Sociological study reveals intergenerational digital conflict stems from differing behavioral logics across school communities, highlighting distributed responsibility over prohibition.
The subject of the study is intergenerational conflicts that arise in the digital educational environment of a modern school, as well as the model of distributed responsibility as a mechanism for reconciling the interests of students, teachers, parents, and school administration. The empirical basis consists of the results of the author’s sociological study conducted in 2025–2026 among 582 students in grades 10–11, 642 parents, and 458 teachers from five constituent entities of the Russian Federation (Moscow, the Moscow Region, the Kursk Region, the Belgorod Region, and the Republic of Bashkortostan). The methodological foundation is based on sociological approaches to the analysis of generations and intergenerational conflict. Methods of comparative analysis, synthesis of scientific literature, and secondary analysis of studies on the digitalization of education were used. The author of the article substantiated that the conflict in the digital educational environment is not so much due to the fact of using technologies, but rather to the clash between the protective and regulatory logic of adults and the instrumental and integrative logic of schoolchildren. It has been clarified that the prohibitive regulatory model reduces certain risks, but does not foster a sustainable culture of responsible digital behavior. A model of distributed responsibility has been proposed, which includes institutional, pedagogical, parental, student, communicative, diagnostic, and restorative‑regulatory elements. The practical significance of the model lies in its applicability in developing a school code of digital conduct, regulating chat rooms, establishing rules for the use of mobile devices and neural networks, conducting regular diagnostics of conflict‑prone areas, and in fostering school self‑governance and meaningful intergenerational dialogue among participants in educational relations within an educational organization.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Roman Vladimirovich Dakhtin (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: