Post-pedagogical Syndrome of the Digimodernism Age

The article discusses the influence of Metamodern culture and digitalization of education on the transformation of the pedagogical understanding of learning process. The author relies on the post-postmodern age interpretations presented in the works of S. Abramson, M. Epstein, R. Eschelman, A. Kirby, J. Mensch, P. Samuels, L. Turner, T. Vermeulen and R. Van den Acker; the transdisciplinary (B. Nicholescu) and connectivist (D. Cormier, G. Siemens) approaches and international documents about the education development in a complex society. In the Metamodern epoch under the influence of the universal digitalization there have been signs indicating that the theory and practice of learning has gone beyond the enduring some pedagogical meanings. This is being manifested at the level of the spontaneous transformation of the main components of learning process; changes in the pedagogical thesaurus, the emergence of “hybrid” didactic theories. The author defines this phenomenon as the post-pedagogical syndrome of the digital age which is capable to disrupt the historical continuity of educational culture. The article talks about the lack of resources in modern pedagogical science to explain the realities of lifelong education as a part of the Digimodernism culture and to develop the truly innovative ways of teaching. The author has suggested that the creation of effective methods of teaching and self-education in the digital age is possible only in the case of rethinking and reassessment of basic didactic categories and concepts on a transdisciplinary basis, taking into account the pedagogical experience of the analogical era and preserving the continuity of humanitarian values and meanings. The author’s arguments and conclusions are addressed to supporters of the study of education on an interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary basis.

1. Gumanisticheskaya pedagogika: xxi vek (2015). [Humanist Pedagogy]. Novaya gazeta [New Gazette]. Oct 11, no. 112. Available at: https://www.novayagazeta.ru/articles/2015/10/11/65959-gumanisticheskaya-pedagogika-xxi-vek (In Russ.)

2. Illich, I. (1971). Deschooling Society. New York: Harper & Row. 116 p.

3. Epshtein, M. (2001). De’but de siesle, ili Ot post-k proto-. Manifest novogo [De’but de siesle, or From Post to Proto. Manifest of New]. Znamya. No. 5. Available at: http://magazines.russ.ru/znamia/2001/5/epsh.html (In Russ.)

4. Rubtsov, A.V. (2018). [Before and after Postmodern: On the Threshold of Supernova Time]. Politicheskaya kontseptologiya: zhurnal metadistsiplinarnykh issledovanii = The Political Conceptology: Journal of Metadisciplinary Research. No. 1, pp. 143-157. DOI: 10.23683/22185518.2018.1.143157 (In Russ.)

5. Gane, M. (Ed). (1993). Baudrillard Live. Selected Interviews. London: Routledge.

6. Turner, L. (2015). Metamodernism: A Brief Introduction. Notes on Metamodernism. January 12. Available at: http://www.berfrois.com/2015/01/everything-always-wanted-know-metamodernism/

7. Vermeulen, T., van den Akker, R. (2010). Notes on Metamodernism. Aesthetics & Culture. Vol. 2, pp. 1-14. Available at: http://www.emerymartin.net/FE503/Week10/Notes%20on%20Metamodernism.pdf

8. Freinacht, H. (2015). 5 Things That Make You Metamodern. Available at: http://metamoderna.org/5-things-that-make-you-metamodern?lang=en

9. Shalaev, V.P. (2008). Globalization, Postmodern, Bifurcation Man as Markers of Transitional History. Servis plus = Service plus. Vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 95-105. Available at: https://readera.ru/140209785 (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

10. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon. Vol. 9, no. 5. DOI: 10.1108/10748120110424816

11. Kirby, A. (2009). Digimodernism: How New Technologies Dismantle the Postmodern and Reconfigure Our Culture. New York: Continuum Publishing Corporation, 282 p.

12. Siemens, G. (2004). Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. Available at: http:// www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm

13. Siemens, G. (2006). Knowing Knowledge. Lulu.com, 176 p.

14. Ihde, D. (1990). Technology and the Lifeworld: From Garden to Earth. Indiana University Press, pp.72-96.

15. Muller-Eiselt, R. (2015). Die digitale Bildungsrevolution. Der radikale Wandel des Lernens und wie wir ihn Gestalten konnen. Munchen: DVA.

16. Manifest o tsifrovoi obrazovatel‘noi srede (2015). [Digital Learning Environment Manifesto]. Available at: http://manifesto.edutainme.ru/en

17. Peltekova, E.V., Stefanova, E.P. (2016). Inquiry-Based Learning «Outside» the Classroom with Virtual Reality Devices. International Journal of Open Information Technologies. Vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 112-116.

18. Kolesnikova, I.A. (2016). Concept Sphere of Lifelong Learning: Logic and Methodology of Study. Nepreryvnoe obrazovanie: XXI vek = Lifelong Education: The XXI century. Vol. 3, no. 15. DOI: 10.15393/j5.art.2016.3210 (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

19. Cormier, D. (2008). Rhizomatic Education: Community as Curriculum. Innovate. Journal of Online Education. Vol. 4, no. 5, Art. 2. Available at: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/innovate/vol4/iss5/2

20. Ivashkin, Yu.A., Nazoikin, E.A. (2011). Multi-agent Simulation Modeling of Accumulation of Knowledge Process. Programmnye produkty i sistemy = Software & Systems. No. 1, pp. 47–52. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

21. Berezin, S.N. (2009). [Post-phenomenological Discourse]. Diskurs Pi = Discourse-P. No. 8, pp. 125-128. Available at: http://www.madipi.ru/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=100&Itemid=89 (In Russ.)

22. Eshelman, R. (2001). Performatism, or the End of Postmodernism. Anthropoetics. Vol. 6, no. 2. Available at: http://www.anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap0602/perform.htm

23. Choshanov, M.A. (2013). E-didactics: A Fresh Look at the Theory of Learning in the Epoch of Digital Technologies. Obrazovatel’nye tekhnologii i obshchestvo = Educational Technology & Society. Vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 673-685. Available at: https://readera.ru/14062503 (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

24. Majer, R.V. (2014). Kiberneticheskaya pedagogika: imitaytsionnoe modelirovanie protsessa obucheniya [Cybernetic Pedagogy: Imitation Modeling of Learning Process]. Glazov: Glazov State Pedagogical Institute Publ.

25. Meteshkin, K.A., Morozov, O.I., Fedorchenko, L.A., Khairova, N.F. (2012). Kiberneticheskaya pedagogika: ontologicheskiy inzhiniring v obuchenii i obrazovanii [Cybernetic Pedagogy: Ontological Engineering in Learning and Education]. Kharkiv: Kharkiv National Academy of Municipal Economy Publ., 207 p. (In Russ.)

26. Fullan, M. (2012). Stratosphere: Integrating Technology, Pedagogy, and Change Knowledge. Pearson, 112 p.

27. Kolesnikova, I.A. (2014). Transdisciplinary Strategy of Lifelong Education Research. Nepreryvnoe obrazovanie: XXI vek = Lifelong Education: The XXI century. Vol. 4, no. 8. DOI: 10.15393/j5.art.2014.2642 (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)