Antinomy and contradiction: the problem of demarcation of concepts in pedagogical research
- Authors: Sannikov M.A.1
-
Affiliations:
- Ushinsky Institute for the Development of Education
- Issue: No 2 (2026)
- Pages: 29-38
- Section: Articles
- URL: https://vektornaukipedagogika.ru/jour/article/view/1343
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.18323/3034-2996-2026-2-65-3
- ID: 1343
Cite item
Abstract
Abstract: Problem. The key concepts used to describe crisis phenomena in education – “contradiction”, “conflict”, “dilemma”, and “antinomy” – lack strict categorical definiteness and are often used as synonyms. There are no operational criteria for their empirical differentiation in normative texts and in the professional consciousness of teachers. The research is conducted within the context of late modernity philosophy. Aim. To substantiate the specific categorical status of pedagogical antinomy, to identify its essential features and an operational criterion of technological duality. Methods. A two-stage mixed-methods design: a theoretical stage (hermeneutic analysis of philosophical and pedagogical sources, categorical synthesis) and an empirical stage (content analysis of the Federal State Educational Standards for Basic General Education (FSES BGE) for 2010–2025, and a survey of 245 practicing teachers). Results. In the current version of the FSES BGE, 100 % of the identified contradictions satisfy the criteria of antinomy. The contradiction “upbringing – assessment” has transformed from a dilemma into an antinomy. Teachers recognise antinomies in only 46 % of cases (conflicts – 79 %, dilemmas – 61.4 %). A weak positive correlation was found between length of service, level of education, and the ability to identify antinomies. Conclusions. The introduced operational criterion of “technological duality” makes it possible to shift the identification of antinomy from the area of expert intuition to the status of an empirically diagnosable parameter. The developed conceptual and categorical framework (including the differentiation between antinomy, contradiction, and dilemma) is recommended for use in the expert evaluation of educational programs and in teacher professional development programs.
Keywords
About the authors
Maksim A. Sannikov
Ushinsky Institute for the Development of Education
Author for correspondence.
Email: rector@ushinsky-iro.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-6155-0581
rector, assistant professor of Chair of general humanities
Russian Federation, 426052, Russia, Izhevsk, Balezinskaya Street, 80.References
- Ignatev V.P. Oppositions and antinomies of modern educational reality. Higher Education in Russia, 2021, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 87–103. doi: 10.31992/0869-3617-2021-30-3-87-103.
- Yakovleva I.V., Chernykh S.I., Kosenko T.S. "Axiological turn" in Russian education: position of subjectivism. Higher Education in Russia, 2022, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 113–127. doi: 10.31992/0869-3617-2022-31-4-113-127.
- Yakovleva I.V., Chernykh S.I. Dialectics of changes in the axiosystem of russian educationin the transition period. Tomsk State University Journal, 2023, no. 497, pp. 57–64. EDN: CWQOWR.
- Biesta G. “Putting the World in the Centre: A Different Future for Scottish Education”. Scottish Educational Review, 2023, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 149–169. doi: 10.1163/27730840-20231001.
- Biesta G. School–as–Institution or School–as–Instrument? How to Overcome Instrumentalism without Giving Up on Democracy. Educational Theory, 2022, vol. 72, no. 3, pp. 319–331. doi: 10.1111/edth.12533.
- Biesta G., Siegel S.T. The problem of educational theory. Policy Futures in Education, 2021, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 537–548. doi: 10.1177/14782103211032087.
- Volkmann L. Antinomies of Inter-and Transcultural Learning. Praxis Forschung Lehrerinnen Bildung. Zeitschrift für Schul- und Professionsentwicklung, 2020, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 158–169. doi: 10.4119/pflb-3532.
- Kuang-Hsu Chiang, Karjalainen A. Fluid education – a new pedagogical possibility. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 2022, vol. 66, no. 6, pp. 991–1004. doi: 10.1080/00313831.2021.1958254.
- Laub J. Education, Sustainability and Responsibility – Pedagogic Antinomies for Prospective Teachers? Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 2022, vol. 18, no. 3, article number e2278. doi: 10.21601/ijese/12015.
- Schroeder M.J. Antinomies of Education and Their Resolution in Liberal Arts. Akita Internatonal University Global Review, 2009, vol. 1, pp. 3–7. doi: 10.50866/aiugr.1.0_3.
- Friesen N., Hanno Su. What Is Pedagogy? Discovering the Hidden Pedagogical Dimension. Educational Theory, 2023, vol. 73, no. 1, pp. 6–28. doi: 10.1111/edth.12569.
- Aksyutina Z.A. Category-terminological apparatus of modern social upbringing. The Education and science journal, 2023, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 12–34. doi: 10.17853/1994-5639-2023-3-12-34.
- Sorokin P.S., Redko T.D. Contemporary research on agency in education: a systematization of key concepts and developments. Educational Studies, 2024, no. 1, pp. 236–264. doi: 10.17323/vo-2024-18131.
- Korzhuev A.V., Lesnichuk S.A., Kontarov N.A., Ikrennikova Yu.B. Methodological reflection in educational research: the functions and potential of academic commentary. The Education and science journal, 2026, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 9–32. doi: 10.17853/1994-5639-2026-1-9-32.
- Sindlerová P. Teachers‘ attitude to the educational process in the context of paradoxes of education and the need for high-quality undergraduate teacher training // ICERI2020 Proceedings. 2020. P. 5533–5541. doi: 10.21125/iceri.2020.1197.
- Sauerwein M., Danner A. Personal und Qualifikation im Ganztag: Zum Verhältnis von Qualifikation zu Wissen, Reflexivität und Kindorientierung // Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft. 2024. Vol. 27. P. 1569–1592. doi: 10.1007/s11618-024-01239-2.
- Witten U. Über religionspädagogische Antinomien // Zeitschrift für Pädagogik und Theologie. 2025. Vol. 77. № 1. P. 81–98. doi: 10.1515/zpt-2025-2008.
Supplementary files


