Университетские преподаватели в условиях пандемии: травматический социальный опыт дистанционного обучения

  • Ольга Крокинская Государственный российский педагогический университет имени А.И. Герцена, Санкт-Петербург, Россия


Distance education of the COVID–19 pandemic period is examined in this article from the perspective of the development of educational processes subjected to the crisis experience of lockdown. This experience opens for study not only the clash of tradition and innovation, but also the circumstances of simultaneous immersion into the crisis and overcoming it. P. Sztompka's notion of trauma of social change is used to set the sociological problem. The article presents the results of the sociological project "Institutional and Behavioral Aspects of Distance Education Functioning in the Context of the COVID–19 Pandemic (2020)", carried out in Russian State Pedagogical University named after A.I. Herzen in St. Petersburg. Among the subjects of this research are crisis transformation of university teacher profession and related tensions in the system of university activities. The empirical research explores professional practices and conditions of teachers' remote work, the phenomenon of disappearing boundaries between working and personal time of teachers, the effects of management during the pandemic period. Special attention is paid to the factor of abrupt increase in workload and feelings of overstrain –– physical, mental, emotional; the phenomenon of cognitive failure in the situation of deformed structure of work tasks is outlined. The problem of distance education quality is considered through the evaluation of the effectiveness of communication between teachers and students from the perspective of both groups, the opinions of professionals about the prospects of distance forms in university education, their acceptable and unacceptable scope. The socio-ethical climate of the situation presented as a background of the processes under study is marked and measured by the method of semantic differential. The general result of the analysis made during the survey of university teachers is the conclusion that in the extraordinary situation of the pandemic distance education as a whole has fulfilled its tasks, that it has served as a test of new technological opportunities for education and created the preconditions for its consolidation in the structure of education as one of the basic technologies.


Abramov R.N., Gruzdev I.A., Terentev E.A., Zakharova U.S., Grigoryeva A.V. (2020) Universitetskiye prepodavateli i tsifrovizatsiya obrazovaniya: nakanune distantsionnogo fors-mazhora [University Professors and the Digitalization of Education: on the Threshold of Force Majeure Transition to Studying Remotely]. Universitetskoye upravleniye: praktika i analiz [University Management: Practice and Analysis], 24(2): 59–74 (in Russian).

Bakhtin M.M. (1975) Formy vremeni i khronotopa v romane. Ocherki po istoricheskoy poetike [Forms of time and chronotope in the novel. Essays on Historical Poetics]. In: Bakhtin M.M. Voprosy literatury i estetiki [Literature and aesthetics]. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaya literatura: 234–407 (in Russian).

Bauman Z. (2000) Tekuchaya sovremennost' [Liquid Modernity]. St. Petersburg: Peter (in Russian).

Beck W (2000) Obshchestvo riska. Na puti k drugomu modernu [Risk Society. On the way to another modernity]. Moscow: Progress-Tradition (in Russian).

Faisal P., Kisman Z. (2020) Information and Communication Technology Utilization Ef­fectiveness in Distance Education Systems. International Journal of Engineering Business Management, 12(2): 1–9.

Gafurov I.R., Ibragimov H.I., Kalimullin A.M., Alishev T.B. (2020) Transformatsiya obucheniya v vysshey shkole vo vremya pandemii: bolevyye tochki [Transformation of Higher Education During the Pandemic: Pain Points]. Vyssheye obrazovaniye v Rossii [Higher education in Russia], 29(10): 1–112 (in Russian).

George M. (2020) Effective Teaching and Examination Strategies for Undergraduate Learning during COVID–19 School Restrictions. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 49(8): 1–26.

Hayek F.A. (2006) Pravo, zakonodatel'stvo i svoboda: Sovremennoye ponimaniye liberal'nykh printsipov spravedlivosti i politiki [Law, Legislation and Freedom: A Contemporary Understanding of Liberal Principles of Justice and Politics]. Moscow: IRISEN (in Russian).

Kahneman D. (2014) Dumay medlenno… reshay bystro [Think fast... decide slow]. Moscow: AST (in Russian).

Khaykin S. (2005) Ekstremal'naya sotsiologiya: metodologiya i opyt konkretnykh issledovaniy v zone sotsial'no-politicheskogo i voyennogo konflikta [Methodology and Experience of Concrete Research in the Zone of Socio-Political and Military Conflict]. In: Khaykin S., Zadorin I. (eds.) Ekstremal'naya sotsiologiya: issledovaniya s riskom dlya issledovatelya [Khaikin S., Zadorin I. (ed.) Extreme Sociology: Research at Risk for the Researcher. Nadym: Association of Regional Research Centers (Group "7/89")]. Research Center "Horizon-M": 40–61 (in Russian).

Krokinskaya O.K. (2015) «Karty pravdu govoryat…»: kognitivnaya sila sotsioeticheskoy metafory [«The Cards Tell the Truth ...»: The Cognitive Power of Socioethical Metaphor]. In: Desyatyye Kovalevskiye chteniya. Materialy nauchno‐prakticheskoy konferentsii 13–15 noyabrya 2015 goda [Tenth Kovalevsky readings. Materials of the scientific and practical conference on November 13–15, 2015]. St. Petersburg: Scythia-print: 1270–1272 (in Russian).

Lotman Y.M. (2000) Kul'tura i vzryv [Culture and Explosion]. Semiosphere. St. Petersburg: Peter: 12–149 (in Russian).

Luhmann N. (1991) Tavtologiya i paradoks v samoopisaniyakh sovremennogo obshchestva [Tautology and paradox in self-descriptions of modern society]. SOTSIO-LOGOS: Sotsiologiya. Antropologiya. Metafizika [SOCIO-LOGOS: Sociology. Anthropology. Metaphysics]. Vol. 1. Moskow: Progress: 194–218 (in Russian).

Makusheva M.O., Nestik T.A. (2020) Sotsial'no-psikhologicheskiye predposylki i effekty doveriya sotsial'nym institutam v usloviyakh pandemii [Socio-Psychological Preconditions and Effects of Trust in Social Institutions in a Pandemic]. Monitoring obshchestvennogo mneniya: ekonomicheskiye i sotsial'nyye peremeny [Monitoring Public Opinion: Economic and Social Change], 6: 427–447 (in Russian).

Maturana U., Varela F. (2001) Drevo poznaniya: Biologicheskiye korni chelovecheskogo ponimaniya [The Tree of Knowledge: The Biological Roots of Human Understanding]. Moscow: Progress-Traditsiya (in Russian).

McCabe D., Ciuk S., Gilbert M. (2019) ‘There Is a Crack in Everything’: An Ethnographic Study of Pragmatic Resistance in a Manufacturing Organization. Human Relations, 73(7): 953–980.

Merton R.K. (1994) Yavnyye i latentnyye funktsii [Explicit and latent functions]. In: Dobrenkov V.I. (ed.) Amerikanskaya sotsiologicheskaya mysl' [American Sociological Thought]. Moscow: Moscow State University: 379–448 (in Russian).

Oslon A.A. (head of the writing team) (2021) Sotsiologiya pandemii. Proyekt korona-FOM. [Sociology of a pandemic. Corona-FOM project]. Moscow: Institut Fonda Obshchestvennoye Mneniye (In Russian).

Rogozin D. M. (2021) Predstavleniya prepodavateley vuzov o budushchem distant­sionnogo obrazovaniya [The Future of Distance Learning as Perceived by Faculty Members]. Voprosy obrazovaniya [Educational Studies Moscow], 1: 31–51 (in Russian).

Rogozin D.M. (2020) Prepodavateli rossiyskikh vuzov o razvitii onlayn-sredy v usloviyakh pandemii [Teachers of Russian universities on the development of the online environment in the context of a pandemic]. Monitoring ekonomicheskoy situatsii v Rossii. Tendentsii i vyzovy sotsial'no-ekonomicheskogo razvitiya [Monitoring of the economic situation in Russia. Trends and challenges of socio-economic development], 14(116) [https://www.iep.ru/upload/iblock/1a2/5.pdf] (accessed: 15.06.2021) (in Russian).

Shtorm pervykh nedel': kak vyssheye obrazovaniye shagnulo v real'nost' pandemii (2020) [The storm of the first weeks: how higher education stepped into the reality of a pandemic]. Moscow: NRU HSE (in Russian)

Sztompka P. (2001) Sotsial'noye izmeneniye kak travma [Social change as trauma]. Sotsiologicheskiye issledovaniya [Sociological research], 1: 6–16. (in Russian)

Terentev E.A., Zakharova U.S. (2020) “Eto rabotaet!”: perekhod na udalenny rezhim raboty i distantsionnoe obuchenie v otsenkakh prepodavateley rossiyskikh universitetov [“It works!”: Transition to Remote Working and Distance Learning as Perceived by Russian Faculty Members]. In: Shtorm pervykh nedel: kak vysshee obrazovanie shagnulo v realnost pandemii [First Weeks Storm: How Higher Education Entered into Reality of Pandemic], Moscow: HSE: 67–79 (in Russian).

Tesar M. (2020) Towards a Post-COVID-19 ‘New Normality’? Physical and Social Distancing, the Move to Online and Higher Education. Policy Future in Education, 18(5): 556–559.

Tirni K. (2019) Disasters: a sociological approach. Cambridge, UK; Medford, MA: Polity Press.

Volchenkova K.N. (2020) Analiz otnosheniya prepodavateley rossiyskogo vuza k vynuzhdennomu distantu [Analysis of the attitude of Russian university teachers to the forced distance]. Vestnik YUUrGU. Seriya «Obrazovaniye. Pedagogicheskiye nauki» [Bulletin of SUSU. Series “Education. Pedagogical Sciences”], 12(4): 88–97 (in Russian).

Как цитировать
Крокинская, О. (2021). Университетские преподаватели в условиях пандемии: травматический социальный опыт дистанционного обучения. ЖУРНАЛ СОЦИОЛОГИИ И СОЦИАЛЬНОЙ АНТРОПОЛОГИИ, 24(4), 59-89. извлечено от http://jourssa.ru/jourssa/article/view/2349