The subject of research in this article is at the intersection of problem areas of subjectivity and the state of higher education in modern Russia. The authors strive to solve a twofold problem. Contextually, in a philosophical and sociological perspective, using the concept of “subjectivity indicator” and outlining its semantic boundaries, instrumentally link it with certain empirical methods and the factual data obtained from them related to the study of students’ professional and educational orientations. The area of subjectivity considered in this article borders on the lower level with the area of mediation, and on the upper level – on the personal area. The authors provide arguments in favour of the fact that sociological tools can be correctly applied to the study of subjective, but not personal qualities. The nature of the error when measuring the level of subjectivity in individuals and in social groups is also clarified. In the field of higher education, the level of subjectivity is determined by a combination of indicators from two components: faculty and student. The professional and educational orientations of students, according to the authors, can be considered as a reliable indicator of subjectivity in a given social group. For the empirical basis of the article a field study conducted at universities in Nizhny Novgorod has been used.

Using a questionnaire survey, we studied the motivations of students at leading universities in the city regarding obtaining higher education, choosing a university and the direction of training, as well as preferences regarding their future field of activity. As a result of the analysis, five groups of students with different motivational guidelines were identified. Three groups with a clear, fully realised vocational and educational strategy: with a focus on the demand for the profession in the labour market, on the advantages of higher education as such, on the realisation of their own abilities and inclinations (the latter is defined by the authors as an “authentically subjective group”). And two groups - with a vague, not quite consciously built professional and educational trajectory (with a drift from the pole of subjectivity to the pole of mediation). As a result of the study, a conclusion was made that the level of subjectivity among modern students is not high enough, and the social reason for this insufficiency is indicated.

ubjectivity, level of subjectivity, indicator of subjectivity, sphere of education, student youth, professional and educational orientations of students, philosophical and sociological context

1. Bachishin V. M., Razin P. V., Vladimirova M. B. A method for analyzing mass consciousness texts (MAMCT) (based on a B. Grushin seminar at the Lomonosov Moscow State University, Faculty of Journalism, in 1983–1989). Monitoring obshchestvennogo mneniya: ekonomicheskie i sotsial'nye peremeny, 2020: 1: 455–464 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.14515/monitoring.2020.1.19; EDN: QEFFNI.
2. Baudrillard J. The Consumer Society: Myths and Structures. Transl. by E. A. Samarskaya. Moscow, Respublika: Kul'turnaya revolyutsiya, 2006: 268 (in Russ.).
3. Gorshkov M. K., Sheregi F. E. The Youth of Russia under the Lens of Sociology: Results of Years of Research. Moscow, FNISC RAN, 2020: 688 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.19181/monogr.978-5-89697-325-6.2020; EDN: BNSNDA.
4. Debreu R. Introduction to Mediology. Transl. by B. M. Skuratov. Moscow, Praksis, 2010: 368 (in Russ.).
5. Konstantinovskiy D., Voznesenskaya E., Cherednichenko G. Molodezh' Rossii na rubezhe XX–XXI vekov: obrazovanie, trud, sotsial'noe samochuvstvie [Russian Youth at the Turn of XX–XXI Centuries: Education, Employment, Social Well-Bein]. Moscow, CSP i M, 2014: 548 (in Russ.).
6. Education in numbers: 2023: a brief statistical book. Moscow, ISIEZ VSHE, 2023: 132 (in Russ.).
7. Labour force, employment and unemployment in Russia (based on sample labour force surveys). 2022. Moscow, Rosstat, 2022. Accessed 22.12.2023. URL: https://rosstat.gov.ru/storage/mediabank/Rab_sila_2022.pdf (in Russ.).
8. Russian Statistical Yearbook. 2020: Statistical Yearbook. Section 5: Labour. Employment and unemployment. Moscow, Rosstat, 2020. Accessed 22.12.2023. URL: https://rosstat.gov.ru/storage/mediabank/Ejegodnik_2020.pdf (in Russ.).
9. Sitnikova I. V. Professional self-determination of students: the motivational and value dimension. Izvestiya vysshikh uchebnykh zavedenii. Povolzhskii region. Obshchestvennye nauki, 2021: 2 (58): 83–99 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.21685/2072-3016-2021-2-9; EDN: APOXWA.
10. Sitnikova I. V. Today's student population: the specifics of vocational choice. In IX International Sociological Grushinsky Conference «Social Engineering: How Sociology Changes the World», Moscow, 20-21 March 2019. Ed. by A. V. Kuleshova. Moscow, VCIOM, 2019: 304–308 (in Russ.). EDN: ALBBOR.
11. Terent'ev K. Yu. Educational strategies of Russian youth: Towards a typology. Vestnik SPbGU. Ser. 12. Sotsiologiya, 2016: 2: 17–27 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.21638/11701/спбу12.2016.202; EDN: YNLBUZ.
12. Fatenkov A. N. Sub"ekt: paradigma vozvrashcheniya [A Subject: Paradigm of Return]. Chelovek, 2011: 5: 5–20 (in Russ.). EDN OIXRST.
13. Fatenkov A. N. Choice: A phenomenon under a cloud of suspicion. Chelovek, 2016: 3: 48–62 (in Russ.). EDN: WKTZVR.
14. Haken H. Synergetics. Transl. by V. M. Emelynov. Ed. by Yu. L. Klimantovich, S. M. Osovets. Moscow, Mir, 1980: 404 (in Russ.).
15. Weidlich W., Haag G. Opinion Formation – an Elementary Example of SemiQuantitative Sociology. In Weidlich W., Haag G. Concepts and Models of a Quantitative Sociology: The Dynamics of Interacting Populations. Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer, 1983: 18–53.