Dialogue of cultures as a sense-technology of forming of attitudes of tolerant consciousness and behaviour of university students

Ðàçìåùåíî íà http://www.allbest.ru/

Ðàçìåùåíî íà http://www.allbest.ru/

Dialogue of cultures as a sense-technology of forming of attitudes of tolerant consciousness and behaviour of university students

Abakumova I.V., Kagermazova L.T., Savin V.A.

The opportunities of use of achievements of the new psychological-pedagogical area of “Sense pedagogics” in the real practice of forming of attitudes of tolerant consciousness of students are considered in the paper. In this context tolerance is analyzed as a component of sense-value sphere of a developing personality that enables to analyze its dynamic features, to consider it as a component of sense regulation and self-regulation of the person. The context of the last two concepts makes the crossing of concepts of life-sense strategies and psychology of tolerance especially urgent field of knowledge. Dialogue of cultures as a way of knowledge and respect for others, as a way to mutual spiritual enrichment and, the main thing, as a sense-technology of forming of tolerant behaviour of students is to promote the approvement of ideals and practice of tolerance.

Keywords: sense pedagogics, sense-creation, sense-value sphere of a person, sensevalue attitudes, technologies of sense translation, ethnocultural competence, dialogue of cultures.

culture dialogue sense technology

The modern humanistic educational paradigm states a problem of disclosing of meaning of a person's being in the world through understanding of character and ways of his/her interaction in surrounding environment. Modern tendencies of the society development are mixing of national cultures, multilinguism, religious pluralism and tending to join the European Union. The Bologna Declaration requires a special attention to the problem of dialogue of cultures as to means of forming of tolerant consciousness of university students.

At the same time, steps on the way to globalization of the modern world demand a special attitude and protection of cultural-educational interests of nationalities. The modern integrative process, which takes place in our country, demands a revision of social-cultural stereotypes, training of tolerance, ethnoempathy, respect for traditions and a spiritual heritage of each ethnoculture, comprehension of the value of a person as a certain culture bearer.

Dialogue of cultures as a way of knowledge and respect for others, as a way to mutual spiritual enrichment is to promote the approvement of ideals and practice of tolerance. In this connection the principle of dialogue of cultures can be considered as one of basic principles of modern education.

The dialogue demands from the society and from the person an attitude to come in contact; forming tolerance as one of the leading personal features which excludes a estructive conflictness of the person in a situation connected to other social norms; forming of readiness to trust, to make a compromise.

The new age in an educational policy has been marked with the promotion of the idea of personal development as the basic priority in education. humanization of education, its orientation to the person and to his/her development have been recognized as the most urgent tendencies for the modern society.

The analysis of publications shows that the research of psychological aspects of tolerance and its forming fails to keep up with the research of its philosophical, ethic and social aspects which, in turn, are also growing stronger at the moment. Formation and development of psychology of tolerance have been reflected in works of such scientists of our country as: V.A. Tishkov, E.M. Adzhieva, E.A. Ashimkhina, O.A. griva, N.A. Astashova, A.g. Asmolov, etc. Forming tolerance of students in polyethnic regions, where the level of interethnic tension is higher, has been studied by g.g. Abdulkarimov, V.N. gurov, O.B. Skryabina, V.A. Tishkov, O.V. Tsirul, etc. Forming of tolerant consciousness of students has been considered by g.V. Bezyuleva, P.F. Komogorov, Å.V. Rybak. Training of tolerance in the higher professional education system has been examined by N.D. Ashirbagina, V.P. Komarov, Z.S. Londyreva, etc. Pedagogical tolerance has been studied by A.V. Korzhuev, N.J. Kudzieva, N.V. Kukushkin, etc. The psychological-pedagogical theories considering sense-personal features of pupils as a pedagogical factor have been examined by I.V. Abakumova, A.g. Asmolov, E.V. Klochko, V.E. Milman, and E.Yu. Patyaeva. And the theories revealing mechanisms of educational technologies which are focused on initiation of sense-creation have been considered by I.V. Abakumova, A.K. Belousova, I.A. Vasiliev, P.N. Ermakov, D.A. Leontiev, and V.T. Fomenko.

Conditions of actualizing and strengthening of tolerance in interpersonal relations, first of all, rely on the differentiation of valuable structure and valuable process made by K. Rogers (Rogers, Freiberg, 2002). The valuable structure represents the established, to some extent “solidified”, values and senses. The valuable process is alive, fluid, continuous forming of values, their designing within the realizing life experience. Besides, values and senses are considered as the basis for realization of a personal choice (Dobroshtan, 1999). hence, their hierarchy and content directly define the process of self-determination which kernel makes the act of the choice that, in its turn, determines the specificity of development.

In this connection tolerance is comprehended as the most important way of coexistence and collective activity in the polycultural educational environment which is a projection of the modern diverse world. The strategic purpose of education is educating of the personality with the non-stereotyped, non-ideologized thinking, who is capable for constructive thinking and acting in various situations of intercultural communication. Such a person is capable to admit the plurality of the truths and value of their content, to respect a position of another, to have tolerance, morality, that is to have those qualities of a tolerant person which are necessary for successful behavioural realization of the basic idea of polycultural education - “to study to be and to study to live together” [6, p. 87].

The student's age, according E.A. Pugacheva's statement, is a special period of developing tolerant characteristics of a person and the most sensitive period of moral maturing during which there is a further developing of self-consciousness and world outlook of the trainee, self-appraisal and self-concept. The age of 18-20 is a period of the most active development of the moral feelings, which are characterized by a heightened interest in moral problems (M.I. Dyachenko, A.V. Peterovsky). But at the same time the student's age is a period of the “youthful maximalism”, when the feeling of one's own exclusiveness, excessive self-confidence, aspiration for self-affirmation of one's own independence develop, the heightened interest in one's own personality is shown. Tolerance, as a personal quality of the person who is ready and capable to accept others, as they are, and productively cooperate with them on the basis of the consent, gets under the conditions of the polycultural educational environment special significance: sense-value features [9, p. 112].

In psychological-pedagogical researches the problem of sense-personal values as important constituents of the person and the society has always taken one of the leading places. V.N. Myasishchev has designated the values of the subject as a realizing within the subject-objective interaction plan of personal attitudes. The attitude indicates subjectivity, partiality of the person, selectivity of preference of one set of values to others. Among the values accepted in the society each individual chooses the most important for him/herself and is guided by them [15, p. 76].

The sense-value attitude is a subjective reflection of the objective reality reflecting diverse relations of the person with the world, as one of the attributes of socio-cultural existence of the person in which the person him/herself is a carrier of the valuable attitude to the world.

The sense-personal sphere of each person is strictly individual, and it determines a life-sense strategy. The life-sense strategy is a system of personal meanings of the individual which allows him/her to optimize or minimize the activity in mutual relations with the objective reality and is shown in the attitude to the purpose, process, result of activity, and also to the life and to oneself. The sense-creating orientation is formed on the basis of the life experience which is individual for each person and includes both mental and practical actions, experienced by the person, and personal meanings, attitudes, stereotypes. The context of the last two concepts makes crossing of the concepts of life-sense strategies and psychology of tolerance especially urgent field of knowledge. Dialogue of cultures as a way of knowledge and respect of others, as a way to mutual spiritual enrichment and, the main thing, as a sense-technology of forming of tolerant behaviour of students is called to promote the approvement of ideals and practice of tolerance. In this connection the principle of dialogue of cultures can be considered as one of basic principle of modern education (I.V. Abakumova, P.N. Ermakov).

The process of sense-creation in education is rather capacious and multifactorial, therefore for its organizing it is necessary to take into account the features and laws of this process. It is important for teacher to understand that the generation of personal meanings, enrichment of value-motivation sphere of pupils is the result of their own thoughts and experiences. Therefore using by the teacher special forms of the pedagogical interaction promoting the process of sense-creation is necessary.

At a stage of learning of moral norms through the system of personal values the student, using all mechanisms of generation of senses, comes to “positing of senses”, when the sense of the comprehended content is revealed through “the special existential act in which the subject with the help of his/her conscious and responsible decision assigns the importance of something in his/her life” [5, p. 12]. In particular this level of sense regulation allows the student to accept values of the culture of another language, other countries, other civilizations (the foreign language itself acts as a multivariate value: as a carrier of another culture; as “a door” to other worlds and civilizations; as a source of development and self-development of the person; as a real means of communication) and existential values of universal culture (spiritual values of the individual human life such as beauty, inspiration, repentance, conscience, creativity, moral duty, responsibility, truth, emotional experience, kindness, love, friendship).

The question of using of identity with the purpose of forming the prescribed attitude to the particular object is important. Identity includes two subsystems: personal and social identities. The former is self-determination in terms of physical, intellectual and moral features. The latter is defined by a belonging of the person to various social categories: to the race, the nationality, the sex, etc.

The person can identify him/herself not only with another person, but also with ideals, patterns, public values, with his/her own aspirations and purposes. The research data made by V.S. Mukhina, L.V.Popova, V.F. Petrenko, etc. point it out.

E. Erikson distinguished positive and negative identity. Under identity g. Mead interpreted the ability of a person to perceive own behaviour and life in general as a connected, single whole.

R. Fogelson described four kinds of identity: 1) the real identity - it is a self-report of the individual on him/herself, his/her self-description of “I am today”; 2) the ideal identity - it is a positive identity to which the individual aspires, it is what he/ she would like to see him/herself; 3) the negative, “causing fear” identity which the individual tries to avoid, it is what he/she would not like to see him/herself; 4) the presenting identity - it is a set of images which the individual transmits to other people to affect their estimation of his/her identity [2, p. 112].

The person tries to approach the real identity to the ideal one and to maximize the distance between the real and the negative identities. It is achieved by a manipulation of the presenting identity in social interaction.

Identity is social by its origin as it is formed as a result of interaction of the individual with other people and assimilation of the own experience produced during social interaction. Change of identity is also caused by changes in the social environment of the individual.

In order to initiate senses of identification it is expedient to address to those technologies which actualize the reflective intensions of pupils.

In this case training activity of the teacher represents a reflective management, which essence consists in transferring the bases for decision-making to the very trainee within the system of the basic processes of his/her self-organizing: self-determination, self-knowledge and self-actualization.

One of the most important conditions of development of the reflective position of the pupil as the bases and the factor of initiation of a choice is a model of reflective activity. It appears as a model of reflective interrelation of the theacher and the trainee as self-organizing systems.

The psychological basis for development of sense communications as a choice of space, type of interaction, system of tramsmitting senses, relative to which the system of knowledge transfer is built, were ideas of organizing of sense-searching activity of a person as conditions of comprehension of life experience (R.R. Karakozov), theses of psychotechnics of a choice (F.E. Vasilyuk) and sense-technics (D.A. Leontiev). These researches focus attention on dynamics and transformations of sense structures, systems and processes at the directed control of the own processes of sense-regulation, and also on control of sense dynamics at other people. The term of sense-technic is a special case of psychotechnics and according to D.A. Leontiev's words, “this concept in its time was posed as a designation of hypothetical system of techniques of education and correction of sense formations of the person (Asmolov, Bratus, etc.)”. The sense-technic is considered as a system of influence on the person causing changes of sense dynamics through which any changes of sense sphere are realized.

In general sense-technics in educational process are come to the choice and to actualization of values and needs of the pupil or the student, and also to his/her selfcharacterization, and to designing of the life-world according to the personal meanings, sense-creating motives, sense attitudes [13, p. 56].

The very dialogue of cultures as a sense-technic of the directed influence on the person in conditions of educational process forms students' tolerant attitudes and tolerant consciousness as a whole. The dialogue of cultures promotes deep and comprehensive mastering the culture of own people by students. It is an indispensable condition for their integration into other cultures. The dialogue of cultures also promotes forming conception of variety of cultures in the world and in Russia at students; educating the positive attitude to the cultural differences which contribute to the progress of mankind and are conditions for self-realization of the person; creating conditions for integration of students into cultures of other peoples; forming and developing skills of effective interaction with representatives of various cultures; educating students in the spirit of peace, tolerance, humane interethnic communication.

On the whole, the given sense-technic enables students to acquire such basic concepts and categories of polycultural education as originality, uniqueness, cultural tradition, spiritual culture, ethnic identification, national consciousness, Russian culture, world culture, common roots of cultures, variety of cultures, differences between cultures, interference of cultures, intercultural communication, culture of international communication, conflict, culture of the world, mutual understanding, consent, solidarity, cooperation, nonviolence, tolerance and forming an active life position, development of ability to live in harmony with different people and ideas, knowledge of the rights and freedoms and recognition of the right of another person to the same rights by means of individual and group work of the teacher with students [4, p. 81].

It also depends on the personality of the very teacher. If the teacher is tolerant and ready for dialogue, he/she will teach it the pupils. As a result, there will be a specific intercultural dialogue promoting interosculation of cultures, development of a communicative openness.

Thus, the dialogue of cultures as sense-technic is an important means of forming tolerant consciousness of students.

For the single person valuable-personal attitudes represent “sense refraction of social experience of the individual, underlying the system of personal meanings” which, in their turn, gain in importance for the person in the process of his/her life activity, i.e. the valuable attitude arises when its objects are involved in this or that kind of human activity [12]. Than more actively the individual is, the more expressed his/her sense-value attitude which is itself dynamical, changeable, and can be educated.

The attitude of the person reflects his/her preference concerning the certain system of values and corresponds to character of structure of the person. It is formed in a situation of a choice between to be or to have (E. Fromm). The attitudes include:

? he public component presented by the ideals of society, culture;

? the individual component reflecting the presence of an active internal position of the person, based on the experience and acceptance (rejection) of public ideals and values.

Thus, the sense-value attitude is formed under the influence of the real life practice in the presence of internal activity of the person, whereas the essence of the very process of the valuable attitude forming reflects the transition of the consensual significant value into personally significant [11, p. 18].

Tolerance as the sense-personal value, recognized by the society, may be different from values of the person. It poses a problem for education to form the system of values of the person, which is a regulator of valuable attitudes of the person to representatives of various sociocultural and ethnocultural groups within the polycultural environment.

The transition from the former traditional culture has changed the ratio of mechanisms of control of people behaviour. If in traditional culture the normative mechanisms predominated, in new postindustrial culture the valuable ones prevail.

S.L. Bratchenko, E.V. Alekseeva, Yu.I. gracheva [7] describe the concept of “tolerance of the student” as a personal formation in community of cognitive, emotional and behavioural components which is a precondition for forming tolerance as a personal quality or as that “backbone factor” which predetermines and integrates actions of all other “peripheral” components of tolerance. It is the researchers' opinion that the content of the cognitive component of tolerance of the student is formed by the knowledge of the existing differences between people of of the group and individual levels demanding correct understanding and tolerant attitude; the knowledge of the fundamental equal protection of the law of all members of the society and their possession of the equal rights.

Empathy or attraction forms the content of the emotional component of the student's tolerance. Attraction means understanding of emotional states of another person, comprehension of his/her feelings and their empathy, and also the emotionalpositive answer to emotional experiences.

The content of the behavioural component of tolerance of the student consists of: the skill of nonviolent interaction through cogent arguments of one's own position or through understanding and full or partial consent to the position of another person; the skill to establish relations of cooperation and to enter into dialogical interaction.

The personal component of tolerance includes the sense-value system in which the value of respect of the person as such, the values of the rights and freedoms of the person and equality of people rights in relation to a choice of world outlook and to a life position, the value of responsibility for the own life and its recognition for each person take the central place. however, according to g.V. gracheva's statement [7], the valuable knowledge of tolerance does not testify the formed attitude to it yet. The knowledge is the first element in the orientation system. The second element is an emotional-volitional one. It assumes an organization of the emotional-sensual experiences connected to comprehension and acceptance of values by the person. The third element is practice- activity. It assumes implementation of valuable orientations into the real life and behaviour of the person. Education, in opinion of the researcher, is not so much a terminal value, a value of the purpose, as an instrumental value. Thus, forming the valuable attitude to tolerance is actualized by the new educational culture focused on and directed at the interests and values of the individual. “In the model of polycultural education of the new educational environment the education of tolerance on the sense-personal basis is more effectively than in conditions of monocultural educational environment. Besides, it is necessary to note the potential of the polycultural educational environment in the context of forming tolerance as a personal quality based on the valuable attitude to people as representatives of other sosiocultural groups. The potential expresses itself in an active personal position which assumes an expansion of personal values due to positive interaction with other cultures” [4, p. 82].

Education of the tolerant principles has got a multilateral character under the conditions of polyethnicity, multilinguizm, polyculture and polymentalities of the population of Russia and gets the character of polycultural education.

Among the specific targets of polycultural education, as a rule, the following ones are posed [4, p. 82]:

? deep and comprehensive mastering the culture of the own people by students as an indispensable condition for their integration into other cultures;

? formation of a conception of variety of cultures in the world and in Russia among students, educating the positive attitude to the cultural differences which contribute to the progress of mankind and are conditions for self-realization of the person;

? creating conditions for integration of students into cultures of other peoples;

? forming and developing skills of effective interaction with representatives of various cultures;

? educating students in the spirit of peace, tolerance, humane interethnic communication.

The educational process is a specific model of culture as a system of the basic values which are nothing but “crystallized” senses of human reality in a sign, text, symbolical condition, on the one hand, and “devitrified” senses in their real, life, mental displays, on the other hand. Educational process is a sense reality; a space of continuous “closing” and “opening” of connections of the subject experience of trainees and objective values of the culture; a source supplying sense-personal structures of consciousness. Senses gaining during training and educating are the “cells” of consciousness which, in aggregate, form a matrix of life orientations of trainees.

No doubt, tolerance as a quality of the person and a phenomenon of social reality belongs to the supreme, fundamental values of the culture. It is part of sense units of a life. And the fact of its importance directs a creation of such models of educational process which would originate from the real practice of the tolerant culture and be based on the subject experience of tolerant attitudes of participants of the process [4, p. 83].

“On the whole, the content of education enables students to assimilate such basic concepts and categories of polycultural education as originality, uniqueness, cultural tradition, spiritual culture, ethnic identification, national consciousness, Russian culture, world culture, common roots of cultures, variety of cultures, differences between cultures, interference of cultures, intercultural communication, cultural convergence, culture of international communication, conflict, culture of the world, mutual understanding, consent, solidarity, cooperation, nonviolence, tolerance, etc.” (I.V. Abakumova, P.N. Ermakov, 2003).

The important parts of the polycultural education are various systems of free education based on the principles of multifactoriality and polyfunctionality of educational process. So, today schools of “sense didactics” (I.V. Abakumova, P.N. Ermakov, V.T. Fomenko, 2001), dialogue of cultures, pedagogics of “new humanism” have already gained ground.

One of the initial principles of dialogue of cultures school is a comprehension of necessity of transition from “an educated” to “a person of culture”, “combining in thinking and activity various cultures which cannot be reduced to each other, forms of activity, valuable, sense spectra” [11].

According to ideas of authors of this school conception, formting “a person of culture” demands transformation of the very content of education. At that the principle of dialogue starts to gain an all-permeating character.

Firstly, the dialogue is not only considered as a heuristic method of mastering monologic knowledge and skill, but it also starts to define the very essence and sense of transmitting and creatively forming concepts.

Secondly, the dialogue gains “a real educational effective sense” as a dialogue of cultures “communicating with each other in the context of the modern culture, in the center of the basic questions of reality, the basic points of surprise of our mind”.

Thirdly, the dialogue becomes a permanently functioning aspect in the consciousness of the pupil (and the teacher)” and a basis for the real development of creative (humanitarian) thinking [10, p. 32].

V.S. Bibler cites one extremely important example which allows us to see the depth of the offered transformations in education. he intends to refuse from hegel's paradigm of inclusion of the old knowledge into the structure new one (“removal”), turning to their direct dialogue in accordance with the conformity principle, the complementarity principle, etc.

The dialogue principle applied to the spheres of life activity of the society also means a refusal of “removal” of archaic cultures in the modern culture, respect and recognition of their importance in the postindustrial epoch.

L.P. Bueva pays attention to one more important aspect of transformation of education. She fairly believes that under current conditions the education system and its content should not have a uniquely adaptive character allowing a “reserve of freedom” to be present. The “reserve of freedom” is created by “polyculture and internal dynamics of assimilating as much cultural space as possible as an expansion of survival capability” [12, p. 67].

On the whole, the problem of reorganization of “architecture of pedagogical space” (V.A. Konev) giving an opportunity to acquire and reinforce the skills of the tolerant attitude to “another” is, perhaps, problem number one in the modern Russian education.

One of the key characteristics of the educational environment of the h.M. Berbekov Kabardino-Balkarian State University (KBSU) is its polyculture, expressed both a quantitative (more than 35 thousand trainees), and a national-cultural variety (representatives more than thrirty nationalities, including near and far abroad). In our opinion, the polycultural environment has a sufficient potential to provide a communication with the particular national cultures represented in this environment, and their national traditions which are an integrating basis of the public whole. And it is also capable to provide a harmonious combination of training and education which should result in forming a tolerant person as an active conscious representative of one's own national culture, who is ready and capable to enter into dialogue with representatives of other cultures. The conception of the “Schools of dialogue of cultures” by V.S. Bibler, the prominent domestic philosopher and cultural studies scholar, provides a considerable assistance in modelling dialogical training and educating strategies. V.S. Bibler defines the culture as a dialogue of cultures, as a form of “…simultaneous existence and dialogue of individuals of various cultures” [9, p. 427].

The dialogue with another person also plays an important part. It enables us to see the inner life of the other person, to put ourselves in his/her place, to overcome the sociocultural stereotyping. The positive effect of perception of “Another” is also achieved by means of situations of problematization of perception of this person in consciousness of the learning subject. The problem situation enables the person to analyse his/her own judgements concerning another, to overstep the limits of one's own stereotypes of thinking.

The dialogue of cultures gains a practical interpretation in joint activity of pupils under the conditions of the polycultural educational environment at different levels: a university, a group, an individual-personal one. In the KBSU the students have been taking an active part in organizing and holding the annual youth festival called “We are different, but we are equal!” for several years. Its primary object is to form tolerance in intercultural relations of the multicultural educational environment. Students organize various interactive national-cultural rooms for representatives both near and far abroad, who study at the university: Russia, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Kazakhstan, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, South Korea, etc.

In the context of polycultural educational environment at the educational group level involving pupils in different discussions with following collective reflection about “To understand oneself through other culture”, “The dialogue of cultures is a culture of the dialogue”, analyzing everyday situations of intercultural communication such as “My neighbour in the hostel”, using case-methods, providing trainings have an effective influence on forming the valuable attitude to tolerance.

The collective work activity in student construction brigades plays an important part in forming tolerant attitudes in the student multicultural environment. The brigades work in the course of year. Students are taken into them in accordance with the results of their progress, and also with a recommendation of the students who have worked in the brigade more than a year.

Conversations and interviews with the participants of this movement indicate that students' aspiration to be taken into the construction brigade is explained not so much with an opportunity of additional earnings, as with emotional-friendly atmosphere of mutual respect, cooperation and mutual aid, first of all.

Practical experience of the KBSU in forming value-sense attitudes to tolerance shows that interaction at the university and the educational group levels promotes forming tolerance as personal characteristic feature as the display of tolerant relations depends on the subjective activity of the student which is caused by the potential of the polycultural educational environment, and on his/her readiness for intercultural contacts which are based on both knowledge of various forms and approaches in situations of meeting of a representative of another culture, and needs for display of a positive moral-valuable act in conflicting intercultural-personal situations.

Thus, one of the main social institutes promoting forming tolerant beginnings in the Russian society is education. however its performance of this new function assumes its radical transformation. It should be realized under the joint influence of the principles of tolerance, dialogue and cooperation of the teacher and the trainee. “The real humanization of educational process is only possible under the condition of its orientation to value-sense features of pupils. The new system of the pedagogical technologies directly influencing the features of sense-creation and sense-revealing of trainees as components of individual life-sense orientation of the person is necessary to bring the educational process up to the sense-personal level. The dialogue can be used as an educational technology for initiation of sense-creation of pupils in the process of education; as the dialogue is a catalyst of sense-creation which starts “a stream of consciousness”, a transition from potential to actualized senses, and determines the level of sense saturation of the educational context and the priorities of its sense-value centrations. Dialogue as a pedagogical technology is entered as a model of the complete technology of the process in its continuum from microdialogue (the dialogue “teacher - pupil”, “pupil - pupil”) to macrodialogue (the dialogue of cultures) within the framework of a dialogue field as a space of sense-creation in the educational context” (I.V. Abakumova, L.Ts. Kagermazova, 2011).

The dialogue principle, which is inseparably linked with the tolerance principle, should be not only the means of education, but also its purpose. In future these principles can expand into other spheres of the society's life. The all-permeating character of tolerance and dialogue principles does not mean their “solitude” and a special separation from other life principles: it testifies that the performance of the main principle for today, the survival principle, is under the threat without intensification of their influence.

The given research examines the opportunities of use of achievements of the new psychological-pedagogical school, “Sense pedagogics”, in real practice of forming attitudes of tolerant consciousness of students (I.V. Abakumova). In this context tolerance is analyzed as a component of the sense-value sphere of a developing person. It enables to analyze its dynamic features, to examine it as a component of sense regulation and self-regulation of the person. The sense-creating opportunities of the intercultural dialogue are the basic source of its potential in education of the polycultural person.

“The optimal education is polycultural from the point of view that it is filled with values of the diverse cultures providing pupils' free choice of this or that fact in accordance with their sense priorities. Moreover, the polycultural education gives pupils free hand for a multiple choice which is made on the basis of their ability to see common things among differently directed sense vectors and their possible compromise acceptance. By means of actualization of sense connections and valuable preferences of pupils this education opens for them the widest field of culture, including its boundary areas. Forming tolerant consciousness of the person is just the result of such sense self-actualization. And to form tolerance is necessary in the context of the whole structure of the person” (I.V. Abakumova, L.Ts. Kagermazova, 2011).

It is possible to suppose that senses of something that is outside the person, which are revealing to him/her in the dialogue, and senses of acts of one's own activity, behaviour of one's own sense structure can enter into dialogue with each other. This dialogue enters us into the problem of consciousness and behaviour, views and acts, positions and actions of the person and approaches us to understanding of those mechanisms which underlie our world outlook, our ideology. The very understanding of dialogue mechanisms as the bases of influence of one person on another should be considered in the context of forming the ideology focused on tolerant consciousness.

References

1. Abakumova I.V. Lichnostnyy smysl kak pedagogicheskiy faktor i yego ispol'zovaniye v uchebnom protsesse. Diss. dokt. psikh. nauk [Personal sense as a pedagogical factor and its using in educational process. Dr. ped. sci. diss]. Rostov-on-Don, 1989.

2. Abakumova I.V. Smysl kak nauchnaya kategoriya i vliyaniye yego kontseptual'nykh interpretatsiy na teoriyu obrazovaniya i obucheniya. [Sense as a scientific category and influence of its conceptual interpretations on the theory of education and training]. Nauchnaya mysl' Kavkaza - The Scientific Thought of Caucasus, 2002, no. 11, pp. 111-117.

3. Abakumova I.V. Modern theories of sense and their influence on the general theory of education. [Sovremennyye teorii smysla i ikh vliyaniye na obshchuyu teoriyu obucheniya]. Ezhegodnik Rossiiskogo psikhologicheskogo obshchestva. Psikhologiia i ee prilozheniia - The Year-book of the Russian Psychological Society. Psychology and Its Applications, 2002, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 73-74.

4. Abakumova I.V., Ermakov P.N. O stanovlenii tolerantnosti lichnosti v polikul'turnom obrazovanii [On the issue of the person's tolerance formation in polycultural education]. Voprosy Psychologii - Approaches to Psychology, 2003, no. 3, pp. 78-82.

5. Abakumova I.V., Kagermazova L.Ts. Smysloobrazovaniye kak faktor initsiatsii tsennostno-smyslovykh ustanovok v protsesse antiekstremistskoy ideologii [Sensecreation as a factor of initiation of value-sense attitudes during antiextremist ideology]. Rossiyskii psikhologicheskii zhurnal - Russian Psychological Journal, 2011, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 11-20.

6. Abakumova I.V., Kagermazova L.Ts. Tekhnologii napravlennoy translyatsii smyslov v obuchenii [Technologies of the directed transmission of senses in education]. Rossiyskii psikhologicheskii zhurnal - Russian Psychological Journal, 2008, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 56-64.

7. Alekseeva E.V., Bratchenko S.L. Psikhologicheskiye osnovy tolerantnosti uchitelya. Monologi ob uchitele [Psychological foundations of tolerance of a teacher. Monologues about the teacher]. St. Petersburg, 2003; pp. 165-172.

8. Asmolov A.g. Tolerantnost': ot utopii k real'nosti. Na puti k tolerantnomu soznaniyu [Tolerance: from utopia to reality. On a way to tolerant consciousness]. Moscow, Smysl Publ., 2000, pp. 4-7.

9. Belinskaya E. Sistema tsennostey lichnosti v perspektive tolerantnosti [The system of values of the person in perspective of tolerance]. Vek tolerantnosti. Nauchnopublitsisticheskiy vestnik - Age of Tolerance. The Scientific-Publicistic Bulletin, 2003, no. 5, pp. 61-72.

10. Bogdanova A.I., Osipova S.I. Innovatsionnaya polikul'turnaya obrazovatel'naya sreda v kontekste formirovaniya tolerantnoy lichnosti [The innovative polycultural educational environment in the context of a tolerant person formation]. Sibirskii pedagogicheskii zhurnal - Siberian Pedagogical Journal, 2012, no. 4.

11. Weber M. Izbrannyye proizvedeniya [The selected works]. Moscow, Progress Publ., 1990. 808 p.

12. Ermakov P.N., Abakumova I.V., Azarko E.M. Osobennosti lichnostno-smyslovoy sfery odarennykh podrostkov [The features of sense-personal sphere of the gifted teenagers]. Nauchnaya mysl' Kavkaza - The Scientific Thought of Caucasus, 2003; no. 1, pp. 17-28.

13. Kagermazova L.Ts. Transformatsiya lichnostnykh osobennostey studentov-budushchikh pedagogov v period modernizatsii obrazovaniya [Transformation of personal features of students, future teachers, during the modernization of education]. Rossiyskii psikhologicheskii zhurnal - Russian Psychological Journal, 2007, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 55-62.

14. Leontiev D.A. Psikhologiya smysla [Psychology of sense]. Moscow, Smysl Publ., 1999.

15. Myasishchev V.N. Struktura lichnosti i otnosheniye cheloveka k deystvitel'nosti. Psikhologiya lichnosti [The personality structure and the person's attitude to reality. Psychology of personality]. Moscow, MSU Publ., 1982. pp. 35-38.

Ðàçìåùåíî íà Allbest.ru