Youth Structure of Values as the Priorities of Sustainable Education

Evgeniya Khudyakova

, Anastasia Ryleeva

and Elena Zakharova

Department of Pedagogy and Methods of Teaching Humanities, Institute of Pedagogy, Psychology and Physical Education,

Kurgan State University, Kurgan, Russia

Keywords: Values, Value Priorities, Adolescence, Late Adolescence, Middle Adulthood, Sustainable Education

Priorities.

Abstract: The paper studies some results of comparative analysis of value priorities of different ages: school students,

university students, adults. Similarities and differences of the dominant values are shown in the article, as

well as gender differences in the structure of values. We used Shalom H. Schwartz’ method to make diagnosis.

132 people aged 14-45 years were diagnosed. Different age people values have continuity, have no

confrontation, and have some variations. Value types that should mutually reinforce each other as Schwartz’

theory says, were really set up differently. The main directions of priority areas of sustainable education

cultivating moral values are outlined in this article.

1 INTRODUCTION

The modern world with its constant economic,

political, ideological transformations is controversial.

They lead to changes in standards and values of social

groups and individuals as well. It is not only the state

of society that affects the establishing ideals and

values, but also individuals’ values and priorities. It

helps to form the image of our society as civilized,

cultural, tolerant or vice versa. Having the system of

personal values helps support a man in difficult

situations, helps adapt to the changes, it opens new

opportunities to personʼs potential, work out life

perspective and strategies for successful behavior.

It must be pointed out that the Russian society is

heterogeneous. There is age, gender, national

diversity, and differences in social position, material

possibilities and others. Values determine the linking

among people of all ages.

Adult people keep and distribute values.

However, the basis of them is laid in childhood and

adolescence. Young people gain the ability to shape

the personal worldview according to the individual

structure of values. Certainly, the value system is a

dynamic individual formation, it is then converted

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7179-7342

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4699-5096

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0672-2317

because of new types of activity, changes in society

positions, environment

Younger generation is more sensitive to social

changes. Consequently, the state of our future society

much depends on what value foundation they are

establishing now (Vaskov et al., 2018). That is why it

is relevant and interesting to study values of people of

all ages, their similarities and differences.

2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Methodological basis in the research is the work of

L.S. Vygotsky (Cultural and historical theory of

mental development of the personality), A.N.

Leontiev, S.L. Rubinshtein (action-oriented approach

to personal development), V. Frankl (his concept, that

the driving force of a person is search for meaning in

life), J. Crumbaugh, L. Maholic (purpose-in-life

concept).

Khudyakova, E., Ryleeva, A. and Zakharova, E.

Youth Structure of Values as the Priorities of Sustainable Education.

DOI: 10.5220/0010670300003223

In Proceedings of the 1st International Scientiﬁc Forum on Sustainable Development of Socio-economic Systems (WFSDS 2021), pages 463-467

ISBN: 978-989-758-597-5

 2022 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All r ights reserved

463

3 RESULTS

Intergenerational research of values was carried out

in March-September 2020. 132 people aged 14-45

were diagnosed.

During the work Shalom H. Schwartz’ method

was used to make diagnostic studies (Schwartz,

Bilsky, 1987). This method allows us to detect the

main values in order to structure them. According to

the method we can group the values into ten

motivational domains: conformity, tradition,

benevolence, universalism, self-direction,

stimulation, hedonism, achievement, power, security.

The concept of Schwartz suggests that types of values

can fit together compatibly and can be opposed. The

conflicting types are situated in opposite directions,

whereas the compatible ones stay close. The author

attributes achievement and power to the pole of self-

enhancement; it opposes the pole of self-

transcendence, which includes benevolence and

universalism. The other two opposite poles have

openness to change (self-direction, stimulation) and

conservation (tradition, security). Hedonism is

located at the intersection of the poles of openness to

change and self-enhancement (Karandashev, 2004).

One of the groups of respondents is a group of

students from Kurgan school №31 aged 14 to15

years. Adolescence is the period of coming into the

adult life. It is characterized by contradictions in

value development. I.S. Kon notes, that a teenager

focuses on adult values, at the same time his/her

peers’ values are not less significant (Kon, 1980).

Adolescent group values exist together with the

developing ability to reassess the principles of “adult”

morality. E.F. Rybalko explains that teenagers’

“rebellion” against these principles combined with

moral idealization of their generation lies in the fact

that a teenager realizes discrepancy in adult morality

and practical reality (Rybalko, 1974).

Let us see the structure of values – normative

ideals of school students obtained using the method

of Shalom H. Schwartz (table 1).

Table 1: Values – normative ideals of school students

(adolescence).

Types of

values

Boys Girls Average Ran

kin

Hedonism 5,37 5,42 5,39 1

Self-Direction 5,08 5,21 5,14 2

Achievement 5,2 4,99 5,095 3

Securit

5,047 5,107 5,077 4

Benevolence 4,6 4,88 4,74 5

Powe

4,765 4,416 4,591 6

Conformit

4,35 4,68 4,52 7

Continuation of table 1.

Universalis

3,86 4,53 4,2 8

Stimulation 3,56 4,33 3,95 9

Tradition 3,56 3,206 3,383 10

As we can see, the leading position takes hedonic

values as well as self-direction and achievement, the

average numbers are close. Human maturing is

impossible without gaining self-direction. That is

why it is quite natural that schoolchildren have

chosen it as the leading value. It is a specific feature

of teenagers to get out from external control, adult

care, to get self-sufficiency, independence. Personal

success is defining in achievement values. It can be

shown by the demonstration of the significance.

Reaching success is important for teenager’s self-

esteem, it strengthens confidence. Benevolence and

security come next (Khudyakova, 2021).

It is obvious; the five value positions are strongly

expressed and have almost the same averages while

they are all related to different poles in value

structure. So, hedonism takes intermediate position

between openness to change and self-enhancement.

Self-direction is in the pole of openness, achievement

is in the pole of self-enhancement, security – the pole

of conservation, benevolence – the pole of self-

transcendence. Besides, the values of the same pole

which must mutually reinforce each other are

expressed differently. Self-direction and stimulation

relate to the same pole of openness to change.

However, the former comes the second position,

whereas the latter comes the seventh. This fact

confirms the controversy and uncertainty of

teenagers’ values.

The next age group of study participants is young

people 20-24 years old, the third-fourth course of

studying in Kurgan state university. The research

results are given in table 2.

Table 2: Values – normative ideals of university students

(late adolescence).

Types of

values

Young

men

Young

women

Average Ran

kin

Self-Direction 5,444 5,044 5,244 1

Securit

5,033 5,033 5,033 2

Conformit

5,014 5 5,007 3

Hedonism 4,982 4,852 4,917 4

Benevolence 4,876 4,922 4,894 5

Achievement 4,931 4,792 4,861 6

Universalis

4,625 4,819 4,722 7

Stimulation 4,278 4,13 4,204 8

Tradition 4,111 3,678 3,894 9

Powe

4,153 3,57 3,861 10

WFSDS 2021 - INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC FORUM ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC SYSTEMS

464

At the period of late adolescence the system of

values reaches the level of meaningfulness and self-

awareness. A psychologist L. I. Bozhovitch said that

moral worldview gets the level, where it can show the

sustainable system of ethical ideals and principles

only at the age of youth (Bozhovitch, 1968). M.S.

Yanitsky considers that only at youthful stage a

person can build up the worldview, which can give an

opportunity to form the unique independent system of

personal values (Yanitsky, 2000).

Unlike the teenage group, self-direction takes the

first position. We can believe, these students have

mature understanding of what self-direction is. This

category includes not only independence, being free

from adult care, but also ability to self-control, self-

regulate, thinking, choosing the modus operandi in

creative and research activity. The university students

find it very important to build skills of independent

work in educational, scientific, professional activity,

to be reliable, to take responsibility, to cope with

problems (Zakharova, 2018). Security and

conformity are in the group of the most significant

values. As the security is the second position, it

proves that these students are more mature in their

choice in comparison with the younger group of

respondents. Young people of 20-24 years old realize

how much security is important for themselves and

other people. It is a requirement of harmony, social

stability and relationships. Hedonism and

benevolence come the next, they represent the

opposite poles. We should confess that their own

pleasure is set higher than well-being of somebody

else. Achievement values from self-enhancement

domain got to the sixth position; it is lower than in the

teenagers’ group. Power has decreased from the sixth

to the tenth position (Khudyakova, 2021).

This age group is characterized by duality of the

system of value preferences. Types of values,

according to the Schwartz theory, must mutually

reinforce each other but they are expressed

differently.

However, the value system is not going to stop at

the stage of youth. It transforms as a result of changes

in living conditions and human activity in another

period – adulthood. Things that were important at a

certain period may turn into less significant after a

while or even lose their importance.

The next group of participants whose values we

have considered in our study is adult people aged

from 30 to 45 years. Results are presented in table 3.

As you can see in table 3, the leading position of

this group of respondents is taken by security. The

significance of this type of value is increasing with

age.

Starting with the fourth position in group 1

(school students), it moves to the second in group 2

(university students) and, finally, it occupies the first

in group 3 (adult people). The next important value is

benevolence and self-direction relating to the pole of

self-transcendence (caring for human beings and

nature) and openness to changes. The difference

between the second and the third positions is minimal.

The next point is conformity. It is located in the

conservation domain. The fifth and the sixth places

are taken by achievement (from self-enhancement

domain) and universalism. Thus, the first five

positions in the table are occupied all domains of

Schwartz’ model. The less important values for adults

are tradition, stimulation, power as well as for the

youth group. They take the 8

, 9

, 10

place of the

table.

Table 3: Values – normative ideals of adult men and women

30-45 years old.

Types of

values

Men Women Average Ranki

Securit

5,044 5,489 5,267 1

Benevolence 4,656 5,111 4,883 2

Self-

Direction

4,867 4,733 4,8 3

Conformit

4,583 5,833 4,708 4

Achievement 4,708 4,236 4,472 5

Universalism 4,292 4,584 4,438 6

Hedonism 4,189 3,611 3,9 7

Tradition 3,511 3,744 3,628 8

Stimulation 3,778 3,074 3,426 9

Powe

3,75 2,847 3,299 10

4 DISCUSSION

Picture 1 allows you to compare the value importance

of the normal ideals of teenagers, young people and

adults.

Figure 1: Average values - normative ideals of research

participants aged 14 to 45 years old.

Youth Structure of Values as the Priorities of Sustainable Education

465

We can monitor that the hedonism and power

value decrease from the age of adolescence to middle

adulthood. The decrease of achievement and

stimulation is less conspicuous. Consequently, the

greatest changes were in the sector of self-

enhancement and openness to change. Comparison

analysis shows that conformity at the age of 20-24

reaches the higher positions than in adolescence and

middle adulthood. This tendency can be, probably,

explained by the teenage impulsiveness release.

School students at this period get the ability to keep

some negative social consequences (politeness, self-

discipline and respect to elderly people) under

control.

Analysis of the data received with the help of

Student’s t-test enables us to make conclusions about

the relevance of differences in all groups of research

participants. The empirical locations of “Power”

value turned out to be in the area of interest between

the teenagers group of 14-15 and adult people of 30-

45 (t = 4 where p≤0.05). The empirical locations of

“Hedonism” value turned out to be in the area of

interest between the teenagers group of 14-15 and

adult people of 30-45 and also between the youth

group of 20-24 and adult people of 30-45 (t = 3,3

where p≤0.05). The empirical locations of the

“Stimulation” value appear in uncertainty area

between the youth group of 20-24 and adult people of

30-45 (t = 2,4 where p ≤0.05). The empirical

locations of the “Conformity” value also appear in

uncertainty area between the teenage group of 14-15

and young people of 20-24 (t = 2 where p ≤0.05).

Thus, the research through Shalom H. Schwartz’

method revealed that dominant values of people of

different age groups have both similarities and

differences. “Benevolence” and “Universalism”

values that are connected with concern for people and

nature are ranked higher in all age groups. The

conservation pole values including “Conformity”,

“Tradition” and “Security” are approximately the

same. However, the research discovered that

“Conformity” and “Universalism” reach the higher

position at the age of 20-24 than in the adolescence,

middle adulthood. Values that focus on personality

are more relevant among youth, concerning those that

are connected with self-enhancement. In this way,

“Power” values greater for teenagers, though in this

period the real power is the least available, vice versa

the least power value is gained at the age of 30-45.

“Achievement” value the top averages can be found

in the group of adolescence (14-15), but later they

gradually decline. We need additional study to find

out the factors (apart from age) that affect

achievement value. Openness to change expressed

through self-direction and stimulation in adolescence

and adulthood has higher placement than the group of

late adolescence has. “Hedonism” moves gradually

from leading to the penultimate placement.

The research discovered some differences in

values of male and female representatives. Thus,

hedonism is a little higher at teenage girls, then

lowers at young women and considerably declines at

adult age of women. Benevolence and security value

average is equal in every group and has no gender

differences except for the group of adult women; they

have a little higher average position.

Commitment to the traditions is higher among

boys and young men than girls and young women.

However, tradition value in adulthood is higher in the

group of women. Achievement, power, stimulation

values get a higher placement in male groups of all

ages.

5 CONCLUSION

The research indicated the continuity of values in

heterogeneous groups, absence of confrontation, but

having differences. Besides, the preference system of

respondents has some duality, which is more common

for young age stages. Types of values, according to

the Schwartz theory, must mutually reinforce each

other but they were expressed differently. As for the

types of values from opposite poles, in some cases

they were strongly expressed.

To sum up, I want to note that process of building

youth values are influenced by social institutions such

as family, culture, educational system, mass media,

advertisement, religion, and prevailing ideology.

Definitely, the role of family in bringing up moral

norms and values, interests, spiritual needs and

tendencies is prior. However, the educational system

is no less important. It introduces the person to the

society by transferring him/her the value system,

knowledge, skills while promoting the integration

into the social life.

As for priorities of sustainable education,

connected with building moral values, I should

highlight these ones: reliance on human values and

social responsibility, national cultural traditions,

building of environmentally-friendly culture,

involvement into the environmental concern, critical

and creative thinking development, and updating the

disciplines that promote the sustainable development

of social and economic systems.

WFSDS 2021 - INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC FORUM ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC SYSTEMS

466

REFERENCES

Bozhovitch, L.I., 1968. Personality and building it up in

childhood. (Psychological research), Prosveshchenie.

Moscow.

Karandashev, V.N., 2004. Schwartz’ method for studying

individual values: concept and methodological

guidance. St Petersburg. Rech.

Khudyakova, E.V., 2021. The values analysis of the modern

youth, International scientific and practical conference

«Development of the modern innovative technologies

and methods in educational institutions: scientific

articles brochure». Kurgan. Kurgan university

publishing house.

Kon, I.S., 1980. High school student’s psychology.

Moscow. Prosveshchenie.

Rybalko, E.A., 1974. Buildinng personality. Social

personality psychology, pages 20-31.

Ryleeva, A., Yemanova, S., Sokolskaya, M., Kazantseva,

E., Khomutnikova, E. 2019. Features of visual

communication of girls in the Internet space.

International Scientific Conference «Social and

Cultural Transformations in the Context of Modern

Globalism».

Schwartz, S.H., Bilsky, W., 1987. Toward a universal

psychological structure of human values. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 53.

Schwartz, S.H., Butenko, T.P., Sedova, D.S., Lipatova

A.S., 2012. The refined theory of basic human values.

Psychology. Higher School of Economics journal, 9(1).

Vaskov, M., Rezvanov, A., Kasyanov, V., Samygin, S.,

Gafiatulina, N., Zagutin, D., Scherbakova, L., 2018.

Value orientation of Russian in the system of managing

the moral security of society. Bulletin of the National

Academy of Management of Culture and Arts, 2.

Yanitsky, M.S., 2000. Personal values as the dynamic

system. Kemerovo. Kuzbassvuzizdat.

Zakharova, E.M., 2018. Managing the students independent

work in the higher education system, International

scientific and practical conference «Level education for

students in higher education institutions: experience,

problems and perspectives», Kurgan. Kurgan

university publishing house.

Youth Structure of Values as the Priorities of Sustainable Education

467