Pedagogical psychology of education — O.V. Lishin

Almost 60 years ago A.S. Makarenko, in the article «The Purpose of Education», published in the newspaper «Izvestia», spoke as follows about the tasks of Soviet pedagogy: ideals as a «harmonious personality».

Fragments from the book

Almost 60 years ago A.S. Makarenko, in the article «The Purpose of Education», published in the newspaper «Izvestia», spoke as follows about the tasks of Soviet pedagogy: ideals as a «harmonious personality». Then they replaced the «harmonious personality» with a «communist man», in the depths of their souls reassuring themselves with a practical consideration that it was «anything else». A year later, they expanded the ideal and proclaimed that we should educate «a fighter full of initiative.» From the very beginning, it was equally clear to preachers, students, and outside spectators that with such an abstract formulation of the question “about the ideal”, no one would ever be able to check pedagogical work, and therefore the preaching of these ideals was a completely safe matter” (Makarenko A. S. Collected works, T. 5.1958, pp. 325-326). Reading these lines, teachers of the 80s of the XX century willy-nilly recall a harmoniously developed personality, teachers of the 70s — an active life position. In the scientific and methodological research of the 70-80s, various pedagogical concepts replace each other. One of them suggests compiling a list of qualities that a well-educated student is supposed to have. In the best cases, these lists at least somehow correlate with the age of the child.

So, according to N.I. Monakhov (Monakhov N.I. Studying the effectiveness of education: theory and methodology. M., 1981), in the first grade there are twelve such qualities. In the fifth — also twelve, in the sixth, eighth and tenth — fourteen, and in the tenth grade courage disappears from the list of qualities, but internationalism is added.

One of the authors of this direction, VS Ilyin, in 1987 came up with a project to assess the level of development of the student’s personality. See →

The approach proposed by N.K. Golubev and B.P. Bitinas in the “standardized characteristic”, which reflects the “indicators of value relations of schoolchildren” assessed in points, for example: “active participation in social and political life, irreconcilable attitude towards ideology and morality alien to us, attitude towards teaching, labor affairs, and products of people’s labor and to nature, a benevolent attitude towards people, an irreconcilable attitude towards immorality, a demanding attitude towards oneself, an attitude towards one’s physical development, an aesthetic attitude towards reality ”(Golubev N.K., Bitinas B.P. Introduction to the diagnosis of education. M., 1989. P. 104–107). In addition to the obvious ideologization of this approach, it sins with strict regulation, a tendency to formalize assessments and disregard for the selectivity of human relations. In fact, in some «labor affairs» the student can participate with enthusiasm, in others — indifferently. Some school subjects attract him, others repel him. Taking care of your physical development can also be very variable. And «active participation in social and political life» — even more so.

To the shortcomings of this system, let’s add the consideration of «a benevolent attitude towards people» as a row indicator in the list of value relations. People are different. Some of them are «neighbors» — relatives, employees and friends, others — «distant», i.e. unfamiliar or unfamiliar, really not very necessary or not at all necessary for the subject. In addition, adolescents generally tend to drastically change their attitude towards people depending on their belonging or not belonging to a significant group. For example, there is a case when a teenager in the summer on the river at the risk of his life saved an unfamiliar girl and, having waited for the ambulance to arrive, quietly disappeared. The same boy was convicted in the coming winter for participating in the torture of an unfamiliar peer.

In general, the behavior of a teenager, like his inner world, is sharply contradictory: a teenager is sometimes worse, sometimes better than himself; and bold, and cowardly, and selfless, and selfish, and kind, and cruel — it all depends on group influence and social circumstances.

Attempts to strictly regulate the goals of education in many respects go back to the concepts that are quite fully set out in the article by G.P. Shchedrovitsky. This work discusses the tasks of educational activities. “Certain activities are pushed into the sphere of culture and serve as models for the implementation of the same activities in the production structure. The real mechanism for this is the acquisition by some people of a special function that allows them to normalize the habits, actions, activities of other people … We can talk about a long series of «life situations» of the child, which are created to master socially fixed activities and through which society «drags» the child in the course of his upbringing and education. The situations of education and upbringing developed in this way and their sequence were fixed in special means of transmission, passed on from generation to generation and imposed on the child … We must determine the order of change in “pedagogical means” (including play ones) that provide a continuous line of formation of the child to given production states, we must find such a linkage of different situations of education and upbringing that determine the movement of the child along the “trajectory” leading to these states ”(Shchedrovitsky G.P. On the methodology of pedagogical research of the game // Knowledge. 1963 C. 28). Here, a functional approach to the tasks of upbringing and education, the desire for strict regulation of the «habits, actions, activities» of pupils is obvious. He is opposed by another, aimed at the formation of trends underlying the decisions made, personal choice, and not rigidly defined forms of behavior. For example, the approach formulated in line with the concept of K. Rogers. The person here acts as a subjectively free person who chooses, creates and is responsible for his «I» (Rogers K. to the science of personality. The history of advanced psychology. Texts. M., 1986. C. 293-323.). According to this approach, among the qualities “according to the criterion of self-actualization” there is a more adequate (compared to the majority) perception of reality and an appropriate attitude towards it. People of this type avoid illusions and prefer to deal with reality, albeit not easy. They are characterized by a high degree of acceptance of themselves and others, a focus on external problems, a high degree of autonomy, the ability to remain true to their goal even in the face of great difficulties, a sense of belonging to all of humanity, etc. (Healthy personality. 1974. № 4. C. 167.). By K. Rogers, the essence of personality is knowledge about oneself, attitude towards oneself and self-esteem. Usually the behavior of the individual corresponds to his ideas about himself. The notion of correspondence between the “I” and experience is fundamental, since experience that is incompatible with the idea of ​​oneself is usually not recognized. This inconsistency between «I» and experience gives rise to a feeling of anxiety, threat, disorganization. In response, protection is actualized: either the experience is perceived distortedly, or it is denied altogether.

In order, in the light of the foregoing, to develop our own view of the goals and objectives of education, let us turn to the personality characteristics given by Russian psychologists A.N. Leontiev and B.S. Bratus. See →

About culture…

The formation of the individual-performing or individual-psychological level of a person is connected, as we believe, with the transformation of the ideal form of affective-semantic formations and the higher psychological functions associated with them into real forms, appropriated by people — the bearers of culture. This requires intermediaries — mediators. Their role can be played by: a person (Adult), a sign, a word and a meaning. Regarding the role of the Adult in this process, D.I. Feldstein writes: “This is the position of responsibility… in all cases, this is the position of the Mediator, without which the transition of children to the World of Adults is inconceivable. And in this regard, the mediation of the Adult Community, which organizes relations with growing people, is practically not considered at the socio-psychological level ”(Feldshtein D.I. Social development in the space-time of Childhood. M., 1997. P. 20).

About the sensitive period, socialization, etc…

Personality is more attitude than skills

Let us formulate the most general and fundamental conclusion from what has been said: a personality is not so much what a person knows and what he is trained as his attitude to the world, to people, to himself, the sum of desires and goals. For this reason alone, the task of promoting the formation of personality cannot be solved in the same way as the task of teaching (official pedagogy has always sinned with this). We need a different path. See →

Personal Orientation

In education, one must rely not on specific personality traits and not even on the relationships that she should develop “ideally”, but on a few, but decisive semantic orientations and correlations of motives, and everything else a person, based on these orientations, will develop himself. In other words, it is about the orientation of the individual.

What are the decisive semantic orientations we mean? A.N. Leontiev wrote: “What is the central relation that characterizes a person’s life? I would put it using the words of A.S. Makarenko, very simply: the main relationship on which the whole thing depends is the relationship between the individual and society. But what is the concrete expression of this relationship as developing? How is it characterized? Apparently, it is characterized by the objective meaning of human life in the given conditions of human social existence, i.e. in these conditions, the connection between man and society. Therefore, it turns out that the motives lying on the periphery of these relations cannot become the leading motives, and vice versa, social motives always become meaningful, significant, which thus have both personal meaning and significance for the individual, but at the same time such motives , which determine the relationship of a person to society, i.e., figuratively speaking, put a person in society ”(Leontiev A.N. Philosophy of Psychology. M., 1994. P. 244).

There are several concepts of personal orientation. The difference between them comes down to an understanding of relatively stable and dominant, i.e. motives that form the basis of the motivational sphere of personality. In the 70s L.I. Bozovic and his co-workers, in addition to personal and collectivist motives, also singled out business motivation. V.E. Chudnovsky considered the concept of group motivation. In the early 80s, while developing the problem of personality orientation formation in adolescence and early adolescence, the author of these lines, in addition to individualistic, group and social orientation, experimentally proved the existence of individual social motivation and its possible combinations. In an early study by I.D. Egorycheva identified four personality orientations: humanistic, egoistic, depressive and suicidal — with a number of accentuations (Feldstein D.I. Psychology of personality formation. M., 1994. P. 164-174). In later studies by the same author, the latter two are renamed sociocentric and negativistic, respectively.

The above characteristic of the orientation of the personality (Psychology: Dictionary. M., 1990. P. 193) is quite consistent with the concept of L.I. Bozovic. However, there is reason to expand the concept of personality orientation by including relationships in it as a potential for a person’s selective activity in connection with various aspects of reality (Myasishchev V.N. Psychology of relations. M-V., 1995, p. 346). G.M. Andreeva noted that “an attitude is a kind of predisposition, a predisposition to some objects, which allows one to expect self-disclosure in real acts of action. The difference from the installation here is that various, including social objects, are assumed, to which the attitude applies … ”(Andreeva G.M. Social psychology. M., 1998. P. 289–290).

In turn, V.N. Myasishchev notes that directionality as a «more topological formalized term is often used as an equivalent of ‘attitude’ and ‘attitude’. It should be noted that the term “readiness” expresses and defines the trend of a promising action, the direction, strictly speaking, is a characteristic of the consequences ”(Myasishchev V.N. Psychology of Relations. M-V., 1995. P. 110–111). According to V.N. Myasishchev, attitude can also be a source of motive. Based on the foregoing, we believe it is legitimate to consider the orientation of the personality as a concept that combines certain personal tendencies of dominant relationships, social attitudes and their corresponding dominant motives. In the concept of V.A. Yadov, this concept corresponds to the basic social attitude, in the concept of D.A. Leontiev — semantic disposition.

Comparison of the concept of personality orientation — O.V. Lishin

Of interest is also the analysis of concepts that are similar in content, but belong to different psychological schools. For example, V.N. Myasishchev, on the basis of the concept of relations, identifies four personal types of correlation of biologically and socially valuable and inferior aspects of the personality as a selective principle. “Let’s imagine a square sheet: the upper half of it is socially positive, the lower half is socially negative, the right half is biologically positive, the left half is biologically negative. With infinite diversity, which is all the greater, the greater the number of human properties mapped, an integral assessment is possible … In our scheme, four main types can be distinguished in four quadrants:

1) socially and biologically complete;

2) socially complete with biological inferiority;

3) biologically complete with social inferiority;

4) socially and biologically inferior. (…) (Fig. 2).

The “O’K Corral” diagram (E. Bern, F. Ernst) can be considered similar to the presented model, which distinguishes four attitudes towards oneself and other people: , 27. S. 27-1996).

1) I am OK; You are OK;

2) I am not OK; You are OK;

3) I am OK; You are not OK;

4) I am not OK; You are not OK. (Fig. 3)

These four views on life are called life positions. Some authors call them basic positions Or simply positions. They represent the basic qualities (values) that a person values ​​in himself and in others, which means more than just some opinion about his behavior and the behavior of other people (…) Every adult has his own script based on one of four life positions. However, we are not in a chosen position all the time, but every minute of our life we ​​can change life positions (…) Although we use the positions of all quadrants of the Corral diagram, each of us has one quadrant in which we spend most of the time when playing our script. This quadrant will be the main position that we adopted in childhood. In this version of the personality model (see Fig. 3), the quadrant corresponding to the full perception of the Self and the Other (I am OK with myself and You are OK with me) is defined as a healthy position based on the action of cooperation. It is opposed by the defensive and offensive paranoid attitude (“I am OK with myself, and You are not OK with me”) based on the action of deliverance. There are two more attitudes associated with a defective perception of «I»: barren (I am not OK with myself; You are not OK with me), based on the action of waiting, and depressive position (I am not OK with yourself, You are OK with me), based on the action of leaving. In our opinion, the task of a psychologist who owns the methodology of transactional analysis is to transfer a patient who is in any of the three inferior positions to the only “healthy” one (I am OK with myself; You are OK with me).

A similar model of personality was laid down on the basis of the behavioral theory of attachment by psychologists J. Bowlby and M. Ainsworth, and later developed by a number of other researchers (L.A. Kirkpatrick, K.E. Davis, K. Barthelomew, L.K. Horowitz, D Griffin, etc.). According to the behavioral attachment system concept, the developing child goes through a series of phases in the development of an attachment and in using that attachment as a «safety base» for exploratory activity and autonomization. In the course of development, an internal program is realized, part of our evolutionary heritage, which has an adaptive meaning. According to this program, the child develops an internal operational model, including psychological images of himself and his caregivers, based on emotional perception and creating a basis for developing expectations about future relationships with people — internal operational models of himself and others. In the early 90s, psychologists developed a system of these models associated with attachment styles. According to Bowlby, “patterns of attachment can be defined by two axes characterizing the internal model of the “I” and the internal model of the “Other”.

Each axis has its positive and negative poles. An example of a positive pole of the Self-Axis is a sense of self-worth and the expectation of a positive reaction to oneself from Others. The positive pole of the axis that characterizes Others can be the expectation that other people will be available and ready to help and support, allowing you to get close to yourself. (…) This pattern leads to a fourth style of attachment, namely rejecting intimacy. Individuals with this attachment pattern feel uncomfortable in establishing close relationships and prefer not to depend on Others, but still maintain a positive self-image28. (28 Pervin L., John O. Psychology of Personality. Theory and Research. M., 2000. P. 185. Ibid. P. 186). According to the proposed model, in addition to the rejecting pattern described above, one can single out a variant of confident attachment, when a person feels comfortable both in close relationships with others and alone with himself; a pattern of fear of attachment, which is characterized by fear of rapprochement, avoidance of communication; pattern of over-attachment, with relationship absorption29. This description corresponds to Fig. 4. Subsequent studies have shown that attachment patterns in adults were associated with the choice of a partner and the stability of love relationships, with the development of depressive states and difficulties in interpersonal relationships, with the problem of overcoming personal crises. The same studies allow us to assert that the confinement of a person to a single pattern is not absolute, that in different situations, in relation to different social objects, different patterns of attachment can take place30. (30 First L., John O. Psychology of personality. Theory and research. S. 186. 28). Thus, the concept of J. Bowlby-K. Barthelomew and their followers reveals a significant similarity with the concept of E. Berne-F. Ernst.

M.Sh. Magomed-Eminov. He writes: “The orientation of the personality of the separation is characterized by: 1) centering on the “I”, which, unlike the Other, is regarded as a special distinctive value, while the ability to decenter from one’s “I” and take into account the position of the Other worsens; 2) a system of requirements goes from the person to the Other; 3) there is a focus on one’s own inner experiences; 4) own interests are the main ones, and the interests of the Other are denied, or recognized insofar as they contribute to the achievement of one’s own interests, or they are not taken into account at all; 5) The Other is considered as a depersonalized category: it is impersonal, a limited set of qualities is attributed to it; 6) a certain limited repertoire of behavioral, emotional manifestations, etc. is expected from the Other; 7) if expectations are not confirmed, then certain measures are taken against the Other (persuasion, persuasion, punishment, etc.) or contact with him is broken.

The orientation of the personality connection is characterized by: 1) centering on the Other, which, in contrast to one’s own «I», is considered as a higher value; there is an inability to decenter from the Other and take into account one’s own positions; 2) the interests of the Other are put in the first place, and one’s own interests are either not taken into account or are generally denied; 3) a person is aimed at controlling his behavior, his emotions and carefully monitors whether they coincide with the expectations of others; 4) the internal experiences of others, their opinions and assessments are of great value; 5) a person expects certain demands, influences, claims from others; 6) if his behavior and emotions do not meet the expectations of others, then he is afraid that he will be rejected, punished, etc.; 7) although a person is directed to close contact, the psychological distance is great; he limits his personality, perceiving himself as a faceless being.

The orientation of the personality of separation through connection is characterized by: 1) equality of positions; 2) value attitude both to oneself and to the Other; 3) interest in both one’s own and others’ inner experiences, which are coordinated into a single holistic process; 4) neither own nor other people’s interests are absolutized; 5) focus not on attributing, but on understanding the point of view of the Other; 6) the ability to decenter both from the “I” to the Other, and from the Other to the “I”; 7) the point of view that the Other is the same as the «I», and that the «I» is the same as the Other. A person with this orientation is characterized by the acceptance of a humanistic norm of relationships, the recognition of a person as an unconditional and supreme value.

It is obvious that the list of characteristic signs of personality orientation is not exhaustively complete. In addition, personality orientations have a complex internal structure and include a variety of motivational factors. The ratio between the directions considered above can be such that one of the extremes will steadily dominate in relations, and the influence of the other will be minimal.

Depending on which orientation of the personality prevails, two motivational accentuations can be distinguished: social phobia and sociophilia. Sociophilia manifests itself in the complete dissolution of the «I» in society, in the fear of being alone with oneself, in the loss of individuality. (…) Social phobia is expressed in the desire for loneliness, for isolation; other people either frighten or irritate or don’t care about them; the minimum required contacts are maintained. There are different gradations of it, ranging from alienation due to the frustration of basic basic needs and ending with the desire for neurotic isolation (…) Motivational-personal continuum: social phobia, separation, separation-affiliation, affiliation, sociophilia. Each of these orientations is understood as an interpersonal personality variable.

This circumstance allows us to connect the orientation of the personality with the phenomenon of position, more precisely, with its two varieties — the personal position and the social position of the individual. (…) So, in a personal position, we distinguish: isolation, I-centering, I-other — integration, other-centering, merging; social position includes, from our point of view, five types: alienation, narcissism, egoism, humanism, altruism, conformism” 31 .

YES. Leontiev, speaking sharply about the desire for a typology of personality, attributing to it “the typology of schoolchildren according to the “orientation” of their personality that prevailed in pedagogical and psychological-pedagogical literature, especially in the 60-70s, but still exists in some places to this day” , clearly separates his “type or path of personality development” from the mentioned typology32. (32 Leontiev DA. Essay on the psychology of personality. M., 1993).

Here he considers it appropriate to single out autonomous, symbiotic, impulsive and conformal types, behind which, according to their content, “life positions” or “attachment patterns” already familiar to us, or finally the types of personality orientation identified by I.D. Egorycheva: humanistic, egocentric, negativistic and sociocentric33. (33 Egorycheva ID. Personal orientation of a teenager and the method of its diagnostics // World of Psychology. 1999. No. 1. P. 264-277).

The remark of D.A. Leontiev, which completely coincides with our understanding of the types of these life positions: “An autonomous path or type of development is the only path leading to the achievement of personal maturity and a full-fledged human existence. The remaining three of the four described types, models or paths of personality development lead to a dead end. (…) Having embarked on one of these paths (and its choice is largely determined by the characteristics of parental relationships in adolescence and earlier), we find ourselves on a conveyor that leads us through life along this path. You can leave it only at the cost of great internal efforts. In particular, the main task of any serious psychotherapy, whatever methods it uses, is to direct a person along an autonomous path of development. If this problem is solved, he will no longer need psychotherapy. (34 Leontiev D.A. Ibid. P. 34). (Similar to the task of a psychologist in the concept of E. Bern — F. Ernst).

The concept of I.D. Egorycheva allows us to consider the orientation of the personality as a causal relationship of dominant relationships — dominant social attitudes — the dominant sense-forming motives of the leading activity — its personal meaning — the life position of the individual — personal values. This whole causal chain is manifested in two positions: in relation to the individual to himself and in his relation to others (society), with all the consequences arising from these relations. Such an understanding of the foundations of personality typology brings the described concept closer to the concepts of E. Bern — F. Ernst, J. Bowlby — C. Barthelomew, the approach of V.N. Myasishchev, the concepts of personality orientation M.Sh. Magomed-Eminova and the type or way of personality development D.A. Leontiev. It does not contradict from the point of view of recognition of the hierarchical scheme of dispositional regulation of the social behavior of the individual and the concept of V.A. Yadov. In general, the approach of I.D. Egorycheva can be called a socio-psychological model of personality. I.D. Egorycheva identified 4 main types of personal orientation and 8 subtypes-accentuations (Fig. 5). The combinations I+, I-, O+, O- (where O is Society, Others) turned out to be associated with the manifestation of a certain type of personal orientation.

I +, O + — humanistic orientation of the personality. With this orientation, the individual does not seek autonomy, recognizing the right of everyone to free self-determination, both individually and within the group. The main value for a person with such an orientation is personality.

I, He, She are a concrete person and a concrete society, consisting of concrete «I», and not of abstract «Others». In this type, subtypes or accentuations are distinguished: with a predominantly positive attitude towards oneself — an individualistic accentuation of a humanistic orientation and with a predominantly positive attitude towards others — altruistic accentuation.

I +, O — egocentric orientation of the personality. With this orientation, the personality is in the center of attention itself, all its activity is focused on itself, its own interests, problems; the individual strives for recognition by society of his special value. The main value for a person with such an orientation is himself, his thoughts, his judgments, his interests, his activities, the results of his work. A person with this type of orientation is very demanding in assessing the other, accepting him as a whole as much as he is similar to himself, as far as he agrees with his opinion, shares his likes and dislikes. In this type of orientation, two accentuations are distinguished: with a predominantly positive attitude towards oneself, with a negative, in general, attitude towards society — an individualistic accentuation of an egocentric orientation; and with a predominantly negative attitude towards society, with, in general, a positive attitude of the individual towards himself — egoistic accentuation. The basis of the characteristics of the first subtype is the lesser rigidity and intolerance of the individual in relation to society. The second subtype is characterized by complete self-centering.

I-, O+ — the sociocentric orientation of the personality is distinguished primarily by the fact that the personality does not accept itself. A person does not believe in his own strength, does not believe that he will independently succeed in what he would like to achieve. At the same time, he is sure that others will achieve what they want with ease, at least much easier than he does. In this type of orientation, two accentuations are distinguished: with a predominantly positive attitude towards society, with a generally negative attitude towards oneself — conformist accentuation; and with a predominantly negative attitude towards oneself, with a generally positive attitude of the individual towards society — a self-deprecating accentuation of a sociocentric orientation.

I-, O — the negative orientation of the personality. Man does not accept himself or others; he experiences his failure as an extremely uncomfortable internal state. In this type of orientation, two accentuations are distinguished: with a predominantly negative attitude towards society, with a negative attitude towards oneself — misanthropic accentuation; and with a predominantly negative attitude towards oneself, with a less negative attitude towards society, a self-deprecating accentuation of a negative orientation35. (35 Egorycheva I.D. Personal orientation of a teenager and the method of its diagnosis // World of Psychology. 1999. No. 1. P. 264-277).

“Relations, understood as a system of temporary connections of a person as a personality — a subject with all reality or its individual aspects,” writes, referring to V.N. Myasishcheva, G.M. Andreev, — explain just the direction of the future behavior of the individual. (…) The sphere of action of the individual on the basis of relations is practically unlimited”36. (36 Andreeva G.M. Social psychology. M., 1998. S. 289-290).

Research conducted under our supervision by graduates of the Moscow Psychological and Social Institute (MPSI): M.Yu. Nikolaeva, L.A. Yarovoy, E.A. Kotelnikova, V.N. Moskalets, E.G. Gusakova, O.A. Gurina, V.K. Kiseleva, O.B. Polevtsova, N.V. Zhuchkova, M.A. Vagina, V.N. Deryabina, O.Yu. Siplatova, S.V. Zonova, Ya.E. Kolomeets, I.V. Motova, E.V. Pochinskaya and I.A. Strashnenko, made it possible to find out that a person with a humanistic orientation, with the most healthy life position (according to F. Ernst), a pattern of confident attachment (according to K. Barthelomew), is able to separate through cooperation (according to M.Sh. Magomed-Eminov), being on an autonomous path of development (according to D.A. Leontiev), biologically and socially complete (according to V.N. Myasishchev) (Fig. 6) is characterized by a relatively stable system of relations, which is dominated by a sense of self-worth and the expectation of a positive assessment from «others «.

Others in this system are evaluated as people worthy of acceptance and respect for who they are, even if they do not share the interests of the subject and hold different views and beliefs. With this approach, the struggle of opinions and opposition to the enemy is not ruled out, there is only contempt for a dissident. B.S. In this case, Bratus speaks of “the activity of bestowal,” when “pro-social aspirations, by their very nature, switch activity to the processes of bestowing oneself, transforming the world for the benefit of others. The world and people become not means, but ends. It is clear from this that activity of this kind is an undoubted sign of personal health. (.37 Bratus B.S. Personality anomalies. M., 37. P. 1988).

Further, this author points to the “semantic force field” that arises around each personality, and that the personalities of this type of development, leading to familiarization with the generic essence of a person, create a “powerful force field of beneficial influence on other people, beneficial “contributions” and elevating semantic transformations”38. (38 Bratus B.S. Personality anomalies. M., 1988. P. 131).

According to B.S. Bratusya, every success of upbringing, the success of psycho-correction is not just a contribution to the fate of an individual, but also a factor in the improvement of the social environment. It would be good for future parents and educators to remember this, especially in our time, which is not very conducive to optimism.

The personality type in question is characterized by the predominance of the norm in the manifestation of physical aggression, in the absence of a tendency to increased aggressiveness. Verbal aggression reveals the most significant (up to 46,1%) manifestations above the norm, as well as guilt. The index of aggression and the indicator of irritability are mostly within the normal range, with a downward trend. Among the terminal (life, basic) values ​​stand out: independence, self-confidence, interesting work, good and faithful friends, happy family life. Among the instrumental values, the most significant are cheerfulness, self-control, education, honesty, responsibility, tolerance, and strong will.

Common features of this type of personality are an increased focus on communication, a high degree of social adaptation in the field of relationships. It is characterized by high indicators of sociability, combined with the dynamism and emotionality of communication, activity in social contacts, the ability for empathy, sympathy and understanding of other people. These qualities coexist with frankness, benevolence towards others, accommodating, self-control, purposefulness in behavior and the presence of intellectual interests. The study of the features of self-esteem of older adolescents allowed I.A. Strashnenko in 2001 to find a certain similarity in terms of self-attitude and self-acceptance of subjects with an individualistic accentuation of a humanistic orientation with subjects of a similar accentuation of an egocentric orientation. Both of them are united by similar indicators of low self-acceptance, increased closeness in communication, a noticeable discrepancy between the level of claims and the level of self-esteem, which, according to B.S. Bratusya, can hinder personal development. The above data allow us to attribute one of the personality types described by A.A. Bodalev, to an altruistic accentuation of a humanistic orientation. The researcher characterizes this type as a person who is equally good at both situational and role-playing communication — any interpersonal communication, regardless of the number of partners and the degree of their heterogeneity. The basis of this ability, according to the author, is increased empathy, the ability to notice and understand the needs and intentions of other people, anticipate their behavior and, accordingly, take into account and exercise one’s abilities, including both advantages and disadvantages. In addition, observation is inherent in this type; decentration, or the ability to put oneself in the place of another and look at what is happening and at oneself through his eyes; the ability to receive this information at a subconscious level; and finally, the ability to experience and realize the attitude towards a person as a value, i.e. the ability to manifest humanity as a deep psychological property. Due to the possession of these qualities, people of this personal type of open and friendly communication experience a feeling of psychological comfort that causes sthenic emotions 39 .

A. G. Maslow describes in sufficient detail and accurately a typical psychological portrait of the individualistic accentuation of the humanistic orientation. He identifies the following features of this personality type: the highest degree of perception of reality, the ability to accept oneself, others and the world as they are; increased spontaneity;, high ability to focus on the problem; craving for solitude, pronounced autonomy; freshness of perception and richness of emotional reactions; identification with all people, the ability to improve interpersonal relations, a tendency to democratic relations; creative abilities, the ability to enjoy the process of activity, the process of self-giving, creativity, insight40 (40 Maslow A.G. Psychology of being. Reflbook., 1997. P. 59-63).

According to our assumption, the boundaries separating the variants of personal orientation into models (see Fig. 5) are rather blurred. In essence, we are talking about the gradual transition of some personality characteristics to others. In this regard, we can expect the presence on both sides of the dividing boundaries between the types of orientation and accentuations of «zones of uncertainty», which include complexes of the personality traits of the subjects that can change depending on the circumstances. For example, the dot, which in the model is I.D. Egorychev’s personal complex of individualistic accentuation of a humanistic orientation and standing in close proximity to the vertical scale I +, I — indicates that this personal complex, due to external reasons, can relatively easily turn into an individualism complex of an egocentric orientation. The farther from the intersecting axes is the point identified as a combination of qualities, personality, attributed to this position, the more stable the listed properties.

According to our research, we can assume the most pronounced resistance of a humanistic personality to stressful situations in comparison with other types of orientation, as well as the dynamics of changes in positions due to excessive exposure to stress. The first change in the position of the humanistic orientation may be associated with the emergence of depressive tendencies, sociocentric but of the “I-, O +” type. Further overstrain due to unbearable stress can lead a person to a negative position «I-, O-«. An illustration of what has been said will serve us as a vital document — the letters of S. Dovlatov. Once in the army, he found himself on active duty guarding a prison camp. Having become a warden, Dovlatov was ready to see the victim in the prisoner, and the punisher and murderer in himself. However, a week later it turned out that this rating scale is false. Another — the opposite — even more so. “And I,” writes S. Dovlatov, “discovered a third way. I found a striking similarity between the camp and the will. Between prisoners and guards. Between burglars-recidivists and controllers of the production area. Between convicts-contractors and ranks of the camp administration. On both sides of the ban lay a single and soulless world. (…) Maybe the point is that evil is arbitrary. That it is determined by place and time… Evil is determined by the market situation, demand, and the function of its bearer. (…) Of course, there is an innate predisposition to good and evil. Moreover, there are angels and monsters in the world. Saints and villains. But this is rare. (…) In normal cases, as I have seen, good and evil are arbitrary. So God save us from the spatio-temporal situation conducive to evil… The same people show equal capacity for evil deeds and virtue. I could easily imagine any recidivist as a war hero, a dissident, a defender of the oppressed. And vice versa, the heroes of the war with surprising ease were dissolved in the mass of the camp. (…) Therefore, any categorical moral attitude makes me laugh. Man is good!.. Man is vile!.. Man to man is a friend, comrade and brother… Man to man is a wolf… and so on… Man to man… how to put it better — tabula rasa. In other words, whatever. Depending on the circumstances. A person is capable of everything — bad and good. I am sad that this is the case.”41 (41 Dovlatov S. Collection of prose in three volumes. St. Petersburg, 1995. Vol. 1. S. 62-63; 87).

Those who knew Dovlatov say that after serving in the internal troops, he returned home internally changed beyond recognition — he became withdrawn and unpredictable in his actions. This is understandable — a man came from the army, expecting «anything» from any of those around him. Including betrayal. Before us is the position of a negativist. Isn’t it the reasons for the alcoholism of this tragic bright talent? His awkward life and early death?

Indeed, people in the 156th century learned to create territories with a spatio-temporal situation conducive to evil. For example, Afghanistan, where “there was a lot of dirt, horrors and in relation to their own. Either at some point, in particular between Farahrud and Chara, about 5 km from Shindan, some desperate Soviet soldier shot several of his comrades, then this happened in Shindan itself in one of the units of the 42th division. (…) Then the ensign and the officer did not share the woman, and because of her one built a banner for the other from a grenade; either the moronic bastards decided to deal with their commander by adding the urine of hepatitis patients to his food, or the Soviet officer, caught by an Afghan boy in stealing a watch from a dukhan, strangled the boy and shot the father who jumped out at the screams of the child”42. (1996 Major Izmailov. Fate kept the soldiers in Afghanistan. For Chechnya // Novaya Gazeta. 25. November 1 — December 1995). And Chechnya, where the city of Grozny, which in 400 had 000 inhabitants, was almost wiped off the face of the earth, and where in the “first” Chechen war the structure of losses was as follows: out of 80 dead, 000 were federal troops, 6000 — militants, the rest — more than 3500 — women, children, unarmed civilians who died from the bombs of their own government, their own army. It is not surprising that people with a broken psyche return from these and similar wars. Many find it difficult to find themselves in a peaceful life, languish in search of work, get drunk, quickly ignite and start fights, often with a fatal outcome, go to criminal structures, get jobs as killers, and commit suicide. According to doctors, almost all those who served in «hot spots» need special assistance. “In general, it should be emphasized that society has not risen to a deep awareness of the insane military adventure in Chechnya, of its responsibility for it … By and large, lessons have not been learned from it: the authorities and the people, top officials of the state and ordinary citizens, public organizations and law enforcement agencies , the intelligentsia and the church, the youth and the older generation, who were on the sidelines, and people scorched by the war…”70. (000 Serebryanikov N.N. Sociology of War. M., 43. P. 43). These lines were written before the beginning of the «second» Chechen war.

Does the above mean that a person is capable of everything — good and bad? In one army unit of the railway troops, a study of a large group of conscripts showed that in the second year of service, all subjects were divided into only two groups: humanistic orientation (35%) and negativists (63%). It is characteristic that among the subjects there were practically no persons of egocentric and sociocentric orientation. The conclusion suggests itself that in a situation of unbearable stress, both mentioned groups turned into negativists who do not accept either themselves or society (Ya.E. Kolomeets, 1999). The data obtained by us in the study of prisoners in a strict regime colony are also indicative (N.V. Zhuchkova, 1999). Among the subjects-recidivists — i.e. persons who have repeatedly been in places of deprivation of liberty, life positions were distributed as follows: egocentric orientation — 52% of the subjects, negative orientation — 24% of the subjects, humanistic and sociocentric orientation — 12% of the subjects each. Among the prisoners who found themselves in corrective labor institutions (ITU) for the first time, the ratio of life positions is different: humanistic orientation is 32%, egocentric — 36%, sociocentric — 24% and negative — 8% of the subjects. Among law-abiding citizens, in the third group of subjects, there were 60% of people with a humanistic orientation, 32% — egocentric, 8% — sociocentric, there is no negative position.

The conclusions from the above ratios are obvious: it can be assumed that illegal activities associated with the neglect of the interests of other people are most consistent with an egocentric life position, and the least with a humanistic one. The negative life position is connected, first of all, with the long-term and destructive effect of stressful pressure on the personality and includes a disdainful attitude towards someone else’s and one’s own personality. The total number of subjects was 236 people, so the conclusions can be considered quite reliable.

The egocentric life position was characterized by D.A. Leontiev as an impulsive way of development. “People of this type,” he writes, “are characterized by a non-integrated, diffuse, unstable self-attitude, with a positive rather than a negative sign, internal decision-making criteria with a sense of independence of the results of actions from their own efforts. The attitude of the Parents towards them is contradictory: it seems to emphasize the failure of the child without explicit rejection. A generally positive self-attitude gives such an adolescent the inner right to be active, but undeveloped self-regulation makes true freedom unattainable, which is replaced by impulsive protest, opposing oneself to others. (44 Leontiev DA. Essay on the psychology of personality. M, 44. P. 1993).

A group of authors with the participation of C. Barthelomew in 1994 showed that a person of this type feels uncomfortable when establishing close relationships, prefers not to depend on others, but at the same time retains a positive image of the “I”45. (45 Pervin L., John O. Psychology of Personality. Theory and Research. M., 2000. P. 186.

According to our research, the egocentric type of life position is characterized by a maximum in the expression of almost all forms of aggression, except for indirect ones, and by the manifestation of negativism. Orientation to communication, in comparison with the humanistic option, is significantly reduced, as well as anxiety, however, it is within the normal and subnorm limits; tendencies of externality-internality in relationships are balanced. Social adaptation is within the normal range. In conflict situations, subjects of this type resorted mainly to rivalry or compromise. The life prospect in our sample was represented by the following terminal values: health, material security, social recognition, prestigious work, self-confidence, enjoyment of life. Of the instrumental values, the most common are cheerfulness, courage, strong will, high demands, intolerance for shortcomings in oneself and others, rationalism. Adolescents of this type are focused on their own interests, have high self-esteem, tend to take as much as possible from society, ignoring the needs and interests of other people. These subjects are emotionally stable, self-possessed, hardworking, careful in their actions, self-centered, in some cases there may be emotional rigidity and insensitivity. Adolescents with such a position in life are in most cases domineering, independent, self-confident, stubborn to the point of aggressiveness, demand submission from friends, but they themselves do not recognize pressure from outside. They are characterized by straightforwardness and immediacy of behavior. Most often, they do not seek to understand other people, to help them, since such teenagers, by and large, are indifferent to other people’s problems and interests, and their main goal is self-affirmation at the expense of anyone. They experience emotional comfort when others agree with their opinion, share their likes and dislikes. The desire for power and domination is natural for them. In general, adolescents of this type are satisfied with their behavior, the state of anxiety is not characteristic of them. They know how to adapt in society. One can expect a greater opportunity for self-realization of people of this type rather in the subject area of ​​work or in the administrative and managerial area, rather than in the area of ​​interpersonal relations, especially family ones. It should be noted that this type of personality tends to an authoritarian style of relationships, as well as the difficulties they experience in understanding people of other types of personal orientation.

The system of relations, which is characterized by a depressive or sociocentric life position, associated with the rejection of oneself and the acceptance of another, is defined by J. Bowlby — K. Barthelomew as excessive attachment. YES. Leontiev speaks in this case of a conformal personality type. “People of this type have an unstable self-relationship, reliance on external decision-making criteria and a sense of independence of the results of actions from their own efforts predominate. The parents of such people are characterized by a hidden rejection, expressed in formal education, orienting the personality to external formal standards (like everyone else). The same circumstance contributes to the formation of a conditionally positive self-attitude, which depends on an external assessment, which can be narrowed down by behaving in accordance with external requirements. Such a person can successfully adapt to life at the cost of unconditionally accepting external requirements and assessments as a guide to action. (46 Leontiev D.A. Essay on the psychology of personality. M., 46. S. 1993-37).

Our studies have shown that people of this type can be distinguished by an acute above-normal form of almost all types of aggression, an extremely high indicator of guilt, suspicion, a high indicator of internal control, high externality and reduced social adaptability. High victimization and low ability to make independent decisions are also possible.

The position that I.D. Egorycheva defined it as negativistic, corresponds to the fruitless position of E. Berne — F. Ernst and the fear of attachment of J. Bowlby — K. Barthelomew. YES. Leontiev describes this symbiotic type of personality development as neurotic. “People classified as this type experienced emotional rejection and CONTROL from their mother, as if they were small children from their father. They are characterized by a stable and generally negative attitude, depending on parental assessment, a sense of personal responsibility for the result of their actions, but at the same time making a decision based on externally set criteria. Lack of freedom is combined here with a perverse form of responsibility — with «responsibility for the implementation of not one’s own, but other people’s values.» Apparently, the relationships characteristic of this type … are formed during the period of growing up of the child as a reaction to this growing up. Parents fear the independence of the child, and they, most often unconsciously, seek to maintain his dependence on them, making their love a conditional reward for the desired behavior. Out of fear of losing parental love, a teenager retains an orientation towards parental values ​​- an external support in behavior. Parents closely monitor and evaluate the behavior of the child, not accepting him as a whole as a person. Thus, he develops an orientation towards “earned behavior”47. (47 Leontiev D.A. Essay on the psychology of personality. M., 1993. P. 37. 42).

Above, we have already talked about the destructive effect of massive stress on a person as one of the widespread phenomena. Psychologist L. Kitaev-Smyk, who worked with soldiers of the federal troops in Chechnya, identifies several types of personalities among them. These are the “broken”, oppressed by fear for their lives, tormented by it. By their condition, they are probably closest to the sociocentric, depressive type. The officers say that the «broken» have bouts of cruelty — as a rule, in relation to the weakest: local residents, prisoners. The psyche of the “broken” seems to require compensatory self-affirmation. «Furious» during the battles can be distinguished by stagnant malice and aggression towards anyone — soldiers, seniors, civilians, prisoners. Sometimes excessive malice deprives the “frantic” of the ability to adequately respond to danger. Perhaps this type of deviation lies closer to the negativistic position, since a person is ready to deny everyone — including himself. The richest spectrum of deviations, indicating closeness to an egocentric position, is among the «heroic killers». These are people who experience the joy of victory over fear, sometimes overstepping the bounds of morally permissible, and capable of cruelty, meanness, abomination, who have acquired a passion for murder and violence. Also close to this type are the «hypersexual wars», more than others prone to violence against any woman who is in sight, even a minor. These are marauders, in whose deeds lies both revenge for the fear experienced, and the hypothetical arrangement of their future with the help of seized wealth. All these broken personalities are opposed by the type of people who are most resistant to stress, i.e. humanistic. They are steadfast, hardy, courageous, they have a normal attitude towards work, of course, taking into account the combat situation. When you are with them, you are not afraid of danger. «Humanists» become violent only in a critical situation. The rest of the time they do not stand out among other soldiers. After the war, people of this type quickly rebuild, vigorously growing into a peaceful life. There is also a type of «dashing fighter», for whom danger sharpens the clarity of mind, the infallibility of actions, the will to win. After the war, according to psychologists, they do not need to be rehabilitated, they will look for a new extreme application. These are types of passionate personalities who do not violate the norms of military morality. They will enter peaceful life with a clear conscience. (48 Kitaev-Smyk L. Returnees // Moskovsky Komsomolets. 48. October 1996).

In the above text, we tried to impose on the practical typology of people at war, proposed by the psychologist L. Kitaev-Smyk, four personality types of the socio-psychological model of personality that we generalized.

In recent years, a relatively new concept of tolerance has appeared in the psychological literature, in terms of meaning it is extremely close to the main subject of our discussion — the life position of the individual. G.U. Soldatova, L.A. Shaigerova, O.D. Sharova psychologically define the concept of tolerance “first of all as respect and recognition of equality, rejection of dominance and violence, recognition of the multidimensionality and diversity of human culture, norms, beliefs and refusal to reduce this diversity to uniformity or to the predominance of any one point of view. Tolerance implies a willingness to accept others as they are and to interact with them on the basis of consent. Tolerance should not be reduced to indifference, conformism, infringement of one’s own interests. First of all, it implies reciprocity and an active position of all interested parties. Tolerance is an important component of the life position of a mature person who has his own Values ​​and interests and is ready, if necessary, to defend them, but at the same time respectful of the positions and values ​​of other people. (…) Psychologists believe that an intolerant personality is characterized by the idea of ​​one’s own exclusivity, the desire to transfer responsibility to the environment, high anxiety, the need for order, the desire for strong power”49. (49 Asmolov A.G. and others. On the way to tolerant consciousness / Edited by A.G. Asmolov. M., 2000. P. 180-181).

First of all, the authors’ appeal to consciousness attracts attention, while the content of the concept of tolerance directly indicates its derivative from the category of a person’s life position, namely, from a humanistic orientation or a pattern of confident attachment, which is formed over a long period, starting from the first years of life. The conscious component of this disposition (basic social attitude) is necessarily combined with the affective one, is under its strong influence, and as a derivative of both of them, a conative (behavioral) component arises that determines the readiness to act in accordance with the dominant attitude. We believe that, considering tolerance as a human quality necessary in the conditions of modern civilization, it is necessary to talk first of all about the education of the qualities of a humanistic orientation of a person or a complex of confident attachment, the most healthy life position of a person’s development along an autonomous path, etc. According to our data; the formation of personal qualities inherent in this type is associated with the experience of early childhood, which passed in an atmosphere of trust, attention, benevolence of adults in relations between themselves and the child, with the certainty of requirements and their personal regulation, with the general stability of the family situation with high emotional saturation of communication. The formation of a humanistic orientation is also facilitated by: the presence of other children in the family, the development of their independence and mutual care, a positive example of adults capable of caring for “outsiders”, and not just about close people, the activity of children, which is supported by adults. At preschool age, these conditions are joined by: the positive semantic content of role-playing games that take place with the help and support of adults; the desire of parents to stimulate caring, responsible, independent behavior; respect for the personality of the child, which consists in taking his opinion seriously, even if it does not agree with the opinion of elders; further development of cognitive interest through reading and expanding the circle of impressions; attitudes of adults towards people outside the family; experience of mutual assistance, which does not exclude some self-limitation of one’s own interests.

Over time, personality-forming relationships are transferred to a wider social circle: significant adults outside the family, a reference group of peers, and other sources of influence that contribute to the formation of meaningful social attitudes and other dispositional structures. However, the decisive role of the family environment for a long time, if not forever, remains decisive. Over time, in the course of growing up, the possibilities of influencing the personality of an ever wider cultural context, including the achievements of world culture in the field of art, science, ethics and other areas, on the development of social attitudes and one’s own position in different life situations increase. Of course, professional psychological influence (group training, consultations, etc.) cannot be excluded from this series, but it is probably not worth exaggerating its significance.

Whatever concepts exist in the concepts of domestic and foreign psychologists, it seems quite real to single out desirable, from the point of view of education, options for a personal orientation. It is unlikely that anyone will undertake to seriously defend the advantages of the three psychologically inferior life positions of the individual over the psychologically complete humanistic position, with its altruistic and individualistic accentuations. Experimental psychological and pedagogical studies of the 70s and 90s confirm the possibility of pedagogical influence on the formation of personality orientation, which is especially intense in adolescence and youth. These studies by L.I. Bozhovich, T.E. Konnikova, M.S. Neimark, M.G. Kazakina, V.A. Karakovsky, L.I. Umansky, V.E. Chudnovsky and other psychologists and educators, in our opinion, were not least called to life by the scientific and practical activities of I.P. Ivanov and his followers. Works by I.P. Ivanova 50 (50 See: Ivanov I.P. Methods of communal education. M., 1990; Ivanov I.P. • encyclopedia of collective creative affairs. M., 1989; Ivanov I.P. Educate collectivists. M., 1982; Ivanov I.P. A link in an endless chain. Ryazan, 1994; Ivanov I.P. Encyclopedia of collective creative affairs. M., 1999) served as an impetus, which in the era of the 60s — the first retreat of the glaciers of the totalitarian system — became the beginning of a democratic movement youth and adolescents of the 60-70s, called the «communard movement». It arose as a mass experience in the implementation of the ideas and humanistic goals of democratic pedagogy. It is based on the idea of ​​a collective as a group, where the principle of relations to others as to oneself and vice versa — to oneself as to others, i.e. the controversy of «I» and «They» disappears and is replaced by the concept of «We» (A.V. Petrovsky, 1982).

A necessary condition for the formation of such a group and such relationships is, on the one hand, the psychological readiness of the individual for such relationships, on the other hand, the existence of an activity where these relationships can be realized. There is reason to believe that the humanistic orientation of the personality, acting as its psychological quality, in this case plays the role of a prerequisite for the socio-psychological phenomenon of collectivist relations, the real formation of which also implies the appropriate organization of joint activities.

The experience of such activity was created by A.S. Makarenko, who not only brought together in his system the achievements of his predecessors, Russian teachers of the late XNUMXth and early XNUMXth centuries, but also made a breakthrough into new psychological and pedagogical units.

However, the system of A.S. Makarenko could not be properly demanded by the Soviet society because of the totalitarian system of government that had formed by that time. At that time, the very concept of the collective was perverted, which in public opinion became synonymous with group conformism, strictly subordinated to the authoritarian requirements of the party and state apparatus. In his activities, A.S. Makarenko was ahead of his time by many decades.

I.P. turned directly to his experience. Ivanov, while still a schoolboy; he began to try to build the life of the school Komsomol organization according to the system of consolidated detachments, close to the ideas of the Pedagogical Poem. War 1941-1945 interrupted these attempts for a long time, but in the mid-50s, already a Komsomol worker, Ivanov returned to his ideas and organized in 1956 in Leningrad the Union of Enthusiasts (SEN) — leaders who wished to change the work in their squads through the methodology they created of collective organization of teenagers’ activities. The pinnacle of this stage in the development of the methodology was the creation in 1958 of the Commune of Young Frunze Citizens (KYUF), and a little later — the student association of the Commune named after Makarenko (KIM), which worked from 1963 to 1991. During this time, on the basis of the pioneer camp «Eaglet» was created a living laboratory of methods of collective education. In the 60s and 70s, thousands of high school students | classes after the shift held at Orlyonok, they traveled around the country, filled with an ardent desire: “This is how you should live!” Naturally, this desire gave rise to appropriate attitudes to action. In the 60s and later in the Soviet Union in different cities there were centers of using the “eagle”, “communard”, “Ivanovo” methods of organizing the life of youth groups.

Of course, in most cases it was found that school teachers, Komsomol workers, and administrators not only did not support, but even tried to hinder such undertakings. Collisions, as a rule, were of a socio-psychological nature. The fact is that a necessary prerequisite for the «communard» methodology is the relationship of openness, trust, mutual respect and concern for improving the surrounding life. The authoritarian egocentric position, characteristic of the majority of «those in power», is organically incompatible with such personal qualities. That is why attempts to implement the method of collective education “according to Ivanov” usually ran into misunderstanding, overt or covert hostility and resistance from the governing bodies under any pretext, for any reason and at all levels of administrative management. Nevertheless, the idea of ​​collective education of the younger generation turned out to be so tenacious that, after its first successes during the years of the Khrushchev thaw, it managed to become the basis of a social and pedagogical movement that exists to this day.

For forty years, the City Headquarters of Schoolchildren (AGSHSH) has been working in Arkhangelsk, raising dozens of effective leaders of the city and region and hundreds, and maybe thousands of good people.

True, such a “longevity” is not characteristic of most associations, but in 2000 our pedagogical detachment “Dozor” celebrated the twenty-seventh anniversary of its biography and, in more than a quarter of a century, achieved some success in educating humanists, and also brought back from oblivion and oblivion about two thousand soldiers and commanders of the Soviet Army, missing in 1941-1942. on the battlefields of the Great Patriotic War. Hundreds of soldiers have found a name, dozens of the dead were found by relatives. The American sociologist N. Tumarkin, who collected material for her book “Life and Death” in the early 90s, about the attitude in Russia to the past World War II, having been on a search expedition with us, said that she was calm about the future of Russia.

To this day, for thirty years, the Kotlas city headquarters of schoolchildren named after the Hero of the Soviet Union, Admiral I.P. Kuznetsova.

The youth parliament of Novodvinsk has been in existence for three years now, preparing from its deputies not only politicians and public leaders, but simply decent people.

For twenty years there has been a children’s theater in the city of Votkinsk, where the studio members follow the «eagle» laws and traditions. The leaders of this theater have never held a competitive selection, believing that every child and teenager is talented in his own way. The creative process under the slogan «Believe in yourself», communication in their environment, respect for communitarian traditions allow teenagers to take an active position in life, become leaders in their environment, develop and deepen knowledge, be enthusiastic and captivate others.

In Udmurtia (the village of Igra), in the Center for Children’s Creativity, a teenage association «Leader» was created, which has become a school for training socially initiative people on the terms of a communal team, namely:

1. relations between the members of the association are built on the basis of cooperation, mutual respect and trust;

2. the guys are included in a variety of activities;

3. each member of the association is given the opportunity to participate in matters that are significant for themselves and for society;

4. conditions have been created for the manifestation of creativity, initiative.

In Izhevsk, on February 28, 1992, the Republican Public Association “Dolg” was registered, where teenagers and youth are engaged in military search work, caring for military graves, and, if necessary, archeological security and rescue work to transfer military graves. It is planned to begin work to perpetuate the memory of the victims of political repression during the Stalinist terror. In essence, we are talking about recreating the real historical past of the country. Filling out the questionnaire, participants in the search work answer the question about the meaning of the work they are doing: “The search is needed primarily by the search engines themselves and, perhaps, some other front-line soldiers and people who are still waiting for someone from the war. Its meaning is to preserve the memory of the dead and understand what the price of human life is. Each person should have their own business. This business should not only give something to you. A person himself must spend, give spiritual strength. I found this while searching. The methodology for organizing intra-collective relations in the association «Duty» again originates in the communal organizations of the 80s.

In 2000, the tenth anniversary of the leader school-pedagogical team «Eagles of Udmurtia» was celebrated. After classes at this school, high school students go to practice — they hold communal fees in the schools of Izhevsk. Every year, the guys from the pedagogical team leave for Orlyonok, and when they arrive, they become instructors preparing a new shift. Many of these guys became students of the Faculty of Psychology and Pedagogy of the Udmurt University.

Judging by these and other similar examples, we can confidently say: the seeds of the educational methodology of the future, sown by A.S. Makarenko in the 20s, saved by I.P. Ivanov and his friends and followers in the 50s and 70s, sprouted and stand the test even in today’s very harsh times. What are the tasks of this technique today?

The work of psychologists in recent years sets the society the task of overcoming the traditional attitudes for Soviet pedagogy to teaching the only true, uncompromising knowledge and transition to the formation of a new pedagogical system based on the idea of ​​a plurality of worldview options. This allows a person who seeks to understand a culture that is not similar to him, to find common ground with it despite its “otherness”. It is about opposing the point of view on morality, achieved through knowledge, and the point of view, according to which the moral attitude towards people is the source of knowledge. For the culture of the future, the most constructive is the model of a person who understands, ready for dialogue, during which the participants, while retaining their personal core, enrich it with the experience of the interlocutor. Here, the experience of Russian culture of the XNUMXth century, the experience of L.N. Tolstoy, F.M. Dostoevsky, A.A. Ukhtomsky, in the XX century — M.M. Bakhtin, in domestic pedagogy — A.S. Makarenko and his successors represented by I.P. Ivanov and his followers — supporters of «communist» ideas of education based on the creative union of generations, mutual care, respect for people and a caring attitude towards them.

“Our goal is the happiness of people. Treat others the way you want to be treated. Leaving — look back! Behind your back, everything must remain clean — both on earth and in human relations» — these are the traditional «Laws of the Communards».

The Communard movement became the basis for a whole series of psychological studies in the 70s. It was then that Russian psychologists had the opportunity to see with their own eyes real collective relationships and their impact on the personality of a teenager. The hypothesis of L.I. Bozhovich about the development of the motivational sphere as the basis for the formation of personality. This assumption was the beginning of numerous works in the field of studying the formation of personality orientation in the course of joint activities. In particular, the author’s research allows us to conclude that the formation of a certain orientation of the personality is preceded by the formation of a similar orientation of activity motivation, which is so relevant for the subject that it can be called the leading one. Once formed, the motivational structure of the personality of a teenager in the future can somewhat change the accentuation within the same direction.

Thus, we have the right to believe that the concept of personality orientation for the work of a teacher-educator can be decisive.