Education of environmental responsibility of students based on integral-dialogue technology
https://doi.org/10.21453/2311-3065-2024-12-2-150-158
Abstract
The article represents the authors’ approach to the formation of environmental responsibility of students based on integral dialogue technology meeting the general trend to humanization of educational process and the raising importance of environmental awareness. The article reveals the integral potential of cultural heritage, materializing the ideas of cocreation between man and nature, and national values and traditions of the peoples of the country. The authors define the theoretical and methodological basis for the development of an integraldialogue technology for educating environmental responsibility, and reveal the substantive aspect of technology that is associated with the use of historical and cultural heritage. The essence and procedural features of integral-dialogue technology, which provides for the consistent implementation of cultural-ecological situations-immersions in the historical and cultural heritage, are considered. The sequence of such situations is built taking into account the stages of formation of environmental responsibility and includes three stages: (1) focusing on the whole: meeting; (2) focusing on the part: dialogue; (3) focusing on the whole: acting responsibly1. These stages provide a systematic consideration of the historical and cultural heritage through the categorical matrix of the whole and the part, as well as a holistic impact on all spheres of the individual’s consciousness in the process of educating environmental responsibility.
About the Authors
A. A. Loshchilova
Minin University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Loshchilova Anna Alexandrovna – CandSc (Ped.), associate professor at the Department of general and social pedagogy
603002, Nizhny Novgorod, Ulyanova str., 1
N. F. Vinokurova
Minin University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Vinokurova Natalya Fedorovna – DSc (Ped.), Professor, professor at the Department of geography, geographical and geoecological education
603002, Nizhny Novgorod, Ulyanova str., 1
References
1. Chuprikova N.I. (2009). Consciousness in the functional system of mental reflection, regulation of behavior and activity Methodology and history of psychology. Issue 1 [el. source]: https://psyjournals.ru/mip/2009/n1/43492.shtml (in Rus.).
2. Dunlap R.E., Liere Van, Kent D. (2000). Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues. No. 56 (3). P. 425-442.
3. Ermakov D.S., Suravegina I.T. (2005). Environmental education: from studying ecology to solving environmental problems. Novomoskovsk (in Rus.).
4. Gagarin A.B. (2005). Nature-oriented activity of students as a leading condition for the formation of ecological consciousness. Moscow: RUDN (in Rus.).
5. Hungerford H.R., Volk T.L. (1990). Changing Learner Behavior Through Environmental Education. Journal of Environmental Education. No. 21. P. 8-21.
6. Karopa G.N. (2000). Theory and methods of environmental education of schoolchildren. Gomel: GGU (in Rus.).
7. Karpova N.N. (2005). Formation of environmental responsibility of high school students in the course of solving environmental and applied problems: diss. thesis. Moscow (in Rus.).
8. Korennaya V.S. (2020). Representation of cultural and natural heritage in school educational programs. Bulletin of the Moscow State University of Culture and Arts. No. 5 (97). P.151-158 (in Rus.).
9. Kovalenko O.P. (2022) Pedagogical technology of formation of ecological and social responsibility of students of pedagogical University: dis. candidate of pedagogical. Tolyatti (in Rus.).
10. Kucher T.V. (1990). Environmental education of students in teaching geography: a teacher’s manual. M.: Prosveshchenie (in Rus.).
11. Likhachev D.S. (1982). Ecology of culture. Znanie – sila. No. 6. P. 22-24 (in Rus.).
12. Loschilova A.A. (2021). Integral approach to the selection and structuring of the content of landscape education. Problems of modern pedagogical education. No. 70-4. P. 229-233 (in Rus.).
13. Loshchilova A.A. (2023). The technology of educating students on the basis of historical and cultural heritage: an integral approach . Problems of modern pedagogical education. No. 80-2. P. 200-203 (in Rus.).
14. Mamedov N.M. (2010). The historical process and the concept of sustainable development. The age of globalization. No. 2 (6). P. 33-46 (in Rus.)
15. Moiseev N.N. (2010). The Teacher system and the modern environmental situation. Ecology and life. No. 2. P. 4-7 (in Rus.).
16. Mukhina V.S. (2011). Phenomenology of the development and existence of personality (Scientific school of the Russian Academy of Education, DSc, Professor V.S. Mukhina). Development of Personality. No. 1. P. 8-18 (in Rus.).
17. Psychological Panov V.I. (2022). Ecopsychological approach to the development of the psyche: stages, prerequisites, constructs. Theoretical and experimental psychology. Vol. 15. No. 3 (in Rus.)
18. Sánchez M.J., Lafuente R. (2010). Defining and measuring environmental consciousness. Rev. Int. Sociol. No. 68. P.731-755. DOI: 10.3989/ris.2008.11.03.
19. Shapinskaya E.N. (2016). The role of cultural heritage in the education and upbringing of Russian youth. Culture and education: scientific and information journal of Universities of Culture and Arts. No. 4 (23). P. 53-61 (in Rus.)
20. Silchenkova T.N. (2004). Cultural and historical heritage and natural resources in the professional education of tourism managers (on the example of the Smolensk region). Vyazma: MGIU (in Rus.)
21. Smirnova O.V. (2014). Methodological foundations of the study of natural and cultural heritage in school geoecological education in the context of sustainable development. Vestnik of Minin University. No. 2 (in Rus.)
22. Suravegina I.T. (1986). Theory and practice of forming a responsible attitude of schoolchildren to nature in the process of teaching biology: diss. thesis. Moscow (in Rus.)
23. Tilikidou I., Zotos Y. (1999). Ecological consumer behaviour: review and suggestions for future research. Medit. Vol 10. № 1. P. 14-21.
24. Vedenin Y.A., Kuleshova M.E., eds (2004). A cultural landscape is an object of heritage. Moscow; St. Petersburg (in Rus.).
25. Vedenin Yu.A. (2000). Formation of a new cultural ecological approach to heritage preservation (in the context of the history of the creation of the Russian Institute of Cultural and Natural Heritage). In: Ecology of culture: almanac of the Heritage Institute “Territory”. Moscow: Rossijskij Institut kul’turnogo i prirodnogo naslediya. P. 25-30 (in Rus.).
26. Vinokurova N.F. (2021). The coevolutionary paradigm of environmental education for sustainable development: methodological foundations. Scientific Notes of the Trans-Baikal State University. 2021. Vol. 16. No. 4. P. 65-74 (in Rus.).
27. Vinokurova, N.F., Loschilova A.A. (2023). Methodology and technology of landscape education of future teachers based on cultural heritage. Lifelong education: The 21st century. No. 2 (42). P. 2-19 (in Rus.).
28. Wilbur K. (2004). Integral Psychology: Consciousness, Spirit, Psychology, Therapy. Moscow (in Rus.)
29. Yasvin V.A. (2000). Psychology of attitude towards nature. Moscow: Znanie (in Rus.).
30. Zakhlebny A.N. (1981). School and problems of nature protection: The content of environmental education. M.: Pedagogika (in Rus.).
31. Zverev I.D., Suravegina I.T. (1998). The attitude of schoolchildren to nature. Moscow: Pedagogika (in Rus.).
Review
For citations:
Loshchilova A.A., Vinokurova N.F. Education of environmental responsibility of students based on integral-dialogue technology. Communicology. 2024;12(2):150-158. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21453/2311-3065-2024-12-2-150-158
Views:
167
Email this article 
