Dr.Philos., Professor K.V. Kiuru
Dr.Hab., Professor L.A. Lipskaya
Ural State University of Physical Culture, Chelyabinsk

Keywords: formation of readiness, cross-cultural communication, readiness, students, multicultural educational environment.

Introduction. General cultural competences, which are formulated in the new educational standards of HPE (higher professional education), are for the most part general declarative, not supported by the broad and specific enough list of knowledge and skills required for their formation.

The implementation of the cultural-humanistic function of education requires the development of culturological foundations upon which a system of social and humanitarian education can be formed, which would provide a pragmatic specific professional training of students and help create conditions for the development of a civilized and moral person as a holistic and multifaceted bio-socio-cultural subject.

We believe, in the face of Russian tendency towards entangling, complementarity and integration of different cultures the competency-building culturological approach appears to be the most productive in regards to education.

The purpose of the study was to scientifically substantiate the competency-building culturological approach to the formation of the readiness for cross-cultural communication in students of physical culture universities.

Materials and methods. Today's social and humanitarian education, built on the basis of an integrated competency-building culturological approach, promotes mutual understanding and cooperation between students, regardless of their ethnic or religious affiliation. This, according to Aleshina T.V., promotes the formation of universal personality traits of future specialists in the sphere of physical culture and sport on the basis of mastering of the universal values of the world culture [1].

The competency-building culturological approach enables us to look differently at the axiological problems traditional for the pedagogics. In the current situation of cultural pluralism or multiculturalism, when the issue of undertaking of certain models, forms or patterns of behavior is not determined by the state, and in fact, is given at the discretion of man himself, it is the anthropological characteristics of the subject of the action that are critical.

With the competency-building culturological approach the variability of education relies on the principles that come from the cultural pluralism and identity of each culture, which is a unique wealth of opportunities for their equal dialogue, based on establishing contacts with traditions and values of different nations, their understanding and mutual enrichment. However, no culture can claim to be universal, cultural identity and cultural diversity are inextricably interrelated, they extend the capabilities of the comprehensive development of man, enabling him to derive strength from his cultural past, to absorb and assimilate elements of other cultures. As a result of the intercultural dialogue, the exchange of views and experience, a man continues the process of enrichment of his culture, his artistic self-creation.

In this case, cultural pluralism is seen not only as recognition of cultural differences, but also as the ability to respond constructively to the ideas of others, to be tolerant of other people's views and values. The problem of cultural pluralism is seen in a bundle with the problem of education of tolerance and liberalism when students are given the freedom to choose their educational path and cultural models that are not imposed on them but are of their own. At the same time it is important to develop in a person a desire to defend his rights and to recognize the freedom of choice of other people.

The competency-building culturological approach focuses on addressing the socio-cultural educational tasks aimed at absorbing by students of the knowledge about other cultures, raising them in a spirit of tolerance and mutual respect for other nationalities, on the formation of human values, intercultural dialogue and ethnic consolidation. Thanks to the experience of intercultural dialogue man looks at the world more widely and is now more tolerant of other people's cultural identity.

According to our study, the proposed competency-building culturological approach provides a personal-meaningful development of students, enabling them to navigate different types of cultures, civilizations and social conventions correlated with them, to adequately interpret the facts and phenomena of culture and to choose the right strategy for engagement in different types of cross-cultural communication. The peculiarity of this approach is that it is characterized by the study of not only national cultures, but also of social subcultures. Thus, students get an idea of the values and lifestyle of representatives of various sectors of society. All of this is aimed at the development of empathic attitude of students towards people belonging to different ethnic groups, different social layers of society, political and economic systems, as well as at taking into account such differences in intercultural communication.

Results and discussion. The teaching of social and humanitarian sciences on the basis of the stated approaches, as practice shows, promotes self-improvement, spiritual and moral growth of each young person, as well as overcoming social anomie and negative phenomena among young people [4]. The main objective of socio-humanitarian education is the development of free critical thinking of a young person, his ability for an independent and responsible choice of life values and patterns of behavior while respecting the views and interests of other people. The teaching of social and humanitarian sciences in this approach promotes open look, better mutual understanding and tolerance among young people. Multicultural educational environment contributes to the promotion of cultural differences as an expression of cultural diversity, tolerance, respect for the opponent's opinion. The tolerant culture is formed as an "incessant discourse" of various social interests and opinions in the search for conjugations and synthesis, binding students together. The competency-building culturological approach under the conditions of variability of education make it possible to move towards cultural pluralism, thus identifying the peculiarities of each culture and at the same time developing a culture of tolerance. The core of this culture is the category of tolerance, which is interpreted as an attempt to achieve mutual understanding and coordination of interests without any means of pressure or coercion. The competency-building culturological approach, considered from the perspective of the "intercultural dialogue", inevitably includes a variety of personality-centered ideas, social positions, value orientations which acquire their significance only in conjunction and comparison with others, i.e. through a dialogue.

In modern domestic pedagogics, representatives of the "School of the Dialogue of Cultures" (M.M. Bakhtin, V.S. Bibler, E.V. Bondarevskaya et al.), that focuses on the formation of human culture, speak out against the monologue-type of thinking, condemn intolerance to the other's word and opinion. They think it is important to understand other cultures and assert cultural diversity. The concept of "The School of the Dialogue of Cultures", developed by V.S. Bibler, involves going beyond the scope of historically formed cultures and through this - the formation of a man's ability to think historically and dialogically. Man in a culture, on the one hand, seeks to preserve what has been created by previous generations, on the other - he always creates his own world by changing it. The author expresses the idea of the need to "change the content and meaning of the idea of education in the context of the idea of culture" [2]. Education here is a unique socio-cultural mechanism that enables a person to exercise his individual existence-in-culture, to display his identity, his ability to create.

"Dialogists" see education as a process of cultural and creative communication, aimed at understanding of the language of an "alien" culture, as an increase in subjective personality traits that determine the extent of its freedom, its humanity, spirituality and creative work. A dialogue is not just standing up for your own cultural positions and values, but is also a respectful and tolerant attitude towards a different culture and its values. Acceptance and understanding of other cultural attitudes and values, the ability to compromise, suggests that such person is not only educated, but also civilized. During a dialogue, a person learns to relate his uniqueness, unique spiritual selfhood to the needs, interests, meaning of life of all mankind. A dialogue is a form of intersubject interaction, which is based on respect and unconditional love, humane human relationships, which mean recognizing the value of every human being. Man acts as the subject of creative activity, the carrier of the activity, of "the will for a dialogue" with all that surrounds him in the world, as well as with himself. From this perspective, in the course of variative education there can be seen the establishment and comprehensive development of man as a self-creative and self-conscious, social and individualized being, that creates culture and is being created by it.

In conditions of variability there take place an immeasurable increase of the value of the cultural and humanistic paradigm, owing to which education is focused on tolerant pedagogical relationships in which none of the existing cultures can be imposed on students as a norm or a standard, students choose cultural values on their own, a "dialogue of cultures" occurs, which doesn't deny the search for common cultural principles. Modeling of different situations of intercultural communication, reproducing the model of intercultural dialogue is a real and efficient way of organizing the educational environment as a variable, multicultural, and at the same time coherent and unified one. An open dialogue of values is needed to ensure that within its framework there would be conscious agreement or disagreement with regard to values, not excluding the conflict of values. Humanitarian educational environment, built on the principles of openness, tolerance and trust, smoothes the revealed contradictions of the change of values. They are realized and accepted by students in the course of free self-determination and choosing of values. A certain difficulty here is imposed by the cognition, understanding and acceptance of the value content of a foreign culture, the development of the ability to give a scientific "evaluation of the effectiveness of value systems" [3].

A humane-oriented education gives priority to the fundamental values of a free society such as dignity, recognition of the right of another person for nonconformity and realization of his life project, to the spontaneity of spiritual life and the freedom of spiritual self-determination. The focus is on the personal growth of students of physical culture universities, expressed in the cultivation of the values of physical, mental and spiritual life, which are in fact integrated into a number of basic values of the modern industrial civilization as axioms of its culture.

Conclusion. Competency-building culturological model of today's social and humanitarian education is possible, provided that there is a priority of freedom and cultural pluralism, based on the search for harmony and consensus in the process of a creative dialogue.

References

1. Alekseeva, T.V. Formirovanie gotovnosti budushchikh menedzherov obrazovaniya k upravlencheskoy deyatel'nosti (Formation of readiness of future managers of education for management activities) / T.V. Alekseeva // Teoriya i praktika professional'nogo obrazovaniya: pedagogicheskiy poisk (Theory and Practice of Vocational Training: Pedagogical search) / Ed. by G.D. Bukharova, O.N. Aref'ev; Ros. gos. prof.-ped. un-t. Yekaterinburg, 2008. Iss. 10. – 380 P.
2. Bibler, V.S. Dialog kul'tur i shkola XXI veka (Dialogue of Cultures and School of the XXI Century) / V.S. Bibler // Shkola dialoga kul'tur: Idei. Opyt. Problemy (School of Dialogue of Cultures: Ideas. Experience. Problems). - Kemerovo: Alef, 1993. – 257 P.
3. Ginesaretskiy, O. Kul'turno-antropologicheskaya perspektiva (Cultural anthropological perspective) / O. Genisaretsky. [Electronic resource]. URL: http://old.russ.ru/antolog/inoe/genis.htm
4. Kiuru, K.V. Grazhdanskaya kompetentnost' studentov vuza: problemy i osobennosti formirovaniya (Civic competency of university students: problems and peculiarities of formation) / K.V. Kiuru, L.A. Lipskaya // Sibirskiy pedagogicheskiy zhurnal. – 2012. – № 2. – P. 141–147.
5. Sannikova, S.V. Mezhkul'turnaya kommunikatsiya i ee rol' v kontseptsii kul'tury (Intercultural communication and its role in the concept of culture) / S.V. Sannikova // Kul'tura i kommunikatsiya (Culture and Communication): Proceedings of the II internat. dist. theor.-prakt. conf. P. II / ChGAKI. – Chelyabinsk, 2006. – P. 93–95.

Corresponding author: kkiuru@mail.ru