Social Participation of the Russian and Armenian Students in the Socio-Cultural Development of Cities

The article was prepared on the basis of an international comparative study – a sociological survey of students from regional universities from 37 cities in the Sverdlovsk region of the Russian Federation and 20 settlements of the Shirak region in the Republic of Armenia (targeted sample, No. = 715). The authors explore the potential for social participation of students from countries with a common political background of post-socialism and cardinal differences in the cultural and historical heritage of urban spaces.

The purpose of this article is to determine the potential for social participation of students of regional universities in Russia and Armenia and the subjective factors that determine their activity in the development of cities. The article analyzes the experience of volunteering, as well as the willingness of students to different types of constructive social participation in urban development. To identify factors that activate the social participation of students, a discriminant analysis has been used. Discriminant models were constructed dividing groups of students from different countries with a high and low degree of readiness for social participation, as well as into groups with and without volunteering experience. The authors argue that Russia and Armenia are characterized by an identical structure of student involvement in volunteer activities, but the level of students’ readiness for social participation in urban development in the countries under consideration is different. For Armenian students, not only the willingness for social participation is higher, but also the practices themselves are more associated with active socio-cultural activities in the urban space. Two factors that determine the experience of real participation in the socio-cultural development of cities are characteristic of both Russian and Armenian students. The real experience of volunteering is more likely to be acquired by those students who are motivated to receive information about the culture and history of their cities, as well as the ability to see and identify significant cultural and historical objects where they live and study. In the Russian scenario, the importance of the city, the need for its development increases for students if they, being armed with certain knowledge about its culture and history, consider that the city is an interesting object (including a tourist one) for promotion. For Armenian students, knowledge of the culture and history of their place of birth is a basic factor that shapes their interest in further exploring their cities, the desire to make them better.

1. Paolini, G., Horváth, A., Motiejūnaitė, А. (2018). Situation of young people in the European Union Commission. SWD 169 of 22.5.2018. Brussels, EС. 163 p.

2. Tkhagapsoev, Kh.G., Sapunov, M.B. (2016). Russian Educational Reality and Its Converted Forms. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. No. 6 (202), pp. 87-97. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

3. Hurrelmann, K., Weichert, M. (2015). Lost in Democratic Transition? Political Challenges and Perspectives for Young People in South East Europe. Results of Representative Surveys in Eight Countries. Sarajevo: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung Regional Dialogue SEE, 146 p.

4. Schild, H., Connolly, N., Labadie, F., Vanhee, J., Williamson, H. (2017). Thinking Seriously about Youth Work and How to Prepare People to Do It. Council of Europe publishing, Youth Knowledge 20, 446 p.

5. Helve, H., Wallace, C. (2018). Youth, Citizenship and Empowerment. London: Routledge, 346 p.

6. Smith, D.H., Stebbins, R.A., Dover, M.A. (2006). A Dictionary of Nonprofit Terms and Concepts. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 360 p.

7. Nikovskaya, L.I., Skalaban, I.A. (2017). Civic Participation: Features of Discourse and Actual Trends of Development. Polis. Politicheskie issledovaniya = Polis. Political Studies. No. 6, pp. 43-60. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2017.06.04 (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

8. Checkoway, B., Aldana, А. (2013). Four Forms of Youth Civic Engagement for Diverse Democracy. Children and Youth Services Review. Vol. 35, pp. 1894-1899.

9. Brodovskaya, E.V., Huang, T. (2019). Digital Generation: Civil Mobilization and Political Protest Among Russian Youth. Monitoring obshchestvennogo mneniya: Ekonomicheskie i sotsial’nye peremeny = Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes. No. 5, pp. 3-18. DOI: 10.14515/monitoring.2019.5.01. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

10. Bachen, C., Raphael, C., Lynn, K. M., McKee, K., Philippi, J. (2008). Civic Engagement, Pedagogy, and Information Technology on Web Sites for Youth. Political Communication. Vol. 25(3), pp. 290-310. DOI: 10.1080/10584600802197525

11. Maznichenko, M.A., Papazyan, G.S. (2018). Pedagogical Conditions of Personal and Professional Growth of Students in the Context of Volunteer Activity. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. Vol. 27, no. 2 (220), pp. 103-113. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

12. Starodubtsev, V.A., Rodionov P.V. (2016). [Voluntary Organizations as an Environment for Professional Samples of University Students]. Pedagogicheskoe obrazovanie v Rossii [Pedagogical Education in Russia]. No. 7, pp. 212-217. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

13. Pevnaya, M.V. (2015). Student Volunteering: Motivation of Volunteers and Specific Features of Their Activity. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. No. 6, pp. 81-88. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

14. Brennan, M.A., Barnett, R.V. (2009). Bridging Community and Youth Development: Exploring Theory, Research, and Application. Community Development. Vol. 40, pp. 305-310. DOI: 10.1080/15575330903279515

15. Ashutova, T.V., Zhelnina, Z.Yu. (2019). Strategic Project «Creative City – Territory of Development » as a Model of Interaction between Flagship University and Region. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. Vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 116-126. DOI:https://doi.org/10.31992/0869-3617-2019-28-3-116-126 (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

16. Adler, R.P., Goggin, J. (2005). What Do We Mean By “Civic Engagement”? Journal of Transformative Education. Vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 236-253. DOI: 10.1177/1541344605276792

17. Rubin, B. (2007). There’s Still Not Justice: Youth Civic Identity Development Amid Distinct School and Community Contexts. Teachers College Record. Vol. 109(2), pp. 449-481.

18. Sinkiene, J., Gaule, E., Bruneckiene, J., Zaleckis, K., Bryer, T. A., Ramanauskas, E. (2017). Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the Study of Vital Urban Communities. Public policy and administration. Vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 9-23. DOI: 10.5755/j01.ppaa.16.1.18010

19. Saveliev, Yu.B. (2013). Main Types of Public Life Participation in European Countries. Sotsiologicheskie Issledovaniia = Sociological Studies. No. 12, pp. 64-71. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)