Promotion of Social Values Among Young People as a Pedagogical Ideology (a Case Study of Russia and Kazakhstan)

At the same time, it is important to decide which further direction to take: either along the path of a modern civilized society with the preservation of national culture, or along the path of developing national consciousness, rejecting everything new in favor of the original. We believe that the first option is more appropriate. One should start their journey with a conceptual, holistic understanding of program ideas. If we approach it from these positions, then the essence of the Program can be stated in three dimensions: continuity, consistency, and complexity.

The concept of ideology is usually identified with politics, with the political form of its existence. But today, both in science and in social practice, there is a clear tendency to overcome this identification. Without subjecting the presence of politics in the field of education to polemics, and recognizing the interest of political power in the implementation of pedagogical goals, «projects» and ideas, following Letyagin L. I., we tend to consider pedagogical ideology «as a system of views, ideas, values, meanings of a certain social group as `ultimate', `final' (Letyagin, 2014). At the same time, let us note that in pedagogy, not everything depends on ideology. But it is extremely important for us to recognize that any ideology develops around values.

Taking into account the above definitions of social and pedagogical values, by «pedagogical ide- ology» we mean a set of these proposed for implementation and reproduction. At the same time, we agree that pedagogical values cover not only the content and goals of education, but also the methods, means and technologies of their implementation (Pantyukhin, 2014). In this aspect, the values of the «Rukhani Zhangyru» national program in their essence fully correspond to the social and pedagogical values of the modern Kazakh community.

Therefore, there are full grounds to consider the promotion of value attitudes in the educational environment, including the university environment, as a pedagogical ideology.

In particular, in the field of higher education, the pedagogical ideology is projected, first of all, into the ideology of high qualifications, since in modern conditions their absence guarantees a low social status.

«For many, especially those who perform unskilled or low-skilled work, this work is hard, stupefyingly boring, tedious, monotonous and leads to degradation» (Gouldner, 2003). Self-improvement and self-realization in these conditions are unlikely to happen.

Methodology

To achieve the goal of our research, we used the method of a sociological survey, as well as interviews and survey of participants to clarify individual questions and strengthen conclusions.

The conducted online survey was aimed at identifying the degree of involvement of students and teachers of a number of Kazakh universities in the values that were identified as the main guidelines for the modernization of public consciousness. The survey was conducted using the anonymous questionnaire method, which guarantees the confidentiality of the responses. Before the Google form of this survey was launched, the questionnaire was tested in one of the universities in order to check the validity and optimality of the volume of questions, the correctness and brevity of their wording. Respondents were given the opportunity to choose the language of the questionnaire: Kazakh and Russian.

Therefore, the survey allows to compare the responses of Kazakh- and Russian-speaking respondents.

Here, one feature should be also noted: Kazakh language is usually chosen by Kazakhs in Kazakhstan, while Russian language is chosen by representatives of all other Kazakhstani ethnic groups (there are more than 130), including Kazakhs, since there are many Russian-speaking people among them.

Our research does not pursue the direct goal of studying the ethnic aspects of the problem under consideration, but the results of the survey can be considered in terms of ethnopedagogy and ethnopsychology. In other words, we see this as promising for our research, which is important for the development of certain scientific areas.

In addition, the survey was organized in such a way that we had an opportunity to draw another comparative line: the responses of students and the responses of teachers.

This gives a more detailed picture for a verified generalization of the information received.

Compiling the questionnaire, methodological errors were eliminated as much as possible, so there are grounds to say that the information received will not be distorted.

The questions were compiled in such a way as not to complicate the technological procedures for collecting and processing the flow of information.

Eight questions of the questionnaire out of 9 were of closed type, while one question was aimed at ranking:

1. In your opinion, is education the main factor of your success?

2. Who do you consider yourself in the first place?

3. Rank the factors of personal competitiveness from 1 to 6 (where 1 is the minimum important factor, and 6 is the most important factor)

4. «Are the following aspirations typical for you?»

5. Are you familiar with the Program Article of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan «Looking to the future: Modernization of public consciousness»?

6. Are you aware of the projects implemented within the framework of the «Rukhani Zhangyru» program?

7. Do you think that knowledge of these projects contributes to changing the public consciousness of Kazakhstanis?

8. Do you think that the state policy conducted in Kazakhstan contributes to the formation of interethnic harmony and tolerance of young people?

9. In your opinion, which of the above factors can contribute to the progressive development of Kazakhstan in the near future?

When launching the online survey, the sample population was representative due to the fact that the respondents included students and teaching staff of four Kazakh universities from three regions: northern, western and central Kazakhstan, as well as two universities of the Russian Federation (one federal and one private).

Results and discussion

The number of respondents was distributed as follows (Table 1):

Table 1. Information about respondents

At the same time, more than half of the survey participants were Russian-speaking respondents (54.7 %), and the group of respondents from among students (89.0 %) also dominates: teachers in the survey were less active (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1. Information about Kazakhstani respondents (in Russian) in proportion

Fig. 2. Percentage of Kazakhstani respondents' answers to the question «Do you think education is the main factor of your success?»

Fig. 2.1. Answers of Russian respondents to the question «Do you think education is the main factor of your success?» (in %)

The study on the Russian perspective involved respondents studying at the second stage of higher education - the master's level. The overwhelming majority of respondents major in the humanities and belong to various age categories from young people (22-35 years old) to elderly people (49-56 years old). Overall, 77 respondents from Russia took part in the Google survey. The sample is considered representative.

The first question of the questionnaire was introductory and was aimed at identifying the respondents' attitude to higher education. If we take into account that all the survey participants are studying at universities, then some confusion is appropriate, since 18.6 % of respondents do not consider higher education as the main factor of their success in life (Fig. 2).

At the same time, the teachers' responses were quite predictable: the share of teaching staff who answered this question positively is higher than in the same group of respondents from among students (91.9 %:80.2 % = 0.9:0.8).

It should be noted that, judging by the answers to this question, a more focused study of the situation where higher education in the system of personal values is more demonstrated by Kazakh-speaking respondents (85.9 %:76.5 %) is required.

A comparative analysis of the answers of Russian respondents shows a significant difference, since only slightly more than half of the respondents (58.4 %) associate their success with having a higher education diploma, while the share of negative answers to this question was 26 % (Fig. 2.1).

Due to the discovered difference, we conducted an express interview with teachers and scientists who did not raise much concern, explaining this by the fact that today many of the respondents have undergone various advanced training and retraining courses, expanding the range of soft competencies formed in the framework of formal education.

The need for lifelong learning in the Life Long Learning paradigm indicates that traditional higher education is experiencing a crisis at the present stage of society's development and is entering competition for consumers of high-quality educational content with non-formal and informal education provided by various stakeholders.

Respondents who found it difficult to answer the given question are still pondering on its exclusivity in order to build successful horizons for the future.

In our opinion, it is necessary to correct the question asked in order to clarify what kind of higher education we are talking about: the second, postgraduate (master's degree, in particular), postgraduate (advanced training) or about higher education as the only (not just basic) factor of success.

In general, we can talk about a general tendency of a decrease in demand for only a higher education diploma due to its non-recognition as the only condition for achieving success. It can be assumed that the existential meaning of success for university representatives is associated with deeper components of the success of a modern person (family, friends, work, money, love, leisure).

The next question of the questionnaire was aimed at identifying the degree of social selfidentification of university students and teachers, which in many respects is a key position for the development of public consciousness of Kazakhstanis and determines their commitment to national values.

Here, we interpret the picture as favorable, since the majority of respondents (61.0 %) consider themselves a citizen of Kazakhstan (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3. Percentage of Kazakhstani respondents' answers to the question «Who do you consider yourself in the first place?»

Fig. 3.1. Percentage of Kazakhstani respondents' answers to the question «Who do you consider yourself in the first place?» (comparative aspect: teachers/students, in particular

The possibility of choosing several or additional answers (9.3 % of respondents call themselves mainly a person, a free person, an individuals human) allows us to judge the prevalence of civil self-identification in the minds of students and university teachers, the perception of Kazakhstan as a common home for representatives of various faiths and more than a hundred Kazakh ethnic groups.

At the same time, Russian-speaking respondents show less commitment to their ethnic roots (5.4 %:10.8 %).

Kazakh-speaking respondents, as it turned out during the interview (in addition to the survey, we conducted an interview on this issue, since the phenomenon of personal identity itself, according to experts in the field of the fourth industrial revolution (Schwab, 2016), is undergoing a certain transformation in the modern world), there is a variety of identities: many representatives of this group of respondents, perceiving their homeland as a common home for all citizens of Kazakhstan, also choose their ethnic group as a reference.

Regarding the fact that a fifth of the respondents (20.0 %) consider themselves to be citizens of the world: this question was also asked during the interview. The opinions of the interview participants coincided in terms of what they mean by this concept.

They are unanimous in the opinion that «a citizen of the world is the one who, first of all, sees himself not as a representative of any state, tribe or people, but as a representative of the human race, and the one who is ready to act on the basis of these beliefs to find solutions to the most complex world problems (Hugh Evans..., 2016).

In essence, these are global problems, and they can only be solved with the participation of the world's citizens, who demand global solutions from their leaders» (On the approval of the Roadmap.).

Based on this, this indicator (20.0 %) can be interpreted as a positive self-identification. As a positive trend, we can also note the indicator of respondents' adherence to a certain religious group, since their share tends to a minimum of 1.4 %. In the context of a comparative analysis of the responses of teachers and students, data on the self-identification of respondents with world citizens showed that the older generation of Kazakhstanis is more conservative and pragmatic about the possibilities of solving problems at the global level (Fig. 3.1)

University teachers identify themselves as citizens of Kazakhstan to a greater extent than students (71.5 %:59.8 %), but the ethnic identity is demonstrated by an almost equal share of teaching staff and students (8.1 %:8.2 %).

In general, understanding selfidentification as a stable identification with any (large or small) social group or community, acceptance of its goals and value system, awareness of oneself as a member of this group or community (The meaning of the word «self- identification».), we believe that the respondents' answers to this question of the questionnaire show a positive trend for Kazakhstan, when one of the values of the modernization of public consciousness is the preservation of national identity.

The essence of this value is that «the concept of spiritual modernization implies changes in the national consciousness. There are two points here. First, it is a change in the national consciousness.

Second, it is the preservation of the inner core of the national «self» while changing some of its features» (Nazarbayev, N.A., 2017). In other words, the modernization of public consciousness, or spiritual revival, carried out in Kazakhstan should not be considered as a transition from a national model of development to a single, universal one. The fact is that different regions and countries, as practice shows, have worked out their own development models, and national roots and national spirit are the determining factors.

Regarding the answers of the Russian respondents, it can be noted that only one third of the respondents consider themselves to be citizens of Russia. This actualizes the need for deeper research into the national and civic identities of students studying at Russian universities.

A quarter of the respondents consider themselves to be citizens of the world, which may indicate a new perception of borders, openness of education in the context of digital transformation, and globalization of the information space in the minds of this group of respondents.

The factor that unites social groups regardless their ethnicity is adherence to religion. Almost a quarter of the respondents showed themselves as representatives of a particular religion. This testifies to the presence of religious preferences and manifestations of faith in society.

The indicator of perceiving oneself as a representative of one's nationality was revealed in a small part of the respondents, only 16 %. This is a rather low indicator of ethnic identification, which indirectly correlates with the

results of previous sociological studies among students, which showed the predominance of Russian identity over national identity in the minds of young people.

Along with this, only 1 % of the respondents perceive themselves as just a person, which indicates the practical absence of this category in self-awareness (Fig. 3.2).

Fig. 3.2. Answers of Russian respondents to the question «Who do you consider yourself in the first place? (one choice)»

The next question of the questionnaire was related to the understanding of the competitiveness of an individual and was aimed at identifying the most important, in the opinion of respondents, qualities of such a person. The study of a number of scientific works, the analysis of the definitions that were given by researchers to this concept, allowed us to identify the following qualities necessary for the competitiveness of the individual:

1) timely achievement of the final result;

2) sociability, ability to cooperate;

3) stress resistance, ability to overcome difficulties;

4) working capacity, ability to professional growth;

5) knowledge of foreign languages;

6) computer literacy.

We identify the first four qualities basing on the unanimous opinion of experts in the field of becoming a competitive personality, where the most significant are orientation to a socially significant result of activity and responsibility for it; conscious focus of the individual on a certain result, the ability to set clear goals and follow them in the activity; awareness and value attitude to the social significance of the result of the activity, as well as ensuring its achievement on their own.

The main mechanism for achieving this goal, according to the researchers, is communication. Therefore, for the competitiveness of a person, the ability to act taking into account the interests, goals, and characteristics of those with whom they interact is very important. Therefore, we have identified such qualities as sociability and the ability to cooperate.

Stress tolerance, the ability to overcome difficulties, in our opinion, are the guarantee of successful adaptation of a person in the «no comfort» zones, which are characteristic of the modern world of instability, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity.

Moreover, for a successful and adequate competition, a person, of course, needs to develop such qualities as efficiency and the ability to advance professional growth.

We firmly believe that the last two qualities are necessary for the formation of a competitive personality in the context of the general trends in the development of modern Kazakh society. Almost none of the available scientific sources mention these qualities directly, unambiguously and so specifically, but for the successful implementation of professional activities in the realities of the Kazakh labor market, they are of lasting importance.

Before testing the questionnaire that we developed, this question assumed the choice of other qualities that indirectly affect the competitiveness of a person. But the analysis of the results of the approbation confirmed us in the opinion that it will be enough to indicate the six above-mentioned factors of personal competitiveness in the answers to this question.

Therefore, we present an analysis of the answers to the question «Rank the factors of personal competitiveness from 1 to 6 (where 1 is the least important factor, and 6 is the most important factor)». In Figures 4 and 4.1, these factors are conventionally indicated by numbers: I-efficiency, ability to professional growth; II-sociability, ability to cooperate; III-stress resistance, ability to overcome difficulties; IV-timely achievement of the final result; V-knowledge of foreign languages; VI-computer literacy.

According to respondents, the most important factors of personal competitiveness (Fig. 4) are stress resistance, the ability to overcome difficulties (44.7 % of respondents gave the maximum six points to this factor) and computer literacy (44.0 %). At the same time, Russian-speaking respondents (45.6 %) emphasize such factors as sociability and the ability to cooperate. The smallest share of respondents (31.1 %) choose such a factor as knowledge of foreign languages.

Fig. 4. Percentage of Kazakhstani respondents' answers to the question «Rank the factors of personal competitiveness from 1 to 6 by the degree of importance for you»

A slightly different picture is formed when comparing the responses of students and teachers (Fig. 4.1). Here, the largest share of respondents gave the maximum six points to such factors as efficiency and ability to professional growth (62.4 % of teaching staff) and sociability, ability to cooperate (61.3 % of teaching staff). Also important for the older generation are stress tolerance, the ability to overcome difficulties (59.7 % teaching staff) and computer literacy (57.5 % of teaching staff). Respondents from among students prefer stress resistance and ability to overcome difficulties in the list of competitiveness factors (42.9 %).

Fig. 4.1. Percentage of Kazakhstani respondents' answers to the question «Rank the factors of personal competitiveness from 1 to 6 by the degree of importance for you»

It should be noted here that the factors of personal competitiveness chosen by the respondents meet the requirements of the time, for which «soft» skills are important. Sometimes they are more important than hard (or `professional' in our interpretation) skills (Zhetpisbayeva et al., 2020). It is quite puzzling that among the factors of human competitiveness that we have indicated, knowledge of a foreign language does not occupy top places in the ranking. Based on the analysis of the answers to this question, we can recommend that the leadership of Kazakhstan's universities pay attention to the need to strengthen measures to improve students' and teachers' computer literacy, as well as the formation of their stress resistance and ability to work in a team, more precisely take into account the opinion of their students and teachers when organizing advanced training courses for teaching staff and building the educational trajectory of students.

The results of the study of a group of experts, among which the course of distance learning of computer science teachers draws attention, are crucial in this aspect. The significance of this study lies in the fact that the course proposed by the authors can be fully applied in the educational process of universities, thereby contributing to the development of computer literacy of students (Mukasheva et al., 2020), which is considered by many to be one of the important factors of the competitiveness of modern people.

All these factors of competitiveness fully reveal the essence of the concept of «flexible skills», which together with professional ones make up the so-called «soft and hard skills». In particular, for a single-profile pedagogical university, this opens up prospects for the development and implementation of such minor programs as «Mediation in Education», «Management in Education», «Information Technologies in Education», «Art Technologies in Education», «Business and Entrepreneurship in Education», etc. This list of additional programs can be continued, taking into account the specifics of a particular (other than pedagogical) direction of training specialists.

These recommendations, taking into account the answers to the following question, can make their own adjustments not only in innovative, but also in traditional (classical) academic disciplines of educational programs. In particular, to develop and support such aspirations of students as achieving their goals taking into account their capabilities (92.0 %) and caring for nature and ecology (91.7 %).

These two aspirations were the most characteristic of our respondents (Fig. 5). However, in our opinion, we should also pay attention to the formation of such qualities as efforts to lead a healthy lifestyle (85.9 %) and to be successful in school (83.6 %).

At the same time, quite an alarming point is associated with a noticeable difference in the indicators of Kazakh-speaking and Russianspeaking respondents: the low aspiration for success in learning among the latter (78.6 %). We are sure that this indicator needs more indepth study, taking into account the ethno- psychological aspects of education in Kazakh universities.

Note that this quality was also demonstrated by the lowest proportion (39.2 %) of respondents from among university teachers (Fig. 5.1).

There is a certain pattern in this: higher motivation in education for those students whose teachers themselves know how to learn and study. This is the power of personal example - students, even as students, imitate their teachers.

It should also be noted that these data correlate with the general picture of professional development of teachers of Kazakhstani universities. Additional interviews with the heads of the institutes (centers) of advanced training of the four universities where this survey was conducted, indicate a formal approach of the majority of students from among the teaching staff to the ongoing advanced training courses: they need certificates only to pass the next certification, which is usually held once every five years. We believe that this aspect of our research should be the subject of special attention of the heads of higher educational institutions.

Fig. 5. Percentage of Kazakhstani respondents' answers to the question «Are the following aspirations typical for you?»

Notes to the figure: I. I try to achieve my goals based on my capabilities; II. I Lead a healthy Lifestyle; III. I try to be successful in my studies; IV. I take care of nature, ecology

Analyzing the answers of Russian respondents, we can conclude that the overwhelming majority of respondents strive to treat nature and ecology with care, which can be regarded as a positive component of the social portrait of Russians. One can note the purposefulness of the respondents, who, when achieving goals, take into account their capabilities as a positive situation as well.

Only half of the respondents adhere to a healthy lifestyle, which is a disappointing indicator. It indicates a low degree of awareness of the need to monitor one's physical health. An alarming situation is developing in the motivation of education, since half of the respondents who are representatives of universities do not particularly strive for academic success. However, these answers correlate with the answers to the question «Is higher education the main factor of your success?» If the first five questions of the questionnaire are asked in the general context of the modernization of public consciousness, then the following questions are directly related to the «Rukhani Zhangyru» program. As we have already noted, the program article of N.Nazarbayev identified the main vectors of development that are strategically important for the modern Kazakh community. Therefore, during the survey, it was absolutely natural to clarify how well our respondents are aware of this article. Despite the fourth year of implementation of «Rukhani Zhangyru» national program (starting from 2017), with the materials of the article of the First President of Kazakhstan called «Looking to the future: modernization of public con- sciousness», among the respondents were those who were not familiar with this article (Fig. 6), not only among students (15.5 %), but also among teachers (11.8 %) of universities.

Fig. 5.2. Answers of Russian respondents to the question «Are the following aspirations typical for you?» (in %)

Note that in the comparative aspect, the responses of Kazakh- and Russian-speaking respondents do not have a significant difference (Fig. 6.1).

Fig. 6. Percentage of Kazakhstani respondents' answers to the question «Are you familiar with the Program article of the First President of the Republic of Kazakhstan «Looking to the future: modernization of public consciousness»?»

Fig. 6.1. Percentage of Kazakhstani respondents' answers to the question «Are you familiar with the Program article of the First President of the Republic of Kazakhstan «Looking to the future: modernization of public consciousness»?»

If we take into account that a third of the respondents admit to ignorance of the content of this program article, then the university management is strongly recommended to step up work to promote the values of spiritual modernization of the Kazakh community. This is important for the further socio-economic and cultural development of the country as a whole. We once again emphasize the strategic importance of this program for the successful social adaptation of Kazakhstanis to the conditions of an extremely volatile world full of uncertainty, instability and impermanence.

Regarding the basic projects of this program, the survey results revealed the greatest interest of respondents to «Transition of the Kazakh language to the Latin alphabet» (52.6 %) and «100 new Faces of Kazakhstan» (50.8 %) projects, of the least interest (36.8 %) is «Tugan Zher» project, and it is the least popular among Kazakh-speaking respondents (Fig. 7). In the comparative aspect, the answers to this question show that teachers are more aware of the projects implemented within the framework of the «Rukhani Zhangyru » program than students (Fig. 7.1).

This information gives real chances to use the potential of the teaching staff for more active promotion of the values of «Rukhani Zhan- gyru» in the university environment, not only among young people, but also among adult representatives of the university community.

Fig. 7. Percentage of Kazakhstani respondents' answers to the question «Are you aware of the projects implemented within the framework of the «Rukhani Zhangyru» program?»

Notes to the drawing: I. «Transition of the Kazakh language to the Latin alphabet»; II. «New humanitarian knowledge. 100 new textbooks in the Kazakh language»; III. «Tugan Zher» Program; IV. «Spiritual shrines of Kazakhstan» or «Sacred geography of Kazakhstan»; V. «Modern Kazakh culture in the global world»; VI. «100 new faces of Kazakhstan»

Fig. 7.1. Percentage of Kazakhstani respondents' answers to the question «Are you aware of the projects implemented within the framework of the «Rukhani Zhangyru» program?»

Notes to the drawing: I. «Transition of the Kazakh language to the Latin alphabet»; II. «New humanitarian knowledge. 100 new textbooks in the Kazakh language»; III. «Tugan Zher» Program; IV. «Spiritual shrines of Kazakhstan» or «Sacred geography of Kazakhstan»; V. «Modern Kazakh culture in the global world»; VI. «100 new faces of Kazakhstan»

A more positive picture can be observed when analyzing the respondents' opinions about the effectiveness of the basic projects, their ability to influence the public consciousness. Here, the majority of respondents (69.0 %) were optimistic, regardless of the chosen language of the questionnaire (Fig. 8).

Fig. 8. Percentage of Kazakhstani respondents' answers to the question «Do you think that knowledge of these projects contributes to changing the public consciousness of Kazakhstanis?»

Let us make a small remark: speaking about the language of the respondents, we once again clarify that the Kazakh language of the questionnaire is chosen in Kazakhstan, as a rule, by Kazakhs, while the Russian language is chosen by representatives of all Kazakhstani ethnic groups (there are more than 130 of them), including Kazakhs (there are many Russian-speaking representatives among modern Kazakhs). That is why any sociological survey conducted in two languages is of scientific interest in terms of ethnopsychology, ethnopedagogy and ethnosociology.

However, the ethnic aspects of the modernization of the public consciousness of modern Kazakhstanis are not the subject of this study. It should be noted as a positive trend that both students and university teachers showed equal optimism in this issue (Fig. 8.1). Nevertheless, a certain categorical attitude of teachers is also of interest to our research, since among them a very small proportion are doubters (5.9 %). We believe that this is due to the fact that not all teachers can judge the very essence of the «Rukhani Zhangyru» program (see Fig. 6 above).

In contrast to the previous question, the respondents' opinions on the impact of the state policy implemented in Kazakhstan on the formation of interethnic harmony and tolerance of young people are less optimistic (Fig. 9), as only half of the respondents (46.7 %) answered in the affirmative, and the Russian-speaking respondents were more positive (50.6 %).

Fig. 8.1. Percentage of Kazakhstani respondents' answers to the question «Do you think that knowledge of these projects contributes to changing the public consciousness of Kazakhstanis?»

As a positive trend in this question, we estimate the low share of negative categoricity in the responses of respondents (6.2 %).

Here, a third, or 27.7 %, of respondents have difficulties in their answers, which once again emphasizes the non-categorical nature of the assessment of state policy in the field of interethnic harmony. In the comparative aspect, teachers are more optimistic about this issue (Fig. 9.1), which indicates that universities have the pedagogical potential to activate the processes of spiritual revival of the Kazakh community.

Russians were asked a similar question. A third of Russian respondents believe that the state policy pursued in Russia contributes to the formation of interethnic harmony and tolerance of young people, another third note the insignificance of the government's actions in carrying out this policy.

Fig. 9. Percentage of Kazakhstani respondents' answers to the question «Do you think that the state policy implemented in Kazakhstan contributes to the formation of interethnic harmony and tolerance of young people?»

Fig. 9.1. Percentage of Kazakhstani respondents' answers to the question «Do you think that the state policy implemented in Kazakhstan contributes to the formation of interethnic harmony and tolerance of young people?»

At the same time, the share of those who find it difficult to answer this question and the share of respondents who give a negative assessment of the processes of forming interethnic harmony and tolerance of young people can be assessed as an alarming trend. We also associate the latter result with low political literacy and complete indifference of a number of respondents to interethnic problems in society (Fig. 9.2).

Fig. 9.2. Answers of Russian respondents to the question «Do you think the current state policy in Russia contributes to the formation of interethnic harmony and tolerance of young people?»

The answers to the last question of the questionnaire were aimed at ranking the factors that, in the opinion of our respondents, can contribute to the progressive development of their countries in the near future.

Nine factors were proposed as a choice, among which the most effective, according to Russian respondents, are: 1) improving the quality of education and healthcare, 2) developing industry and infrastructure, 3) upbringing a free personality. An important factor in the progressive development of Russia and Siberia, first of all, according to the respondents, is the development of science and technology (28.6 %), civil society (26 %), and democratic institutions (20.8 %).

16.9 % of respondents believe that it is necessary to eliminate corruption for the sake of the development of Russia.

As a positive trend, one can note the low share of respondents who prefer protest movements for the development of the country. For centuries Siberia has been a multinational family for many peoples, but the share of respondents who prefer the activities of opposition parties as a factor in Russia's development is somewhat alarming (Fig. 10).

Answers of Kazakhstani respondents were ranked in descending order of importance and are shown in the following table.

Thus, the respondents consider the elimination of corruption as a factor of primary importance in the progressive development of Kazakhstan. This fact confirms the loyalty of the anti-corruption policy pursued in Kazakhstan (National report on anti-corruption policy...).