VANHEMPING E. STRATEGIC TRENDS IN EDUCATIONAL ANALYTICS OF FINLAND AND RUSSIA: A COMPARATIVE APPROACH. LIFELONG EDUCATION: The 21st Century.
2020. № 4 (32). DOI: 10.15393/j5.art.2020.6344


Issue 4 (32)

Lifelong learning in the modern world: the research and design methodology
pdf-version

STRATEGIC TRENDS IN EDUCATIONAL ANALYTICS OF FINLAND AND RUSSIA: A COMPARATIVE APPROACH

VANHEMPING Elina
PhD in social science, professor
Scandinavian Institute for Academic Mobility
(Seinäjoki, Finland)
treningcom@mail.ru
Keywords:
educational analytics
mega-trends
digital transformations
«pre-covid» and «covid» periods
social problems.		 Abstract: the article presents the education system analysis from the point of view of the possibility of effectively applying the experience of Finland in post-Soviet countries, primarily in Russia, as well as in the Baltic States and Kazakhstan. Special emphasis is placed on digital learning experiences. The article identifies the key reasons for the diversity of assessments of educational practices in the same country. Two methodological directions of analytics and interpretations of the Finnish and Russian educational space are considered. The dominant topic of the «politicized» direction of the «school» analytics in Finland and Russia is revealed. The analysis of the controversy about digital and distance learning in the Russian-speaking professional field is presented. Attention is paid to «trolling» technologies and technologies of «rocking a boat» in the analytical discourse of educational transformations. The article formulates the methodological foundations and considers the genesis of the politicized aspects of the construction of social problems around the topic of digital transformations of education. The article considers the target guidelines for the development of constructive foresight analytics on applied learning problems in the context of digital transformations.
Paper submitted on: 11/01/2020; Accepted on: 11/20/2020; Published online on: 12/25/2020.

References

  1. Bloomer G. Social problem as collective behaviour. Konteksty sovremennosti 2. Kazan, 2001. (In Russ.)
  2. Vanhemping E. G., Novak M. A. Innovative practices and civil initiatives in education of generation Z. St. Petersburg, 2020. 246 p. (In Russ.)
  3. Vanhemping E. G., Saltseva S. V., Seydumanova A. S. Leap into «digital»: transformation of education in the context of global digitalization. St. Petersburg, 2020. 288 p. (In Russ.)
  4. Aarrevaara T. Oh Happy Days! University Reforms in Finland. I. Dobson, F. Maruyama (Eds.), Cycles of University Reform: Japan and Finland Compared. Center for National Unviersity Finance and Management. Japan, Tokyo, 2012. P. 79–92.
  5. Allart E. Having, Loving, Being: An Alternative to the Swedish Model of Welfare Research.  Quality of Life, WIDER, 1996. 309 p.
  6. Dervin F., Jacobson A., Chen N. [Electronic resource]. We must mend what has been torn apart (Camus): Interculturality in Teacher Education and Training. Education and Society. 2020. № 38 (1). P. 3–12. Electron. dan. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7459/es/38.1.01 (date of access 09.10.2020).

 


Displays: 1338; Downloads: 397;

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j5.art.2020.6344