socialization of the individual, the loss of spiritual freedom by the individual, and ultimately to the crisis of the entire social system. Social and moral infantilism is not the result of acceleration or unwillingness of children and adolescents to work, but the result of the parents' inability to educate them in work, the result of underestimation of the educational role of labour. The entrepreneurial spirit that is taking the lead today generates conflicts primarily in economic relations, the primary understanding of which is laid down in the family. The results of sociological studies show that, despite all the financial difficulties in most families, there is a continuing trend of the increase in the number of students striving to live according to excessive needs. This is where the roots of the contradiction between the growing claims, the expectations of young people and the socially just principle of satisfying these needs for worklie. Young people, accustomed to receive more than give, with the acquisition of a new social and age status are exposed to stress and social disappointment (Grantseva, 2014). A certain part of them, due to the influence of these factors, finds a way out in deviant behavior. It is important to understand that overcoming and preventing social deviation among young people is carried out primarily by replacing forms of deviant behavior with socially useful activities and relationships, rather than prohibitions and moralizing. The commercialization of education has led to the fact that the educational process began to be reduced to the provision of educational services for a fee, while educational work in many educational institutions has lost its significance and is being implemented mainly in entertainment forms. The place of traditional formal youth organizations has been taken by informal leaders, groups, associations, and the media, which disseminate criminal, tobacco, beer, alcohol and drug subcultures that contribute to the popularization of “antiheroes” among the youth. New political organizations and public associations are not so large-scale and authoritative as to engage the youth audience as much as possible. Among public organizations, volunteer associations are becoming more and more popular, however, not all young people participate in them. The social sphere of students’ activity within the walls of educational institutions or under their influence is clearly limited and does not cover the better part of the youth community. As a result, those who organize their leisure activities on their own often fall under the negative influence of a deviant environment.

The essential factors determining the socialization parameters of high school students and high school graduates are, without a doubt, the level of intellectual and spiritual development, the profession and the degree of material wealth of their parents. However, the subjective attitude of parents to studying their children at school also has a no less effect on this process. The successes or failures of children in schooling are largely determined by the degree of cooperation in the form of family-school partnerships. These connections of each student’s parent with the school are natural and coincide in the main thing - in training and education. No one else but them will be able to create the necessary social and moral-psychological conditions for the development of children/ youth, consistent with social and family interests. However, the majority of parents transfer the functions of upbringing and training to an educational institution, and teachers cannot or even do not try to involve them to the educational process. Some respondents explain the lack of proper attention of parents to the school due to their employment (Kuchkovskaya, 2015). This reason, likely, is secondary: the main one is that the family and the school are still alienated from each other, and this alienation is multifaceted. It should also be taken into account that a particular family and a specific school do not interact in a vacuum. Students, as a social community, do not live in isolation, interact not only with each other, but also with other social groups and institutions (parents, mass media, teachers, peers). The family interacting with the school also communicates with other families, which often have different positions in social stratification. A peculiar social environment is being created, in the center of which are students, and around the edges are various social and cultural worlds that either agree with the students’ ones or oppose them.

Findings

Considering the problem associated with the nature and structure of the family as the most important institution of spiritual and professional socialization of high school students, it is necessary to pay attention to the social consequences of the influence of single-parent families on the upbringing of a teenager. Based on the results of the researches conducted, the negative aspects often prevail in the influence of an incomplete family on personality formation. However, the causes of deviant behavior in adolescents from single-parent families lie not so much in financial difficulties as in moral and psychological factors. The desertion by a father of a family or the appearance of a stepmother/stepfather does not pass without a trace for children: 72.5% of students who lived with a father and a stepmother, and 63.8% who lived with a stepfather and a mother, left school before graduation due to psychological instability a family that pushed a teenager to find ways of financial and moral independence. At the same time, in families with a mother only, a significant role is played by the material factor, which encourages combining work with school or going to work before graduating from high school. On the whole, mothers have a more beneficial effect on children's performance and behavior. That is why deviations in the behavior of students living only with their mothers are less in number than deviations in adolescents living only with their fathers. Single fathers do not have a proper impact on children. Thus, 23.2% of those who dropped out of school and did not continue their studies lived only with their father, while 82 out of every 100 sons of single mothers continued their studies in various forms (Bikmetov, 2007). Therefore, one of the main reasons is not the composition or nature of the family, but its spiritual and moral structure, values-based orientations of senior family members. Note that the influence of the mother on the spiritual and moral climate of the family remains decisive. Family problems affect children of different ages, as well as adults themselves, including the elderly (Mustaeva, Sizonenko, & Yuldasheva, 2016). Divorces give the largest number of single-parent families. Annually, up to half a million children are born to unmarried women, a significant part of whom do not get married later. A fairly high percentage of widows can be observed as well. In total, this gives rise to a huge number (more than a quarter) of children living and being raised without noticeable male influence. A negative reaction of adolescents arises not only in the families where alcohol abuse and conflict are frequent, but also in the families where two “pedagogies” coexist: the father believes in the power of the order, and the mother seeks to weaken the stiffness of the father. The spouses' lack of unity in understanding of various life processes and phenomena, in values-based orientations and attitudes, and finally, in ideas about the methods and means of teaching and raising children, leads the teenager to face an alternative - whose requirements to fulfill. The negative impact of such families affects the communication of students with their peers and adults. Only 1-2 out of 10 adolescents from dysfunctional families had “good” relations with others.

Conclusion

Thus, the family as an institution of socialization exerts a more effective influence on the formation of the values-based orientations of a young person than educational institutions. In the family, unlike educational institutions, individual interaction prevails, communication is characterized by a greater emotional richness, lacking a formalized beginning. The continuity of generations and their socialization, including spiritual, professional one, is an objective necessity in the process of human life. The strategic objective in this process is not only to solve economic, national and ideological problems, but also to organize social partnership of families and education institutions.

References

1. Baryishnikova, N. A. (1998). « Voskhozhdeniye» – programma reabilitatsii tak nazyvayemykh «trudnykh» ["Climbing" is a rehabilitation program for the so-called "difficult" children]. Direktor shkolyi, 7, 9-16.
2. Benin, V. L., & Ryabova, S. V. (2018). Problemy ucheta urovnya razvitiya sovremennoy nauki pri formirovanii soderzhaniya shkol'nykh distsiplin (na primere predmetnoy oblasti «Osnovy dukhovno-nravstvennoy kul'tury narodov Rossii») [Problems of taking into account the level of development of modern science in the formation of the content of school disciplines (for example, the subject area "Fundamentals of the spiritual and moral culture of the peoples of Russia")]. Pedagogicheskoe obrazovanie v Rossii, 11, 72-79.
3. Bikmetov, E. Yu. (2007). Vzaimodeystviye sem'i i shkoly v sotsializatsii individa [The interaction of family and school in the socialization of the individual]. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, 9, 86-92.
4. Gorshkov, M. K., & Sheregi, F. E. (2010). Molodezh' Rossii: sotsiologicheskiy portret [Youth of Russia: a sociological portrait]. Moscow: TsSPiM.
5. Grantseva, T. G. (2014). Sotsial'noye partnerstvo kak instrument v soglasovanii obshchestvennykh interesov [Social partnership as a tool in harmonizing public interests]. Izvestiya ASOU. Nauchnyiy ezhegodnik, 1(2), 128-132.
6. Hagström, T., & Gamberale, F. (1995). Young people's work motivation and value orientation. Journal of Adolescence, 18(4), 475-490.
7. Karpukhin, O. I. (1995). Molodezh' Rossii: Osobennosti sotsializatsii i samoopredeleniya. [Youth of Russia: Features of the Socialization and Self-Determination]. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, 1, 124-128.
8. Karvonen, S., Young, R., West, P., & Rahkonen, O. (2012).Value orientations among late modern youth – a cross-cultural study. Journal of Youth Studies, 15(1), 33-52.
9. Kivarina, M. V. (2015). Sotsial'noye partnerstvo: klyuchevyye usloviya effektivnosti [Social partnership: key conditions for effectiveness]. Vestnik Novgorodskogo filiala RANHiGS 2,4-2(2), 109-117.
10. Kosharnaya, G. A., & Afanaseva, Yu. L. (2008). Tsennostnyye oriyentatsii sovremennoy Rossiyskoy molodezhi [Value orientations of modern Russian youth]. Izvestiya VUZov. Povolzhskiy region. Obschestvennyie nauki, 4, 41-52.
11. Kuchkovskaya, N. V. (2015). Sotsial'noye partnerstvo kak institut vzaimodeystviya [Social partnership as an institution of interaction]. Forum. Seriya: Gumanitarnyie i ekonomicheskie nauki, 3(6), 158-160.
12. Lisovskiy, V. T. (2002). «Ottsy i deti»: za dialog v otnosheniyakh (Razmyshleniye sotsiologa o preyemstvennosti pokoleniy) [“Fathers and Sons”: for a dialogue in relations (The sociologist’s reflection on the continuity of generations)]. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, 7,111-116.
13. Mustaeva, F. A., Sizonenko, Z. L., & Yuldasheva, O. N. (2016). Issledovaniye roli sem'i v zhizni pozhilogo cheloveka [Study of the role of the family in the life of an elderly person]. Zdorove i obrazovanie v XXI veke, 10,143-147.
14. Robb, M., & Thomson, R. (2010). Critical practice with children and young people. Bristol: Policy Press.
15. Selezneva, M. K. (2007). Sotsializatsiya molodezhi v sovremennom obshchestve [Socialization of youth in modern society]. Izvestiya RGPU im. A.I. Gertsena, 40, 239-243.
16. Selivanova, Z. K. (2017). O zhiznennykh tselyakh i professional'nykh predpochteniyakh starshikh podrostkov [On the life goals and professional preferences of older teens]. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, 5, 51-56.
17. Semenov, V. E. (2007). Tsennostnyye oriyentatsii sovremennoy molodezhi [Value orientations of modern youth]. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, 4, 37-43.
18. Zubok, Yu. A. (2003). Problemy sotsial'nogo razvitiya molodezhi v usloviyakh riska [Problems of social development of youth at risk]. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, 4, 42-51.