The authors study the features of the influence of informational, territorial, institutional and economic factors on the availability of additional education for children in rural areas. The analysis is carried out based on the concept of factors as a driving force that can affect the availability of additional education; groups of factors are distinguished. Methods and research methods: focus group, questionnaires, interviews, and observation. Study sample - students, parents, and teachers at rural schools of five municipal districts of the Yaroslavl region. The study found that the main source of information about additional education for rural children and their parents is the teacher. The satisfaction of parents with the additional education of children is affected primarily by the territorial and institutional factor. Most respondents indicate the need to increase the number of organizations providing educational services in rural areas. The distance form of additional education is more in demand in children than in parents. It has been revealed that at present most of the programs of additional education are free, but a significant part of parents is ready to finance directions of additional education that are attractive and useful for children under certain conditions. The results of the stud, show the features of the influence of socio-economic factors on the organization of additional education in rural areas, the data can be taken into account in the management of rural educational organizations and the design of additional education for children.
Keywords: Accessibilityadditional educationfactorsrural schoolchildren
Additional education of children in its various forms is an essential component of the continuing education system. It is important here to obtain an increment in the child’s social experience in the process of developing additional educational programs and implementing an individual educational program. This will give a feeling of social confidence, will contribute to successful adaptation to changing conditions, the formation of professional competence;
The importance of further education and ensuring its accessibility in rural conditions is especially important, rural children can be realized to a large extent thanks to it (Baiborodova & Lushnikova, 2018). There are favorable conditions for this: the implementation of an individual-personal approach, close cooperation in the team, a flexible regime of the day. Additional education allows overcoming the problems and difficulties of a rural school: limited and monotonous communication, insufficiently high level of social and professional self-determination, a small number of opportunities for creative, intellectual, and social self-expression and self-affirmation (Erdyneeva et al., 2016).
The availability of supplementary education in rural conditions depends on the type of settlement, structure, and composition of the population, living conditions, values and cultural traditions of residents, their style of relationship (Mudrik, 2005). Teachers solve problems associated with low transport mobility, a low level of autonomy, determination, adaptation, and socialization of children, which impede the building of an educational trajectory. There is a need for a special study of the problems of ensuring the accessibility of additional education for rural schoolchildren.
The problem of access to education, considering the influence of factors, has been partially developed at different levels of education (Curl et al., 2011; Roshchina, 2003; Seliverstova, 2005; Song, 2016). The work of Bourdieu and Passeron (1970) and Coleman (Coleman, 1966), the relationship between the socio-economic status of students' families and their academic achievements is examined in several studies (Breen & Jonsson, 2005). The authors suggest that among the factors affecting the availability of additional education in rural areas, there are those that have a significant impact, and factors whose influence has a certain degree of assumption. For example, the institutional factor may be decisive in realizing the child’s desire to go swimming if there is no swimming pool in the educational institution (Niedzielski & Boschmann, 2014).
We did not find separate works analyzing the impact of the rural lifestyle on the accessibility of additional education for children. In this regard, the authors pose the following research questions:
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of the study is to identify the features of the influence of informational, territorial, institutional and economic factors on the availability of additional education for children in rural areas.
In accordance with the purpose of the study, the following methods were used:
analysis of available theoretical materials on the topic, generalization, and systematization of ideas.
focus group, questionnaires, interviews, conversations, observations.
statistical processing and graphical interpretation of the research results.
The study involved 333 respondents (156 children, 139 parents and 38 teachers) from rural schools in the Yaroslavl region. Educational organizations are different in terms of activity and structure and are most typical for rural areas: a full-time school, a school complex, a basic school, a small school, and a school with a preschool group.
We see the accessibility of additional education, as the right of the child to the possibility of continuing education in the amount necessary for them, at a convenient time and in a suitable form. Accessibility is ensured by the multi-level nature of educational programs (Baiborodova, 2018; Moskal & Schweisfurth, 2018). The concept of “access to further education” can be considered in connection with a social order for education; variability of educational services; accessibility factors (Zolotareva & Sinicin, 2018), the number and quality of programs (Paez et al., 2012). In this paper, we examine the availability of additional education depending on the influence of factors.
One of the requirements for organizing the activities of institutions is the openness and accessibility of its activities to the public. This suggests the possibility of obtaining complete, relevant, and objective information about the additional education of children. The
All necessary information must be provided by the website of the educational organization. In practice, social networks, newspaper ads, open days, reporting concerts, performances, open master classes are used to inform in rural areas. Parents of rural schoolchildren (96.5%) say that most of them are informed by teachers in direct communication. Children list school, parents, relatives, friends, the Internet among the sources of information. The share of information received by parents and their children from each other is low (4.0% and 5.88%), this may indirectly indicate insufficient attention of parents to discussing the educational prospects of children.
According to teachers, information received from other parents and students (33.34%), from school (30.76%) and the official website of the organization (12.82%) has a great degree of reliability for children and parents. The results obtained by the child during additional education are convincing for parents (12.82%). A reliable source of information for some parents (7.70%) is their own experience in complementary education, which is consistent with the assertion that parents who have been involved in additional education themselves also attract a child to learn additional programs (Mestnikova et al., 2016). According to teachers, 2.56% of parents trust information from their child.
As we can see, rural children and parents receive most of the reliable information about additional education from school and from each other. Official sites are not critical in disseminating information, so it is probably worth reviewing the forms and methods of working with this resource.
When receiving information about additional education, children and parents pay attention to some key points. Parents need information about the legal status of the organization, they are concerned about information about fees, prospects, and planned learning outcomes. For all respondents, the personal and professional qualities of the teacher who teaches according to additional programs are important. Schoolchildren are interested in the organization of training: time and place of employment, material, and technical support. They pay attention to other people's reviews and opinions.
Most participants in the study note that children receive additional education in organizations located in the immediate vicinity of the students' place of residence. Parents and children mean classes based on comprehensive rural schools working in the complex, licensed for additional education.
When determining territorial accessibility, parents considered it necessary to distinguish between a rural school as accessible to all children and specialized institutions of additional education, which 37.15% of parents consider inaccessible. Institutions that are not possible to attend because of remoteness were highlighted: music school, sports school.
The problem of territorial accessibility of additional education can be solved with organized transport delivery. Parents generally expressed their consent to travel of children to other educational organizations, if accompanied by teachers, recommendations, clear interest, and abilities of the child. However, when considering the standards for the use of school buses, it was noted that this is not possible. There are examples of interaction when mobile educational centers come to the countryside to educate children in the practice of rural schools (Quantorium, planetarium). Sometimes parents take their children to classes with their own or public transport, older children drive on their own. Here, there is a coincidence of the child’s strong motivation for classes and support from the parents. In general, the problem of low transport mobility of rural residents remains.
The problem of territorial accessibility can be removed by the distance form of additional education, but most respondents are skeptical of it. About half of the children and parents believe that distance learning is an inconvenient form that is difficult for perception, understanding and assimilation of material, there is no close contact with the teacher, there are types of activities that cannot be learned remotely. Arguments are given that there is no technical possibility, there are no specialists, there are age restrictions. However, a group of children (45.62%) decided that it is possible to try learning remotely, and some schoolchildren (3.50%) are already learning this way. Teachers (40.54%) noted that children have an interest in distance learning and there may be circumstances when a distance form of education is the only way to get not only additional, but also general education (for those living far from centers with health restrictions interested in a rare destination, under quarantine).
Children, parents and teachers noted that there should be so many additional programs that everyone could attend (62.88% of respondents), interests were satisfied (61.85%), horizons were developed (17.52%), there was a choice of programs (10.3%), free time can be occupied (10.3%). Most educators (90.47%) believe that in rural areas, everyone is welcome to study additional programs without a competitive selection. It happens that the teachers themselves invite children to study.
Children with different levels of educational needs (gifted, beginners, with disabilities, living in difficult living conditions) work together due to the small number of contingents in rural schools. Teachers carry out a differentiated approach in training, develop multilevel or individual additional educational programs.
Almost all teachers (96.40%) evaluate the material and technical base of organizations as insufficient, but there are separate programs, directions or schools that are very well and modernly equipped. It is necessary to pay attention to the creation of special programs for children with disabilities, gifted schoolchildren, and children in difficult conditions, providing free programs at the request of these children and their parents. The material resources of the organization significantly affect the choice of additional education programs by children and parents. Suggestions were repeatedly expressed on attracting specialists to additional education of children and the use of specialized modern equipment.
In assessing the sufficiency of equipment for the organization of additional education, 75% of schoolchildren noted that everything was enough, and only 7.14% did not agree with it. Satisfaction with resources decreases as children grow older, high school students are more critical, point out deficiencies in equipment, lack of specialists.
The results of this and other studies (Magun & Engovatov, 2007) highlighted the desire of rural people to choose personally meaningful programs for additional education and to satisfy their life needs. The additional education of rural schoolchildren has its own peculiarities, due to the territorial and geographical location of most villages remote from institutions of additional education, transport mobility, information, communicative and technological competence of children and their parents, the social well-being of families, and pedagogical support for additional education.
Satisfaction with additional education in the countryside depends on the level of professional training of teachers, the number of specialized institutions, the variability of additional programs corresponding to the diverse interests and needs of students, financial affordability, and the material and technical equipment of institutions providing additional education services. In practice, the problem of access to additional education is solved individually, targeted, considering the conditions and capabilities of the child or small groups. It is worth considering various options for designing additional education for schoolchildren and forms of support for initiatives of families, children, and parents.
Increasing the level of accessibility of additional education for rural schoolchildren is impossible without creating a single educational space in the rural territory. We can talk about the need to create an open, accessible to all territorial educational system (Mudrik & Tupicin, 1999), providing a choice of content and types of activities.
Our results allow us to determine several conditions that must be met:
to provide information on additional education that is in demand by parents and children, using the potential for direct communication and modern communication technologies.
to develop the mobility of students, teachers, social partners.
to develop programs of additional education for group and individual, full-time, part-time, distance learning.
to form the subjective position of students, manifested in the comprehension of individual value orientations, the request for education and the design of an individual educational program.
- Baiborodova, L. V., & Lushnikova, T. V. (2018). Povysheniye dostupnosti dopolnitel'nykh obshcheobrazovatel'nykh programm dlya sel'skikh detey [Increasing the accessibility of additional general education programs for rural children]. RIO YSPU.
- Baiborodova, L. V. (2018). Kontseptsiya obespecheniya dostupnosti dopolnitel'nogo obrazovaniya [The concept of ensuring access to continuing education]. Yaroslavskiy pedagogicheskiy vestnik [Yaroslavl Pedagogical Bulletin], 5, 99–109.
- Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. C. (1970). Reproduction elements for a theory of the educational system. Editions de Minuit.
- Breen, R., & Jonsson, J. O. (2005). Inequality of Opportunity in Comparative Perspective: Recent Research on Educational Attainment and Social Mоbility. Annual Review of Sociology, 31, 223-243.
- Coleman, J. S. (1966). Equality of Educational Opportunity. Integrated Education, 6(5), 19-28.
- Curl, A., Nelson, J., & Anable, J. (2011). Does Accessibility Planning Address what Matters? A Review of Current Practice and Practitioner Perspectives. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 11, 3-11.
- Erdyneeva, K. G., Vasilyeva, K. K., Krysova, E. V., Nikonova, T. V., Fatikhova, L. E., Klimenko, T. I., Zaitseva, N. A., & Martina, L. V. (2016). The mechanism of state regulation of regional services markets as an imperative to reduce territorial socio-economic disparities. International Review of Management and Marketing, 2, 274-280.
- Magun, V. S., & Engovatov, M. V. (2007). Dinamika prityazaniy i izmeneniye resursnykh strategiy molodezhi: 1985-2005 gody [The dynamics of claims and changes in youth resource strategies: 1985-2005]. Rossiya reformiruyushchayasya [Russia is reforming], 6, 197-219.
- Mestnikova, A. E., Alekseeva, G. G., & Ohlopkova, D. K. (2016). Psikhologo-pedagogicheskoye issledovaniye otnosheniya roditeley k sfere dopolnitel'nogo obrazovaniya v sel'skoy mestnosti [A psychological and pedagogical study of the attitude of parents to the field of additional education in rural areas]. https://science-education.ru/pdf/2016/3/24791.pdf
- Moskal, M., & Schweisfurth, M. (2018). Learning, using and exchanging global competence in the context of international postgraduate mobility. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 16(1), 93-105. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2017.1387768
- Mudrik, A. V., & Tupicin, A. Y. (1999). Vospitaniye kak sotsial'naya problema: Tendentsii i strategiya sotsial'nogo vospitaniya v Rossii [Parenting as a social problem: Trends and strategy of social education in Russia]. Family in Russia, 1-2, 100-110.
- Mudrik, A. V. (2005). Gorod kak faktor sotsializatsii podrastayushchego pokoleniya [City as a factor in the socialization of the younger generation]. Sibirskiy pedagogicheskiy zhurnal [Siberian Pedagogical Journal], 10, 47–52.
- Niedzielski, M., & Boschmann, E. (2014). Travel Time and Distance as Relative Accessibility in the Journey to Work. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 104(6), 1156-1182.
- Paez, A., Scott, D., & Morency, C. (2012). Measuring Accessibility: Positive and Normative Implementations of Various Accessibility Indicators. Journal of Transport Geography, 25, 141-153.
- Roshchina, Ya. M. (2003). Neravenstvo dostupa k obrazovaniyu: chto my o nem znayem? [Inequality of access to education: what do we know about it?] In Shishkin, S. V. (Ed.) Problems of accessibility of higher education (pp. 102-110). SIGNAL.
- Seliverstova, I. V. (2005). Dostupnost' doshkol'nogo obrazovaniya: vliyaniye territorial'nogo faktora [Accessibility of preschool education: the influence of the territorial factor]. Sotsial'nyye issledovaniya [Social studies], 2, 95-103.
- Song, Y. (2016). Trends in Preschool Education: Public Finance Investment, Development Trends, and Challenges to Its Equality. Chinese Research Perspectives on Educational Development, 3, 77-110.
- Zolotareva, A. V., & Sinicin, I. S. (2018). Povysheniye dostupnosti dopolnitel'nogo obrazovaniya detey – novyy vektor realizatsii gosudarstvennoy obrazovatel'noy politiki [Increasing the accessibility of additional education for children is a new vector in the implementation of state educational policy]. Obrazovatel'naya panorama [Educational panorama], 1(9), 8-18.
- Zolotareva, A. V., Baiborodova, L. V., & Ansimova, N. P. (2018). Kontseptsiya i modeli povysheniya dostupnosti realizatsii dopolnitel'nykh obshcheobrazovatel'nykh programm [The concept and models of increasing the accessibility of the implementation of additional general education programs]. RIO YSPU.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
About this article
27 May 2021
Print ISBN (optional)
Culture, communication, history, mediasphere, education, law
Cite this article as:
Bayborodova, L., Lushnikova, T., Serebrennikov, L., & Tamarskaya, N. (2021). Socio-Economic Factors Of Accessibility Of Additional Education For Rural Schoolchildren. In E. V. Toropova, E. F. Zhukova, S. A. Malenko, T. L. Kaminskaya, N. V. Salonikov, V. I. Makarov, A. V. Batulina, M. V. Zvyaglova, O. A. Fikhtner, & A. M. Grinev (Eds.), Man, Society, Communication, vol 108. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences (pp. 1337-1343). European Publisher. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2021.05.02.170