A Comparative Analysis of Classical and Postmodern Views on the Idea of a University; Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences; Vol. 206 : Linguistic and Cultural Studies: Traditions and Innovations, LKTI

Bibliographische Detailangaben
Parent link:Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences
Vol. 206 : Linguistic and Cultural Studies: Traditions and Innovations, LKTI.— 2015.— [P. 469-473]
Körperschaft: Национальный исследовательский Томский политехнический университет
Weitere Verfasser: Petrova G. Galina, Smokotin V. Vladimir, Brylina I. V. Irina Vladimirovna, Kornienko A. A. Alla Alexandrovna, Kornienko A. A. Anna Anatolievna, Nikitina Yu. A. Yulia Anatolyevna, Kachalov N. A. Nikolay Aleksandrovich
Zusammenfassung:Title screen
Background: The crisis that the modern university is experiencing today, is conditioned by the crisis of its idea as of a classicalessence. The idea of university was formulated by W. von Humboldt, however, its history starts with the Greek-Roman era whenthe ancient philosophy in its cognitive attitude to the world saw its truth, leaning on intelligence that brought it to the harmony ofbeauty and good. In this quality, the idea of university was changing the university history. However, today, by rejecting anynatural unity and integrity and also reconsidering classics, the postmodern views diversify the classical university and eliminatethe possibility of its common form. Questions arise: can the common idea for the university be preserved in these conditions?Will it be preserved (and should it be preserved) by the postmodern culture? Is it possible today to have the unity of theuniversity as a classical social and educational institution? Do modern university models (entrepreneurial, corporate, research,etc.) have their own idea? Methods: The purpose of this article is to search for differences between the modern and classicaluniversities. The comparative method is used. Results: Distinctive characteristics (peculiarities) of the modern university havebeen discovered and described. Conclusions: A conclusion is drawn that there are transformations of the modern university formsin accordance with the conditions of the modern culture.
Режим доступа: по договору с организацией-держателем ресурса
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: 2015
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.10.085
http://earchive.tpu.ru/handle/11683/15285
Format: xMaterials Elektronisch Buchkapitel
KOHA link:https://koha.lib.tpu.ru/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=644843

MARC

LEADER 00000nla2a2200000 4500
001 644843
005 20250523153338.0
035 |a (RuTPU)RU\TPU\network\9927 
035 |a RU\TPU\network\9925 
090 |a 644843 
100 |a 20151202a2015 k y0engy50 ba 
101 0 |a eng 
105 |a y z 100zy 
135 |a drgn ---uucaa 
181 0 |a i  
182 0 |a b 
200 1 |a A Comparative Analysis of Classical and Postmodern Views on the Idea of a University  |f G. Petrova [et al.] 
203 |a Text  |c electronic 
300 |a Title screen 
320 |a [References: р. 473 (15 tit.)] 
330 |a Background: The crisis that the modern university is experiencing today, is conditioned by the crisis of its idea as of a classicalessence. The idea of university was formulated by W. von Humboldt, however, its history starts with the Greek-Roman era whenthe ancient philosophy in its cognitive attitude to the world saw its truth, leaning on intelligence that brought it to the harmony ofbeauty and good. In this quality, the idea of university was changing the university history. However, today, by rejecting anynatural unity and integrity and also reconsidering classics, the postmodern views diversify the classical university and eliminatethe possibility of its common form. Questions arise: can the common idea for the university be preserved in these conditions?Will it be preserved (and should it be preserved) by the postmodern culture? Is it possible today to have the unity of theuniversity as a classical social and educational institution? Do modern university models (entrepreneurial, corporate, research,etc.) have their own idea? Methods: The purpose of this article is to search for differences between the modern and classicaluniversities. The comparative method is used. Results: Distinctive characteristics (peculiarities) of the modern university havebeen discovered and described. Conclusions: A conclusion is drawn that there are transformations of the modern university formsin accordance with the conditions of the modern culture. 
333 |a Режим доступа: по договору с организацией-держателем ресурса 
461 0 |0 (RuTPU)RU\TPU\network\2898  |t Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 
463 0 |0 (RuTPU)RU\TPU\network\9691  |t Vol. 206 : Linguistic and Cultural Studies: Traditions and Innovations, LKTI  |o XVth International Conference, 9-11 November, 2015, Tomsk, Russia  |o [proceedings]  |v [P. 469-473]  |d 2015 
610 1 |a электронный ресурс 
610 1 |a труды учёных ТПУ 
610 1 |a классические модели 
610 1 |a постмодернистские модели 
610 1 |a университеты 
610 1 |a новые формы 
610 1 |a идеи 
701 1 |a Petrova  |b G.  |g Galina 
701 1 |a Smokotin  |b V.  |g Vladimir 
701 1 |a Brylina  |b I. V.  |c philosopher  |c Associate Professor of Tomsk Polytechnic University, Doctor of Philosophy  |f 1967-  |g Irina Vladimirovna  |3 (RuTPU)RU\TPU\pers\33600  |9 17258 
701 1 |a Kornienko  |b A. A.  |c D. Sc.  |c Professor of the TPU  |f 1941-  |g Alla Alexandrovna  |3 (RuTPU)RU\TPU\pers\27763  |9 12824 
701 1 |a Kornienko  |b A. A.  |c economist  |c Associate Professor of Tomsk Polytechnic University, Doctor of Philosophy  |f 1970-  |g Anna Anatolievna  |3 (RuTPU)RU\TPU\pers\33080  |9 16912 
701 1 |a Nikitina  |b Yu. A.  |c economist  |c Professor of Tomsk Polytechnic University, Doctor of philosophical sciences  |f 1963-  |g Yulia Anatolyevna  |3 (RuTPU)RU\TPU\pers\31963 
701 1 |a Kachalov  |b N. A.  |c linguist  |c Head of the Department, Associate Professor of Tomsk Polytechnic University, candidate of pedagogical sciences  |f 1954-  |g Nikolay Aleksandrovich  |3 (RuTPU)RU\TPU\pers\33552 
712 0 2 |a Национальный исследовательский Томский политехнический университет  |c (2009- )  |9 26305 
801 2 |a RU  |b 63413507  |c 20161122  |g RCR 
850 |a 63413507 
856 4 |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.10.085 
856 4 |u http://earchive.tpu.ru/handle/11683/15285 
942 |c CF