The concept of student cognitive culture: Definition and conditions for development

Introduction. Nowadays, knowledge is the main resource for the innovative economy. In the information society, there is the contradiction between the gradually increasing flow of new information and the inability of users to understand it. Education, including higher vocational training, should play a key role in bridging that cognitive gap. However, the current educational standards and programmes of universities, as well as the lower level of cognitive skills and students’ competencies, do not meet the requirement to solve the global problem related to the processes for changing the knowledge structure and total informatisation of human activities. In particular, against the background of the achievements of modern epistemology, there is still no scientific-based interpretation of the student cognitive culture, which formative factors have not been also identified yet.

The aim of the present article is to define the concept of cognitive culture of a university student and the conditions for its development.

Methodology and research methods. The methodological framework of the research is based on cognitive, informative and cultural approaches to the discussed problem. The analytical-synthetic method and the method of comparative analysis were applied in the course of the research.

Results and scientific novelty. The definition of a student cognitive culture is defined on the basis of the modern principles of cognitive functioning and its subjects (unity of consciousness, unconscious and activity; co-evolution of individual, collective and social, etc.), as well as the classical model of knowledge transformation. Student involvement in all types of information activities is substantiated as the main criterion for assessing cognitive culture maturity. A technocognitive environment with integrative character is considered as the condition for development and achievement of a high level of student cognitive culture. The version of structural technocognitive environment is proposed and the content of each of the components is described.

Practical significance. The present research material is primarily addressed to the specialists involved in improving the quality of higher education. The main provisions of the article and the author’s conclusions can be employed as a theoretical basis to organise the cognitive environment at the university. To further the present research, the author intends to identify the specifics of the development of student cognitive culture in various educational fields, as well as to investigate the computer component of the student internal thinking as a part of his or her cognitive culture. 

1. Zavyalova M. P. Cognitive “turn” in science and philosophy. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Ser. Filosofiya. Sociologiya. Politologiya = Tomsk State University Bulletin. Ser. Philosophy. Sociology. Political Science. 2012; 2 (18): 5–12. (In Russ.)

2. Orlov M. I. From the information society to the knowledge society: Conceptualisation of the new paradigm of civilisational development. Nauka i obshchestvo = Science and Society. 2013; 1 (10): 111–117. (In Russ.)

3. Gilev A. A. Metodicheskaya sistema razvitiya kognitivnyh kompetencij studentov pri obuchenii fizike = Methodological system of development of cognitive competencies of students in teaching physics. Samara: Samara State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering; JeBS ASV; 2016. 324 p. (In Russ.)

4. Bilalov M. I. The dependence of cognitive culture on the interpretation of truth. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 7: Filosofiya = Moscow University Bulletin. Series 7: Philosophy. 2011; 2: 3–8. (In Russ.)

5. Kalinina N. V. Culture of broadcasting methods of cognitive activity as the actual professional quality of the future teacher. Problemy sovremennogo pedagogicheskogo obrazovaniya = Problems of Modern Pedagogical Education. 2017; 56–8: 87–93. (In Russ.)

6. Sharifulina S. R. Cognitive readiness of future teachers to manage physical culture and sports activities. Vestnik Volzhskogo universiteta im. V. N. Tatishcheva = Bulletin of the Volga University named after V. N. Tatishchev. 2012; 1 (9): 124–130. (In Russ.)

7. Akhtamyanova I. I. Cognitive readiness to study at the university as a condition for the formation of the student’s subject position. Pedagogicheskij zhurnal Bashkortostana = Pedagogical Journal of Bashkortostan. 2010; 1 (26): 56–74. (In Russ.)

8. Smakovskaya N. I., Sorokina T. M. The study of the cognitive component of the psychological culture of a technical university teacher. Plekhanovskij nauchnyj byulleten’ = Plekhanov Scientific Bulletin [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2018 Nov 09]; 4. Available from: http://science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id=14076 (In Russ.)

9. Badmaeva S. V., Rykalina O. V., Sharova I. V. The study of the cognitive component of the economic culture of modern youth. Plekhanovskij nauchnyj byulleten’ = Plekhanov Scientific Bulletin. 2015; 1 (7): 30–43. (In Russ.)

10. Zharova D. V., Shusherova M. Yu. The study of the cognitive component of the emotional culture of younger schoolchildren. Vektor nauki Tol’yattinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Pedagogika, psihologiya = Vector Science of Togliatti State University. Series: Pedagogy, Psychology. 2016; 2 (25): 83–87. (In Russ.)

11. Miroshnichenko A. Pedagogical culture of a teacher: The cognitive aspect. Kul’tura v fokuse nauchnyh paradigm = Culture in the Focus of Scientific Paradigms. 2017; 5: 328–332. (In Russ.)

12. Gnenik M. E., Dmitrieva E. N. Cognitive foundations of the formation of information culture of the future teacher of a foreign language in high school. Problemy sovremennogo pedagogicheskogo obrazovaniya = Problems of Modern Pedagogical Education. 2017; 55/4: 150–156. (In Russ.)

13. Markaryan E. S. Teoriya kul’tury i sovremennaya nauka. Logiko-metodologicheskij analiz = The theory of culture and modern science. Logical and methodological analysis. Moscow: Publishing House Mysl’; 1983. 284 p. (In Russ.)

14. Generalova L. M. The cognitive approach to communicative competence. In: International Scientific Research 2017. XXVI Mezhdunarodnaja nauchnoprakticheskaja konferencija = International Scientific Research 2017. XXVI International Scientific and Practical Conference [Internet]; 2017; Moscow. Moscow: Publishing House Olimp; 2017 [cited 2018 Nov 09]; p. 31–33. Available from: http://olimpiks.ru/d/1340546/d/irs_26.pdf (In Russ.)

15. Volov V. T., Gilev A. A. Sravnenie kompetentnostnogo i funkcional’nogo podhodov k opisaniyu poznavatel’noj deyatel’nosti = Comparison of competence and functional approaches to the description of cognitive activity. In: Tradicii i innovacii v stroitel’stve i arhitekture. Social’no-gumanitarnye i ehkonomicheskie nauki = Traditions and innovations in construction and architecture. Socio-humanitarian and economic sciences. Samara; 2017. p. 165–168. (In Russ.)

16. Voronin V. M., Kurytsin S. V., Nasedkina Z. A. Cognitive pedagogy is a new stage in the interaction of psychology and pedagogy. Akademicheskij zhurnal Zapadnoj Sibiri = Academic Journal of Western Siberia. 2014; 10, 3 (52): 116. (In Russ.)

17. Sergeev S. F. Cognitive pedagogy: User properties of tools of knowledge. Shkol’nye tehnologii = School Technologies. 2011; 2: 35–41. (In Russ.)

18. Sergeev S. F. Educational environments in post-non-classical views of cognitive pedagogy. Otkrytoe obrazovanie = Open Education. 2012; 1: 90–99. (In Russ.) 1

19. Nikitina E. A. Scientific communication in multidisciplinary communities and styles of thinking. In: Aktual’nye problemy i perspektivy razvitiya radiotekhnicheskih i infokommunikacionnyh system. Sbornik nauchnyh trudov III Mezhdunarodnoj nauchnoprakticheskoj konferencii = Actual Problems and Development Prospects of Radio Engineering and Information and Communication Systems. Collection of Scientific Papers of the III International Scientific and Practical Conference; 2017 Nov 13–17; Moscow. Moscow: Moscow Technological University; 2017. p. 464–467. (In Russ.)

20. Akhtamyanova I. I., Sitdikova L. R. The relationship of cognitive styles and types of thinking in schoolchildren. Vestnik Bashkirskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta im. M. Akmully = Bulletin of the Bashkir State Pedagogical University named after M. Akmullah. 2017; 3 (43): 36–43. (In Russ.)

21. Imai M., Kanero J., Masuda T. The relation between language, culture, and thought. Current Opinion in Psychology. 2016; 8: 70–77.

22. Tamariz M., Kirby S. The cultural evolution of language. Current Opinion in Psychology. 2016; 8: 37–43.

23. Deng C., Georgiou G. K. Cognition, intelligence, and achievement [Internet]. 1st ed. Edited by Papadopoulos T. C., Parrila R. K., Kirby J. R. UK: Academic Press; 2015. Chapter 8, Establishing measurement invariance of the cognitive assessment system across cultures; [cited 2018 Nov 09]. p. 137–148. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978–0-12–410388–7.00008–7

24. Ji L. J., Yap S. Culture and cognition. Current Opinion in Psychology [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2018 Nov 09]; 8:105–111. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.10.004

25. Akhtamyanova I. I. The genesis of the cognitive culture of the individual. Pedagogicheskij zhurnal Bashkortostana = Pedagogical Journal of Bashkortostan. 2008; 2 (15): 44–62. (In Russ.)

26. Nikitina E. A. The subject of knowledge, the cognitive culture of the individual and education as a hi-hume. Cennosti i smysly = Values and Meanings. 2011; 7 (16): 94–108. (In Russ.)

27. Abdikeev N. M., Moreva E. L. On culture and cognitive thinking as factors of innovation development. Gumanitarnye nauki. Vestnik Finansovogo universiteta = Humanities. Bulletin of the Financial University. 2017; 7, 5 (29): 56–62. (In Russ.)

28. Nonaka I., Takeuchi X. Kompaniya – sozdatel’ znaniya. Zarozhdenie i razvitie innovacij v yaponskih firmah = The company is the creator of knowledge. The origin and development of innovation in Japanese firms. Moscow: Publishing House Olimp-Biznes; 2003. 320 p. (In Russ.)

29. Gaysina G. I. The formation of a cultural approach as a methodological basis of pedagogy. Gaudeamus = Gaudeamus. 2002; 2 (2): 12–21. (In Russ.)

30. Nikitina E. A. Poznanie. Soznanie. Bessoznatel’noe = Cognition. Consciousness. Unconscious. Moscow: Publishing House Librokom; 2011. (In Russ.)

31. Leontiev A. N. Deyatel’nost’, soznanie, lichnost’ = Activity, consciousness, personality. Moscow: Publishing Houses Smysl; Akademiya; 2005. 352 p. (In Russ.)

32. Nikitina E. A. The problem of the subject of knowledge in modern epistemology. Perspektivy nauki i obrazovaniya = Prospects of Science and Education. 2015; 2 (14): 16–24. (In Russ.)

33. Sergeev S. F. Once again about e-learning didactics: Acute angles of the methodological circle. Obrazovatel’nye tekhnologii i obshchestvo = Educational Technologies and Society. 2015; 18 (1): 589–599. (In Russ.)

34. Sergeev S. F., Sergeeva A. S. The problem of consciousness in learning systems and environments. Otkrytoe obrazovanie = Open Education. 2016; 20 (3): 9–15. (In Russ.)

35. Namakanov B. A. The concept of cognitive technology in modern pedagogy. Prepodavatel’ XXI vek = Teacher XXI Century. 2011; 3/1: 39–48. (In Russ.)

36. Kovalenko E. M. Culture, symbol, person in the context of the cognitive theory of culture. Istoricheskie, filosofskie, politicheskie i yuridicheskie nauki, kul’turologiya i iskusstvovedenie. Voprosy teorii i praktiki = Historical, Philosophical, Political and Legal Sciences, Cultural Studies and Art History. Questions of Theory and Practice. 2011; 4/2 (10): 81–84. (In Russ.)

37. Nikitina E. A. Artificial intelligence: philosophy, methodology, innovations. Filosofskie problemy informacionnyh tekhnologij i kiberprostranstva = Philosophical Problems of Information Technologies and Cyberspace. 2014; 2: 108–122. (In Russ.)

38. Smirnov A. V. Collective cognitive unconscious and its functions in logic, language and culture. Vestnik Rossijskoj akademii nauk = Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 2017; 87 (10): 867–878. (In Russ.)

39. Zubov Yu. S. Bibliografiya i hudozhestvennoe razvitie lichnosti = Bibliography and artistic development of the individual. Moscow: Publishing House Kniga; 1979. 144 p. (In Russ.)

40. Krasin Yu. A. Ideological pluralism and meta-ideology of new humanism. Vestnik Instituta sociologii = Bulletin of the Institute of Sociology. 2015; 1 (12): 34–59. (In Russ.)

41. Schleiermacher F. Germenevtika = Hermeneutics. Translated from German by A. L. Vol’skij. St. Petersburg: Publishing House Evropejskij dom; 2004. (In Russ.)

42. Mes’kov V. S., Mamchenko A. A. The transformation cycle of a cognitive subject: Subject, environment, content. Voprosy filosofii = Questions of Philosophy. 2010; 10: 67–80. (In Russ.)

43. Ellis C., Johnson F., Rowley J. Promoting information literacy: Perspectives from UK universities. Library Hi Tech. 2017; 35 (1): 53–70.

44. Putnik G., Costa E., Alves C. et al. Analysing the correlation between social network analysis measures and performance of students in social networkbased engineering education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2018 Nov 09]; V. 26 (3): 413–437. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798–015–9318-z

45. Sapegin K. V. Obrazovanie 1.0, 2.0, 3.0: mif i real’nost’ = Education 1.0, 2.0, 3.0: Myth and reality [Internet]. [cited 2018 Nov 09]. Available from: http://ioc.rybadm.ru/project/s_17_01_13/obrazovanie.pdf (In Russ.)