Education in the 21st century: philosophical foundations and principles
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.57125/FP.2022.06.30.01Keywords:
philosophy of education, educational strategies, education of the future, education of the XXI century, quality of education, human dimension of education, philosophical and educational principlesAbstract
Aims: The purpose of the article is to provide a philosophical analysis of the anthropocentricity of education in the twenty-first century in the context of individual, local, and global dimensions. It is noted that education in the philosophical sense is interpreted from two key positions: existential and anthropological. The twenty-first century has become a period of actualisation of the human dimensional context of educational development. The role and status actualisation of participants in the educational space in the internal educational space and in the sociocultural environment as a whole implies the need to determine the content and format of the functioning of the education system. Methodology: To achieve the results of the study, the general scientific and philosophical methodological arsenal is used. Since the key task is to study the human aspects, the most appropriate methods are analytical and prognostic. The philosophical understanding of educational development is provided by two most common methodological approaches - dialectical and synergistic. Results: The results of the study indicate the actualisation of the following anthropocentric guidelines that are the basis of educational development in the twenty-first century: efficiency, quality, creativity, responsibility, competitiveness, and innovation. Scientific Novelty: Based on the results obtained in the course of the study, the human-dimensional elements that require a more thorough scientific and philosophical analysis are identified. If the fundamental anthropocentric educational elements have already been actually established in development strategies, the aspects of creativity, competitiveness, and prospects are updating their guidelines online, requiring constant scientific and philosophical support. Conclusion: The philosophy of education proposes the principle of anthropocentrism as a correlative element between education and other spheres of social activity. Human dimensionality determines the key characteristics of the participants in the educational process, forming the dominance of the anthropological component in this area in the twenty-first century - the era of dynamism and flexibility of the worldview paradigm.
References
Al Kandari, A. M., & Al Qattan, M. M. (2020). E-Task-Based Learning Approach to Enhancing 21st-Century Learning Outcomes. International Journal of Instruction, 13(1), 551–566. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13136a
Alam, A., Mohanty, A. (2022). Foundation for the Future of Higher Education or ‘Misplaced Optimism’? Being Human in the Age of Artificial Intelligence. In Alam, A., Mohanty, A. (Eds.), Innovations in Intelligent Computing and Communication. ICIICC 2022. Communications in Computer and Information Science, Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23233-6_2
Berkovich, I., & Eyal, O. (2020). Ethics education in leadership development: Adopting multiple ethical paradigms. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 48(2), 270–285. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143218792914
Braund, M., Reiss, M. J. (2019). The Great Divide: How the Arts Contribute to Science and Science Education. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 19, 219–236. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42330-019-00057-7
Didem Gürdür, B., Okyay, K., & Sadiq, M. S. (2022). Rethinking engineering education at the age of Industry 5.0. Journal of Industrial Information Integration, 25, 100311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jii.2021.100311
Facer, K. (2019) Storytelling in troubled times: what is the role for educators in the deep crises of the 21st century? Literacy, 53, 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/lit.12176
Giesenbauer, B., Müller-Christ, G. (2020). University 4.0: Promoting the Transformation of Higher Education Institutions toward Sustainable Development. Sustainability, 12(8), 3371. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12083371
Godfrey, P., & Lewis, B. W. (2019). Pragmatism and Pluralism: A Moral Foundation for Stakeholder Theory in the 21st Century. The Cambridge Handbook of Stakeholder Theory. Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3365160
González-Pérez, L. I., & Ramírez-Montoya, M. S. (2022). Components of Education 4.0 in 21st Century Skills Frameworks: Systematic Review. Sustainability, 14(3), 1493. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031493
Coates, A. (2021). The Prevalence of Philosophical Assumptions Described in Mixed Methods Research in Education. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 15(2), 171–189. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689820958210
Couldry, N. (2020). Recovering critique in an age of datafication. New media & society, 22(7), 1135–1151. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820912536
Hagg, G., & Gabrielsson, J. (2020). A systematic literature review of the evolution of pedagogy in entrepreneurial education research. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 26(5), 829–861. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-04-2018-0272
Hermawan, E., & Arifin, A. L. (2021). Human Resources Education and Innovation to face the demands of Business in the Digital Age. Jurnal Iqra’: Kajian Ilmu Pendidikan, 6(2), 136–147. https://doi.org/10.25217/ji.v6i2.1122
Howlett, G., & Waemusa, Z. (2019). 21st century learning skills and autonomy: students’ perceptions of mobile devices in the thai efl context. Teaching English with Technology, 19(1), 72–85. Retrieved from: https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=737375
Ismailovich, S. A. (2021). Socio-Psychological Problems of Educating an Independent-Minded, Creative Person in the Educational Process. Central Asian Journal of Literature, Philosophy and Culture, 2(12), 4–7. https://doi.org/10.47494/cajlpc.v2i12.264
Jalinus, N., Verawardina, U., Krismadinata, Nabawi, R. A., & Darma, Y. (2021). Developing Blended Learning Model in Vocational Education Based On 21st Century Integrated Learning and Industrial Revolution 4.0. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 12(8), 1239–1253. https://doi.org/10.17762/turcomat.v12i8.3035
Karpan, I., Chernikova, N., Motuz, T., Bratanich, B., & Lysokolenko, T. (2020). Conceptual Principles of Education for Sustainable Development. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 9(2), 99. https://doi.org/10.14207/ejsd.2020.v9n2p99
Kelly, L. M., & Cordeiro, M. (2020). Three principles of pragmatism for research on organizational processes. Methodological Innovations, 13(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2059799120937242
Kim, S., Raza, M., & Seidman, E. (2019). Improving 21st-century teaching skills: The key to effective 21st-century learners. Research in Comparative & International Education, 14(1), 99–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745499919829214
Korkmaz, G. & Toraman, C. (2020). Are we ready for the post-COVID-19 educational practice? An investigation into what educators think as to online learning. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science (IJTES), 4(4), 293–309. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijtes.v4i4.110
Kwaku Kankam, P. (2019). The use of paradigms in information research. Library & Information Science Research, 41(2), 85–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2019.04.003
Lavy, S. (2020). A Review of Character Strengths Interventions in Twenty-First-Century Schools: their Importance and How they can be Fostered. Applied Research Quality Life, 15, 573–596. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-018-9700-6
Lee, C. D., White, G., & Dong, D. (2021). Recommendations for Practice, Policy, and Research. Educating for Civic Reasoning and Discourse, 454, 397–413. Retrieved from: https://naeducation.wpenginepowered.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Conclusion-Recommendations.pdf
Meyer, M. W., & Norman, D. (2020). Changing Design Education for the 21st Century. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 6(1), 13–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2019.12.002
McComas, W. F., & Burgin, S. R. (2020). A Critique of “STEM” Education. Science & Education, 29, 805–829. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00138-2
Mooney Simmie, G., & Moles, J. (2020). Teachers’ Changing Subjectivities: Putting the Soul to Work for the Principle of the Market or for Facilitating Risk? Studies in Philosophy and Education, 39, 383–398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-019-09686-9
Ortiz-Revilla, J., Adúriz-Bravo, A. & Greca, I.M. (2020). A Framework for Epistemological Discussion on Integrated STEM Education. Science & Education, 29, 857–880. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00131-9
Park, Y. S., Konge, L., & Artino, A. R. (2020). The Positivism Paradigm of Research. Academic Medicine, 95, 690–694. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000003093
Petscher, Y., Cabell, S. Q., Catts, H. W., Compton, D. L., Foorman, B. R., Hart, S. A., Lonigan, C. J., Phillips, B. M., Schatschneider, C., Steacy, L. M., Terry, N. P., & Wagner, R. K. (2020). How the Science of Reading Informs 21st-Century Education. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), S267–S282. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.352
Supena, I., Darmuki, A., & Hariyadi, A. (2021). The Influence of 4C (Constructive, Critical, Creativity, Collaborative) Learning Model on Students’ Learning Outcomes. International Journal of Instruction, 14(3), 873–892. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.14351a
Susan, E. R. (2020). Divergent viewpoints about the statistical stage of a mixed method: qualitative versus quantitative orientations. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 43(1), 93–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2019.1626365
Qadir, J., Yau, K.-L. A., Ali Imran, M., & Al-Fuqaha, A. (2020). Engineering Education, Moving into 2020s: Essential Competencies for Effective 21st Century Electrical & Computer Engineers. IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (pp. 1-9), Uppsala, Sweden. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE44824.2020.9274067
Samodryn, A., Patlaichuk, O., Morgun, V., Mokliak, O., Aronova, R., & Lebedyk, L. (2023). Methodological Foundations of Noosphere Education: Comprehension of Aggravated Relevance. Revista Romaneasca Pentru Educatie Multidimensionala, 15(2), 342–357. https://doi.org/10.18662/rrem/15.2/737
Singh, B. (2019). Character education in the 21st century. Journal of Social Studies, 15(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.21831/jss.v15i1.25226
Tan, O.-S. (2003). Problem-Based Learning Innovation. Using Problems to Power Learning in the 21st Century, 162. Retrieved from: http://dspace.vnbrims.org:13000/jspui/bitstream/123456789/4228/1/Problem-based%20Learning%20Innovation%20Using%20problems%20to%20power%20learning%20in%20the%2021st%20century.pdf
Taranto, D. & Buchanan, M. (2020).Sustaining Lifelong Learning: A Self-Regulated Learning (SRL) Approach. Discourse and Communication for Sustainable Education, 11(1), 5–15. https://doi.org/10.2478/dcse-2020-0002
Teo, P. (2019). Teaching for the 21st century: A case for dialogic pedagogy. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 21, 170–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2019.03.009
Teo, T., Unwin, S., Scherer, R., & Gardiner, V. (2021). Initial teacher training for twenty-first century skills in the Fourth Industrial Revolution (IR 4.0): A scoping review. Computers & Education, 170, 104223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104223
Toha Tohara, A. J., Shuhidan, S. M., Saiful Bahry, F. D., & bin Nordin, M. N. (2021). Exploring Digital Literacy Strategies for Students with Special Educational Needs in the Digital Age. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 12(9), 3345–3358. https://doi.org/10.17762/turcomat.v12i9.5741
Trynyak, M., & Yakymchuk, O. (2021). Moral Paradoxes of Emerging Technologies in the Education Sector. Philosophy and Cosmology, 27, 163–173. Retrieved from: https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=987342
Yılmaz, A. (2021). The Effect of Technology Integration in Education on Prospective Teachers' Critical and Creative Thinking, Multidimensional 21st Century Skills and Academic Achievements. Participatory Educational Research, 8(2), 163–199. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.21.35.8.2
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 author
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
