Global Journal of Management and Business Research, B: Economics and Commerce, Volume 21 Issue 5

2017). This means that the intellectually autonomous person becomes its main architect. But if conditionally estimating the period of study in the secondary education system at 9-12 years, then the loss of at least one young generation (X, Y, Z) turns into a 30-year period of socio-economic stagnation or regression. So, the waste of time on realizing this truth is the loss of young generations, which could begin to form the general contours of the future world in a dozen years. III. R esults and D iscussion The problem of education is eternal. The experts usually describe it, highlighting the main reasons for the decline in the quality of knowledge, and justifying new and the newest technologies (Romer, 1986; UNESCO, 2016a, 2016b). In 2018 г . in its World Development Report World Bank (World Bank, 2018), and subsequently other analytical institutions (World Bank, 2020; The Economist, 2020) came to the disappointing conclusion that the modern education system is in crisis. Following dialectical logic and considering all of the above, the authors tried to highlight the essence of the problem of the ineffectiveness of the educational process, taking into account more and more advanced methods of presenting material, more and more skillful teaching technologies, etc. In this context, it should be emphasized that the authors first discuss the educational component of the process of self- organization of the individual. The starting point in the study was the basic methodological principles of teaching, which were brought together by the famous Soviet educator А . А . Pinsky (1978) to the following three: «what to teach», «how to teach» and «how to learn» (Fig. 7). As for the first two – «what to teach», «how to teach», they are quite skillfully implemented in the educational process. As for the 3rd component of the Pinsky triad – «how to learn», then it has turned out to be the weakest element of the modern education system. This is largely due to the fact that the problem of implementing this principle turned out to be the most difficult. Meanwhile, the current state of the education system has made the principle of "how to learn" the most demanded, especially in connection with the massive transition to distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Indeed, not having taught the student to learn, the teacher makes the first two components – “what to teach” and “how to teach” meaningless. The main reason for the unresolved problem of "how to learn" (or rather "to teach how to learn") lies in the fact that the modern education system simply ignores it. And, meanwhile, from a philosophical point of view, this problem can be presented structurally. If the learner and the teacher are a dialectical pair, then their connection can be represented using the methodological principles of teaching: then the teacher is associated with “how to teach”, and the learner is associated with “how to learn”. Their dialectical unity is determined by the quality of mastering the subject - "what to teach" (and at the same time "what to learn"). If the degree of the student's mastery of the academic discipline is high, then the difference between “what to teach” (on the part of the teacher) and “what to learn” (on the part of the student) is reduced. Otherwise, this gap increases. It follows that the degree of mismatch between “what to teach” and “what to learn” predetermines the quality of education in all disciplines in general. What underlies the inhibition of the gap between "what to teach" and "what to learn", provided that both the student and the teacher strive to increase the level of mastery of the subject? According to the authors, the psychological and cognitive barriers (PCB) predetermine such a brake (Pilipenko, 1997). PCBs function both in the educational consciousness of students and in the professional consciousness of teachers. Hence it follows that the main reason for the low level of education lies in the presence of PCBs, or rather, in the fact that they have not been overcome both in the educational consciousness of students and in the professional consciousness of teachers (Pilip е nk о , at al., 2015). The PCB theory structures the problem of the difficulties of mastering scientific knowledge, typical mistakes and misconceptions in the most general form, serving explanatory, diagnostic and predictive tools. It is aimed at identifying the sources of many students' difficulties in the process of mastering an education subject, at developing general approaches to prevent and overcome the PCBs. The methodological approaches of the PCB theory in teaching represent the new basis for the creation of innovative educational technologies and aim at generating the intellectually autonomous personalities for post-pandemic reality (Maor, et al., 2017). At the same time, the model of real cognitive consciousness of students could become a new pedagogical tool designed to identify cognitive difficulties, their diagnostics, and to organize their reflection (self- reflection) to students (in the minds of students). Application of the Pilipenko theory of PCB (Pilipenko, 1997; 2015; 2020) and the generalized model of the real cognitive consciousness of students in education act as a new multifunctional pedagogical tool that allows:1) to carry out a causal diagnosis of students' cognitive difficulties; 2) to organize reflection and self-reflection of the students for the identifying unproductive cognitive strategies; 3) to design innovative educational technologies focused on the development of human capital as an important factor of the formation and development of the knowledge (intangible) economy of the future; 4) to solve effectively the third problem of the Pinsky triad - how to learn or, somewhat broader, how to teach to learn. The psycho- Uncertainty of the Post-Covid Future: How will Humanity Solve this Puzzle? © 2021 Global Journals 57 Global Journal of Management and Business Research Volume XXI Issue V Version I Year 2021 ( ) B