Features and contradictions of professional identity formation of modern young teachers at higher education institutions

About the authors:

Elena O. Nidergaus, Senior Lecturer, Department of Sociology and Technologies of Public and Municipal Administration, Ural Federal University (Yekaterinburg); e.o.nidergaus@urfu.ru

Lyudmila N. Bannikova, Dr. Sci. (Soc.), Professor, Department of Sociology and Technologies of Public and Municipal Administration, Ural Federal University (Yekaterinburg); urfu.bannikova@bk.ru

Abstract:

This article presents the results of studying the professional identity of a young teacher in the transforming academic environment. The authors prove that the contemporary generation of young teachers exists in the conflicting socio-cultural and professional space.

One of the research’s focuses includes the transformation of the academic environment as a place of work and the conflict of two types of University cultures: the traditional, or “professorial” one, focused on humanitarian values; and the corporate one with its basic economic values. Another aspect of the analysis is the blurring of social identification of contemporary youth, including “young adults”, the modern generation of young teachers at universities.

The results of the study reveal the features of forming a professional identity of young teachers. The most significant feature of the professional identity of a young teacher is the perception of the socially significant profession of a higher school teacher not as a vocation, but as a tool to achieve the desired level and lifestyle.

References:

1. Zborovsky G. E. 2009. Theory of Social Community. Yekaterinburg. [In Russian]
2. Magura M. I., Kurbatova M. B. 2001. “Organizational commitment”. Upravlenie personalom, no 6, pp. 19-25. [In Russian]
3. Vannikova  L. N., Wisniewski J. R. (eds.). 2013. Formation of the engineering elite of the industrial region: sociological analysis. Yekaterinburg. [In Russian]
4. Affum-Osei E., Acquaah E., Acheampong P. 2015. “Relationship between organisational commitment and demographic variables: evidence from a commercial bank in Ghana”. American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, no 5, pp. 769-778. DOI: 10.4236/ajibm.2015.512074
5. Becker H. S. 1960. “Notes on the concept of commitment”. American Journal of Sociology, vol. 66, no 1, pp. 32-40. DOI: 10.1086/222820
6. Lipponen J. 2001. Organizational Identifications: Antecedents and Consequences of Identifications in a Shipyard Context. Helsinki: Department of Social Psychology, University of Helsinki.
7. Meyer J. P., Allen N. J. 1984. “Testing the ‘side-bet theory’ of organizational commitment: some methodological considerations”. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 69, no 2, pp. 372-378. DOI: 10.1037//0021-9010.69.3.372
8. Meyer J. P., Allen N. J. 1991. “A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment”. Human Resource Management Review, vol. 1, no 1, pp. 61-89. DOI: 10.1016/1053-4822(91)90011-Z