Conditions for conceivability of individualization within the new paradigm of education

Abstract

This article discusses why the traditional pedagogical paradigm of education failed to consider individualization: this was contradicted by the fundamental principles of pedagogy of the XIX century (interpretation of a student as a generalized individual, rather than personality; uniform curriculum, understanding of key goal of education as digestion of knowledge, etc.); these principles were also supported by project of modernity. New paradigm of education should take into account the analogy of phylo- and ontogenesis, in the context of which the author differentiates the culture that includes sociality (phylogenetic plan), and development of the individual in education and culture (ontogenetic plan). At the same time, culture and sociality, should be viewed within the framework of semiotic, activity, and environmental approaches, a detailed characteristic of which is presented. The author distinguishes between the “before-personality” cultures (Ancient World) and “with personalities” cultures (since the Antiquity). The first one did not allow autonomous behavior; while the second, in addition to collective forms of life, initiate private forms driven by “private patterns”. From ontogenetic perspective, the author delineates the three “cultures of life”: the culture of “prama” (childhood), the culture of “personal becoming” (teenage period and adolescence), the culture of “personal enhancement” (adulthood). Three phases of personal becoming are discusses: 1) formation of intersubjective situation, 2) response of an individual to such situation, as a yet unsconsious way of its resolution; 3) comprehension, outlining, action (this phase includes learning). The author introduces an important concept of “evolution of an individual”, which implies spontaneous and conscious changes in personality of a student under the influence of school, family, media (Internet), friends, and reflection. Based on the aforementioned differences and concepts, the author gives characteristics to the sources of individualization, and describes the space it is fulfilled within.