Datasets:

---

LLMDH

/

OpenScience

like 0

Follow

LLM - Digital Humanities 16

ERROR: type should be string, got "https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202127312104 https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202127312104 E3S Web of Conferences 273, 12104 (2021)\nINTERAGROMASH 2021 * Corresponding author: lncs@springer.com Digital \neducation: \ncultural \naspects \nof \ncommunication in the modern educational \nenvironment \nInna Zilberova*, Marina Alyaeva, Fotina Shuraeva, and Konstantin Petrov \nDon State University, 344000, Rostov-on-Don, Russia Abstract. The article presents an analysis of modern approaches to the \nconcepts of \"information and educational environment\" and\" digital \neducational environment\", in which modern students - future bachelors-\ndevelop competencies in the field of intercultural communication. Special \nattention is paid to the consideration of the features of professional \ntraining, as well as the requirements for future specialists. The problems of \nmodern digital education closely follow from the problems of verbal \ninteraction of communicants in the educational environment. The \nconsidered issues of updating the needs for an educational product cannot \nbe separated from the realization of the possibilities of didactic and \nmethodological support for digital education, which is realized in the \ncommunicative interaction of a student and a teacher. The authors \nconducted a number of experimental studies in the field of studying the \nneeds of students in educational services and the opportunities for teachers \nto effectively realize their educational potential. The authors offer \nrecommendations for improving educational technologies in the context of \ndigitalization, improving the technical and communicative literacy of \nteachers, conducting trainings and trainings aimed at increasing the stress \ntolerance of teachers, providing them with comfortable working conditions \nin remote mode, modernizing the system of technical regulation in the \nprocess of providing educational activities, conducting explanatory work \nwith students, motivating them to contact work in remote access, \nimproving the culture of group and interpersonal communication © The Authors, published by EDP Sciences. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative\nCommons Attribution License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). 2 Materials and methods When increasing the activity of the interaction between people, in terms of improving the \ntechnical means of communication formed a new type of culture - the culture of virtual \ncommunication. Characterizing this phenomenon, we can distinguish its basic properties: \nnon-linear mode of existence of the communicating subject, virtualization of public \nrelations, the increasing role of social institutions that form the space of virtual \ncommunications, etc. This study examines the problems of the correlation of contemporary culture and \ncommunication in the digital educational environment [1]. The cultural and economic basis of the civilization development has recently become \nthe subject of hard discussions. Does culture represent the same intangible value as other \nobjects that have an immaterial value, and what is the place of culture in the information \nworld? The abundance of educational programs, blogs, courses, distance education among \nuniversities and private resources raise questions “what to teach and how to teach” in a \ncompletely different plane. In the modern world, we can talk about the existence of an \nentire economy of virtual educational services, including technical profile. There is a \nnecessity for effective interaction between the student and the teacher in the context of \nremote education. In our study, we can defined necessity as the need for something, \nwithout which the natural life of a person and his formation as a member of society are\nimpossible. This definition helps us to understand the objective essence of the necessity, its \nobjective expression. However, any necessity also has a subjective expression, determined by the impact of \nneeds on the subject (personality, collective, society and its organizations), on biosocial, \nintellectual-cognitive, aesthetic-emotional, moral and other spheres of his life and which \nfinds expression in the form of a natural reaction subject - a feeling of lack or unwanted \nexcess of something [2]. Consequently, if we ignore instinctive reactions that cannot be influenced, then the \nessence of subjective expression consists in awareness, understanding, etc., of a given \nnecessity. This, as a rule, finds an active reflection of the personal position, expressed in \nspeech behavior and reactions to certain material or moral stimulus. Personal priorities may be in conflict with the public need. Public need corresponds to \nthe objective and subjective sides of the need. If a real, natural or public demand for \nsomething exists, but is not realized by the subjects, then we cannot talk about the need. 1 Introduction The increase of digitization in the economy predetermines the enlargement the volume of \nvirtual communication. In turn, this presupposes the formation of new forms of social and \nverbal human behavior, the revision of values and categories that determine interaction in \nsociety. Communication flows penetrating into all spheres of human activity make virtual \ninteraction massive and significant. On the one hand, the emerging culture requires \nreflection within the framework of culture-philosophical analysis - testing technologies for \ntheir cultural consistency and value in the aspect of analyzing the fundamental problems of \ntransforming the human being and society, because it is formed not one - common to all © The Authors, published by EDP Sciences. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative\nCommons Attribution License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). E3S Web of Conferences 273, 12104 (2021)\nINTERAGROMASH 2021 E3S Web of Conferences 273, 12104 (2021)\nINTERAGROMASH 2021 https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202127312104 reality, but multitude. On the other hand, it calls for the renewal of the culture-philosophical \nknowledge itself and the ways of its translation into the scientific and educational \nenvironment, taking into account the possibilities and requirements of new technological \nrealities. E3S Web of Conferences 273, 12104 (2021)\nINTERAGROMASH 2021 In contemporary digital education, there are signs of the formation of the follow\nneeds in the educational system “teacher-student”: y\nthe universality of the individual needs, including the factors of choice and freedom; а) the universality of the individual needs, including the factors of choice and freedom; b) the full development of all creative abilities of a person [13]; c) the all-round development of individuals ceases to be a means, but becomes a prim\ngoal, becomes a measure of the economic and social development of society; d) free self-affirmation of the person as a member of society [14-15]; e) free self-realization of personality in professional and other spheres. e) free self-realization of personality in professional and other spheres. The criterion of rationality (irrationality) of educational needs is: e) free self-realization of personality in professional and other spheres. The criterion of rationality (irrationality) of educational needs is: )\np\ny\np\np\nThe criterion of rationality (irrationality) of educational needs is: y\ny\nа) its qualitative aspect (primary definition), that is, does this need reflect the objective\nnecessary professional, cultural and social conditions of a person and trends in their\ndevelopment; а) its qualitative aspect (primary definition), that is, does this need reflect the objective \nnecessary professional, cultural and social conditions of a person and trends in their \ndevelopment; b) its quantitative aspect (secondary definition), i.e., to what extent this need corresponds \n(or does not correspond) to the objective need for education, mastering competencies, \nskills, etc. 2 Materials and methods Subjective expression of necessity, that is, a certain idea of the need for something or even \na feeling of lack (undesirable excess) of something, can exist relatively independently of \nthose primary objective conditions that contributed to the emergence of the need. If, \nhowever, the subjective expression of needs not related to its objective character and if the \nfirst does not take into account the restrictions imposed on needs by the reproduction \nprocess, then we cannot talk about social needs, although they can declare themselves as \nsuch really and sometimes very intensely [3-5]. The mismatch between the needs of the system and its environment is overcome bas\non: \u0002\nchanging the environment by increasing the production of material products and \nservices, changing the mode of production and the way of consumption in this case by \ncreating a digital educational product. At the same time, it is assumed that need is an \u0002\nchanging the environment by increasing the production of material products and \nservices, changing the mode of production and the way of consumption in this case by \ncreating a digital educational product. At the same time, it is assumed that need is an 2 E3S Web of Conferences 273, 12104 (2021)\nINTERAGROMASH 2021 E3S Web of Conferences 273, 12104 (2021)\nINTERAGROMASH 2021 https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202127312104 existing ideal image of the future, desired consumption, it is a generalized internal \ndriving force of consumption, in our case - the desire of learning to expand one's own \ncapabilities; existing ideal image of the future, desired consumption, it is a generalized internal \ndriving force of consumption, in our case - the desire of learning to expand one's own \ncapabilities; \u0002\nadjusting needs in the course of their social verification in a given system of public \nrelations, that is, a qualitative transition to the level of virtual reality, the objectification \nof spatial and personal properties. \u0002\nadjusting needs in the course of their social verification in a given system of public \nrelations, that is, a qualitative transition to the level of virtual reality, the objectification \nof spatial and personal properties. Public need as a category has a complex character; its various sides are expressed in \nobjective and subjective dimensions and find themselves in constant internal contradiction\n[6]. If the “external”, objective, expression of the need has been determined, and the \n“internal” has not yet taken shape, then it is premature or ineffective to convince the subject \nof the need for this necessity. Therefore, first, it is necessary to create conditions in the field \nof the formation of subjective needs. If the subjective, “internal”, state has already been formed, and the objective, \n“external”, has not yet matured, then this can lead to a loss of internal incentives to satisfy \nthis need, and then either there will be a reorientation to other needs, or even an \nunreasonable dissatisfaction will appear. In education, this is fixed in the form of the \nimpossibility of realizing the acquired knowledge or skills on the one hand, and on the \nother hand, in the formation of a cognitive barrier that prevents a person from learning from \nthe student's side [7-9]. What explains the subjectivity in the approach to educational needs? In our opinion, the \nreason for subjectivity lies in the confusion of the two sides of the issue. On the one hand, \nall anthropological needs must be taken into account. On the other hand, the objective \nnature of needs lies in the fact that social-production relations and the economic basis, \nwhich determine the conditions for the formation and satisfaction of needs, objectively \ndetermine them [10-12]. 3 Results and discussion The problems of modern digital education closely follow from the problems of verbal \ninteraction of communicants in the educational environment. The considered issues of \nactualizing the needs for an educational product cannot be separated from the \nimplementation of the possibilities of didactic and methodological support of digital \neducation, which is implemented in the communicative interaction of a student and a \nteacher. 3 3 E3S Web of Conferences 273, 12104 (2021)\nINTERAGROMASH 2021 https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202127312104 Today, the main attention and time of the teacher's educational work is concentrated on \nproviding students with data, familiarizing them with information, transferring knowledge \nand forming their understanding. As the study shows, there is a definite relationship \nbetween the presence of a perlocutionary effect (the presence of feedback) and the \neffectiveness of distance learning (Fig.1). Fig. 1. The mastering competencies on bachelor's programs in the direction 08.03.01 Construction in \n% from 100% competence based on the results of control and cut works during the period of distance \nlearning (Development of the authors) Fig. 1. The mastering competencies on bachelor's programs in the direction 08.03.01 Construction in \n% from 100% competence based on the results of control and cut works during the period of distance \nlearning (Development of the authors) The diagram of the development of competencies shows that the result in the studied \nperiod is quite low, and not a single competence is mastered by 50% of the possible \nmaximum. At the same time, the distribution of mastering among students shows other \ndependencies: Fig. 2. Mastering the total number of students on all competencies for bachelor`s programs in the \ndirection 08.03.01 Construction in% of 100% competence (Development of the authors)\n0\n5\n10\n15\n20\n25\n30\n35\n40\nMastered\nby 10%\nMastered\nby 30%\nMastered\nby 50%\nMastered\nby 80%\nMastered\nby 100%\n% of students\n% of students Fig. 2. Mastering the total number of students on all competencies for bachelor`s programs in the \ndirection 08.03.01 Construction in% of 100% competence (Development of the authors) Thus, the number of learners who have mastered the program is 75.2% of the total \nnumber of students who took part in the study. This shows us that the students received \nsome knowledge in the professional field, but this knowledge requires further improvement \nfor full professional implementation. E3S Web of Conferences 273, 12104 (2021)\nINTERAGROMASH 2021 6. Historical sciences\n1 priority -0%\n2 priority -7%\n3 priority -93%\n7. Philosophical sciences\n1 priority -0%\n2 priority -4%\n3 priority -96%\n8. Foreign language\n1 priority -22%\n2 priority -8%\n3 priority -70% As the analysis of the results shows, students prioritize purely practical skills in \naccordance with their personal ideas about the essence of the industry. Comparing these data with the results of teachers' feedback about the effectiveness of \nspeech communication (Fig. 4), we can draw conclusions about the patterns of the results of \nmastering the competencies of students, implemented as feedback. Fig. 4. Results of a questionnaire survey on the problems of teacher communication in a distance-\nlearning environment (Development of the authors)\n0\n5\n10\n15\n20\n25\n30\n35\n40\nTechnical\ninterference\nProblems with\nestablishing\ncommunication\nin the native\nlanguage\nAbsence of\nstudent`s\ninterest\nDifficulties with\npresenting\ninformation in a\nremote form in\nan accessible\nway, according\nto the teacher\nPsychological\ndiscomfort\nReviews of teachers Fig. 4. Results of a questionnaire survey on the problems of teacher communication in a distance-\nlearning environment (Development of the authors) Fig. 4. Results of a questionnaire survey on the problems of teacher communication in a distance-\nlearning environment (Development of the authors) The main problems, according to teachers, are difficult communication with foreign \nstudents. The lack of interest among students, difficulty in presenting information in a \ndistance mode is in second place in terms of reviews. Among the teachers` comments to the \nquestionnaire can be found the following comments: “It's hard to tell when you are here and \nthey are at home”; “Many sit imposingly lounging, some just sleep during the lecture”. These remarks indicate a low degree of teacher-student contact when the teacher is \nperforming duties and the student is serving voluntary service. In this case, the educational \nprocess does not affect in any way on the acquisition of the necessary knowledge and the \nsatisfaction of educational needs. 3 Results and discussion These data can be compared with research data on the development of competencies in \nthe study of disciplines in a full-time classroom work format. 4 E3S Web of Conferences 273, 12104 (2021)\nINTERAGROMASH 2021 https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202127312104 INTERAGROMASH 2021 Fig. 3. The mastering competencies on bachelor's programs in the direction 08.03.01 (Development \nof the authors)\n0\n10\n20\n30\n40\n50\n60\n70\n80\n1st year\n2nd year\n3rd year\n4th year\nGeneral cultural competences\nGeneral professional competencies\nProfessional competence: prospecting\nProfessional competence: production and technological\nProfessional competence: experimental and research Fig. 3. The mastering competencies on bachelor's programs in the direction 08.03.01 (Development \nof the authors) Construction in % from 100% competence based on the results of control and cut works \nduring the period of full-time classroom training As the research data show, in full-time classroom training, the percentage of mastering \ncompetencies is above average, except for the first year of study. The low percentage of \neducation shows only the development of common cultural competence. An analysis of students` necessities, carried out through a questionnaire survey, showed \nthe following differentiation of educational requests: able 1. Determining the priorities of students' needs in the development of areas of the educational \nprogram Table 1. Determining the priorities of students' needs in the development of areas of the educational\nprogram\nName of the mastered area\nPercentage specified priority\n1. Engineering surveys, design of buildings \nand constructions;\n1 priority – 74%\n2 priority - 12%\n3 priority – 14%\n2. Engineering support and equipment of \nconstruction sites and urban areas;\n1 priority - 65%\n2 priority -17%\n3 priority- 18%\n3. Application of machinery, equipment and \ntechnologies for building works;\n1 priority -54%\n2 priority -42%\n3 priority -4%\n4. Business and production management in \nthe building sector;\n1 priority -76%\n2 priority -23%\n3 priority -1%\n5. Technical and environmental safety in the \nbuilding sector\n1 priority -17%\n2 priority -36%\n3 priority -47% Table 1. Determining the priorities of students' needs in the development of areas of the ed e 1. Determining the priorities of students' needs in the development of areas of the educational \nprogram 5 https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202127312104 E3S Web of Conferences 273, 12104 (2021)\nINTERAGROMASH 2021 E3S Web of Conferences 273, 12104 (2021)\nINTERAGROMASH 2021 https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202127312104 1. Improving the technical and communication literacy of teachers. Conducting coaching \nand training courses designed to increase the resistance to stress of teachers, to provide \nthem with comfortable working conditions in a distance mode. 1. Improving the technical and communication literacy of teachers. Conducting coaching \nand training courses designed to increase the resistance to stress of teachers, to provide \nthem with comfortable working conditions in a distance mode. 2. Modernization of the technical regulation system in the process of providing educational \nactivities. 2. Modernization of the technical regulation system in the process of providing educational \nactivities. 3. Carrying out explanatory work with students, motivating them to contact work in \nconditions of remote access, increasing the culture of group and interpersonal \ncommunication. 4 Conclusion Summing up, as recommendations for improving educational technologies in the context of \ndigitalization, the authors suggest: 6 6 6 E3S Web of Conferences 273, 12104 (2021)\nINTERAGROMASH 2021 Electronic edition. Ser. \"Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities \nResearch\" 14-18 (2018). 15. K. Gudkova, Cognitive-Pragmatic Analysis of Argumentation in the Analytical Paper \nArticle (on the British press matter), PhD Thesis, St. Petersburg (2009). 16. M.Yu. Seyranyan, Conflict discourse: sociolinguistic and pragmalinguistic aspects,\nmonograph, Moscow, 2012. References 1. E.V. Gryazeva, Social partnership as one of the conditions for quality training of \nspecialists, Modern trends in the management of industrial innovative organizations: \ncollection of scientific articles, region. Scientific and practical conf. with internat. participation (Alatyr, September 28-29, 2017), Cheboksary, Chuvash Publishing House\nun-ta, 2017. 2. V.G. Kvachev,\nI.M. Divilkovskiy,\nSocial resources of modernization,\nState \nmanagement: The Russian Federation in the modern world, Proceedings of the KHGG \nInternational Conference. (2015) 105-109. 3. S.B. Kotlyarov, E.A. Chicherov, Law and education 7, 117-122 (2017). 4. A.N. Makarevich, VestnikNovSU 74, 53-56 (2013). 5. M.A. Panfilov, S.B. Kotlyarov, E.A. Chicherov, Organizational forms of interaction \nbetween government and business at the regional level, Professional of the Year 2016: \ncollection of articles of the International Scientific and Practical Competition, Under \nthe general editorship of G.Y. Gulyaev, Penza, ICNS \"Science and Education\" (2016)\n80-84. 6. O.A. Podolsky, V.A. Pogozhina, Humanitarian studies 1, 96-103 (2016). 7. N.V. Potekhina, Yu.I. Shulinina, Theory and practice of social development 3, 2016. Information \non \nhttps://cyberieninka.ru/article/n/ \nvzaimosvyaz-tehnologicheskih-\nukladov-i-obrazovaniya-kak-chasti-chelovecheskogo-kapitala (accessed 10.09.2018). 8. N.Yu. Nevraeva, A.M. Kabanov, N.Kh. Savel'eva, N.I. Sorokina, Review of \npedagogical research 2 (3), 105-111 (2020). 9. C.M. Woodward, A History of the St. Louis Bridge (St. Louis, G. I. Jones, 1881). 10. F. van Eemeren, P. Houtlisse,\nArgumentation and Rationality, The Though: \nArgumentation 6, 7-22 (2006). 11. T. Volosovets, I, Kirillov, and A. Buyanov, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences \n237, 1299-1303 (2017). doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2017. 02.213. 12. O.V. Kliuchnikova, O.A. Pobegaylov, Procedia Engineering 150, 2168-2172 (2016). http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/18777058. doi: \n10.1016/j.proeng.2016.07.259 13. E. Shirina, G. Myasischev, The degrading value-based orientations of the linguistic \npersonality in the infomedia of the contemporary internet public communication,\nProceedings of the International Conference on the Theory and Practice of Personality \nFormation in Modern Society (ICTPPFMS 2018). Electronic edition. Ser. \"Advances \nin Social Science, Education and Humanities Research\" 4-7 (2018). 14. O. Gaibaryan G. Myasischev, Proceedings of the International Conference on the \nTheory and Practice of Personality Formation in Modern Society (ICTPPFMS 2018). 7 7 7 E3S Web of Conferences 273, 12104 (2021)\nINTERAGROMASH 2021 E3S Web of Conferences 273, 12104 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202127312104 INTERAGROMASH 2021 15. K. Gudkova, Cognitive-Pragmatic Analysis of Argumentation in the Analytical Paper \nArticle (on the British press matter), PhD Thesis, St. Petersburg (2009). 16. M.Yu. Seyranyan, Conflict discourse: sociolinguistic and pragmalinguistic aspects,\nmonograph, Moscow, 2012. 16. M.Yu. Seyranyan, Conflict discourse: sociolinguistic and pragmalinguistic aspects,\nmonograph, Moscow, 2012. 8 8"