Introduction. The article discusses the problem of providing professional training for work organizers with youth, taking into ac-count modern challenges, regulatory requirements and the potential of interaction between subjects of science, education, youth policy.

Materials and methods. The research was carried out on the basis of the methods of theoretical analysis, synthesis, generalization, as well as the application of the online survey method.

Results. Based on a constructive approach, the conceptual idea of training specialists has been substantiated, and its implementation in six aspects:

1) In ensuring the relevance and quality of educational programs;

2) In the development of research activities of students, teachers and employers;

3) In the development of social service practices;

4) In the development of projects in the field of state youth policy;

5) In the career development of professionals in the organization of work with youth, state youth policy;

6) In the implementation of an effective assessment of the quality of education and qualifications of graduates.

Discussion. Formed proposals on the design and implementation of professional training of specialists in the field of youth policy correlate with the concept of the three missions of the university, revealing the tools that ensure its implementation directly by the participants in educational relations.

Conclusion. It is necessary to further elaborate the concept of professional training of organizers of work with youth on the basis of interactive interaction of subjects of youth policy, and a focus on the proactive orientation of the implementation of the educational program.

A paradigm framework has been established for the training of professionals in the organization of work with young people in the context of interaction between youth policy actors;

The tasks, directions, forms, planned results of professional training of specialists in organizing work with youth in partnership between educational organizations and youth policy actors are revealed on a systematic basis.

1. Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation (2021), No. 77 ot 5 february 2021 g.: Federal'nyy gosudarstvennyy obrazovatel'nyy standart vysshego obrazovaniya [No. 77 dated February 5, 2021: Federal state educational standard of higher education]. Spravochno-pravovaya sistema “Konsul'tantPlyus”. (In Russian).

2. Maslow A. (1997), Psikhologiya bytiya [Psychology of being], Izdatel'stvo “Refl-buk”, Moscow, 300 p. (In Russian).

3. Stolyarova O. (2003), Sotsial'nyy konstruktivizm: ontologicheskiy povorot [Social constructivism: an ontological turn], Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta, Seriya “Filosofiya”, 3, 39–51. (In Russian).

4. Raskin J.D. & Bridges S.K. (2002), “Constructivism in psychology: Personal construct psychology, radikal constructivism, and social constructionism”, American Communication Journal, vol. 5, no. 3. pp. 7–24.

5. Eliseyev O.P. (2004), Aktivnost' i sotsiokul'turnaya evolyutsiya cheloveka (Dissertatsiya na soiskaniye uchenoy stepeni doktora filosovskih nauk) [Activity and sociocultural evolution of man. (A dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Sciences)]. Moscow, 387 p. (In Russian).

6. Zinchenko Yu.P., Dorozhkin E.M. & Zeer E.F. (2020), Psikhologo-pedagogicheskiye osnovaniya prognozirovaniya budushchego professional'nogo obrazovaniya: vektory razvitiya [Psychological and pedagogical bases for determining the future of vocational education: Vectors of development], Obrazovaniye i nauka, 3 (22), 11–35 (In Russian).

7. Ministry of Labor and Social Protection of the Russian Federation (2020), No 59n ot 12 february 2020 g.: Professional'nyy standart “Spetsialist po rabote s molodezh'yu” [No. 59n dated February 12, 2020: Professional standard “Specialist in working with youth”]. Spravochno-pravovaya sistema “Konsul'tantPlyus”. (In Russian).

8. Harlanova E.M. (2014), Kontseptsiya razvitiya sotsial'noy aktivnosti studentov v protsesse integratsii formal'nogo i neformal'nogo obrazovaniya: monografiya [Concept of development of social activity of university students in the process of integration of formal and informal education], Monografiya, Izdatel'stvo Chelyabinskogo gosdurastvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta, Chelyabinsk, 380 p. (In Russian).

9. Shmelev E.A. & Kislakov P.A. (2021), Tret'ya missiya universitetov v institualizatsii prosotsial'noy aktivnosti molodezhi [The third mission of universities in the institutionalization of pro-social activity of youth], Noosfernye issledovaniya, 2, 4–12. (In Russian).

10. Ronnie L. (2017), “Dyadic processes in postgraduate education: Insights from MBA student experiences”, The International Journal of Management Education, no. 3 (15), pp. 513–519. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijme.2017.09.002.

11. Pherali T. &, Lewis A. (2019), “Developing global partnerships in higher education for peacebuilding: a strategy for pathways to impact”, Higher Education, no 78, pp. 729–744. DOI: 10.1007/s10734-019-00367-7 (Scopus).

12. Lopez Diosdado M.H. (2016), “Learning to live together’ a pending course in teachers’ training”, Revista de educacion inclusive, no 2 (9), pp. 215–224. (Scopus).

13. Volkova O.V. (2019), Perspektivy vnedreniya sistemy profilaktiki vyuchennoy bespomoshchnosti v protsesse podgotovki spetsialistov pomogayushchikh professiy [Prospects for the introduction of a system for the prevention of learned helplessness in the process of training specialists in helping professions], Vestnik Kemerovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2 (21), 384–394. (In Russian).