Why was the Soviet education system so unique?
The Soviet system was recognized as one of the best models of education all over the world. How did she differ from the rest and what was her advantage? To begin with, a short digression into history.
The secret weapon of the Bolsheviks
In 1957, the Soviet Union launched the world's first artificial Earth satellite. A country whose economic and demographic situation was undermined by the bloodiest of wars, having spent a little more than a dozen years, made a cosmic breakthrough, which the most economically strong and unaffected power in the war was not capable of. In the context of the Cold War with the USSR and the arms race, the United States perceived this fact as a national shame.
The US Congress created a special commission with the task of finding out: "Who is to blame for the national disgrace of the United States?" After the conclusions of this commission, the secret weapon of the Bolsheviks was called ... the Soviet secondary school.
In 1959, NATO officially called the Soviet education system an achievement unparalleled in history. By all the most unbiased estimates, Soviet schoolchildren were much more developed than American ones.
First of all, its mass character and general availability. By 1936, the Soviet Union had become a country of universal literacy. For the first time in the world, conditions were created so that every child in the country from the age of seven had the opportunity to receive a free education, even if he lives in the taiga, tundra or high in the mountains. The younger generation was becoming totally literate, which no country in the world had achieved at that time!
Education for the masses!
The program throughout the vast territory of the Soviet Union was the same. This allowed any child, the son of a peasant or a worker, after graduating from high school, with the help of the system of workers' schools, to enter a university and there to show their talents for the good of their native country. The Soviet system of higher education was the most massive in the world, because the country headed for industrialization and was in dire need of highly qualified personnel. The new emerging Soviet intelligentsia are the children of workers and peasants, who later became professors and academicians, artists and artists.
The Soviet educational system, unlike the American one, made it possible for gifted children from the social ranks to break into the ranks of the intellectual elite and reveal their full potential for the benefit of society.
"All the best for children!"
The Soviet slogan "All the best for children!" in the USSR was reinforced by a serious program of action to educate a new generation of Soviet people. Special children's sanatoriums and pioneer camps were built to improve the health of young citizens, dozens of varieties of sports sections and music schools were opened. Especially for children, children's libraries, Pioneer Houses and Houses of Technical Creativity were built. Various circles and sections were opened in the Houses of Culture, where children could develop their talents for free and realize their potential. Huge editions produced children's books of the widest subjects, illustrations for which were made by the best artists.
All this made it possible for the child to develop and try himself in a wide variety of hobbies - from sports and music to creativity, artistic or technical. As a result, at the moment of choosing a profession, a graduate of the Soviet school approached quite consciously - he chose the business that he most liked. The Soviet school had a polytechnic orientation. This is understandable - the state headed for industrialization, and one should not forget about defense capability either. But, on the other hand, a network of music and art schools, circles and studios was created in the country, which satisfied the needs of the younger generation in music and art.
Thus, Soviet education provided a system of social lifts that allowed a person from the very bottom to discover and develop his innate talents, learn and take place in society, or even become its elite. A huge number of factory directors, artists, filmmakers, professors and academicians in the USSR were the children of ordinary workers and peasants.
The public is more important than the private
But what was the most important, without which the education system could not have taken place even with the best organization: a lofty, noble idea - the idea of building a future society in which everyone will be happy. To comprehend sciences, to develop - not in order to earn more money in the future for your individual happiness, but in order to serve your country, in order to replenish the treasury of the “general good” with your contribution. Children from an early age were taught to give - their work, their knowledge, skills, skills for the good of their native country. It was an ideology and a personal example: millions of people gave their lives defending their homeland from fascism; parents, not sparing themselves, laid out at work; teachers, regardless of time, tried to give knowledge and educate the next generation.
The educational process in the Soviet school was built on the basis of the communist ideology canceled 70 years after the revolution and the ideas of collectivism: the public is more expensive than the personal, conscientious work for the benefit of society, everyone's concern for the preservation and multiplication of public property, man is friend to man, comrade and brother. The younger generation was told from a very early age that the social value of an individual is determined not by his official position and not by material well-being, but by the contribution that he made to the common cause of building a brighter future for all.
According to the System-Vector Psychology of Yuri Burlan, such values are absolutely complementary to ours, in contrast to the Western skin individualistic mentality. The priority of the public over the personal, collectivism, justice and mercy are the main distinguishing features of the Russian worldview. In the Soviet school, for example, it was customary to help weak students. A stronger one was “attached” to the weak one, who was supposed to pull up his comrade in his studies.
If a person committed an act that was contrary to public morality, he was collectively “worked out”, put “in sight” so that he would be ashamed in front of his comrades, and then taken on bail. After all, shame in our mentality is the main regulator of behavior. Unlike the Western one, where the regulator of behavior is the law and the fear of it.
October stars, pioneer and Komsomol detachments helped unite the guys on the basis of the highest moral values: honor, duty, patriotism, mercy. A system of leaders was introduced: the best pioneer was appointed as leader among the Octoberites, and the best member of the Komsomol was appointed among the pioneers. Leaders were responsible for their detachment and its success to their organization and their comrades. Both older and younger children rallied not according to (as is often the case in modern schools), but on the basis of a common noble cause: whether it was a community work day, collecting scrap metal, preparing a festive concert, or helping a sick friend study.
Who did not have time, he was late!
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the old value systems also collapsed. The Soviet education system was recognized as overly ideologized, and the principles of Soviet education were overly communist, so it was decided to remove all ideology from the school and introduce humanistic and democratic values. We decided that the school should give knowledge, and the child should be raised in the family.
This decision caused enormous damage to the state and society as a whole. Having removed the ideology from the school, it was completely deprived of its educational functions. It was no longer teachers who taught children about life, but on the contrary, children and their wealthy parents began to dictate their conditions to teachers. The education sector has de facto turned into a service sector.
The collapsed ideology disoriented the parents themselves. What is good and what is bad in the new conditions and circumstances, not at all similar to the Soviet ones? How to raise children, what principles to be guided by: urethral “die yourself, but help a friend out” or archetypal skin “if you want to live, know how to spin”?
Many parents, forced to deal with the problem of earning money, had no time for education - they barely had the strength to ensure survival. Having given the best years of their lives to the state and having experienced the collapse of the values they believed in, adults, succumbing to their own despair and the influence of Western propaganda, began to teach their children the opposite: that one should live only for oneself and one’s family, “do not do good, you will not receive evil ”and that in this world it is every man for himself.
Of course, the change in views, which had tragic consequences for our country, was also influenced by the one that came into its own after the Second World War, and on the territory of the former USSR - in the 90s.
Free (or, in other words, paid for by the state, by common labor) circles and sections very soon disappeared from the education system. Many paid classes appeared, which quickly divided the children according to property. The direction of education also changed to the opposite. The value was not to raise people useful to society, but to give the child the tools to get more for himself in adulthood. And who could not - he found himself on the sidelines of life.
Do people raised in this way become happy? Far from always, because the basis of happiness is the ability to harmoniously exist among other people, to have a favorite business, favorite people, to be needed. An egoist, by definition, cannot experience the joys of realization among people.
Who are they, the future elite of the country?
From the point of view of the system-vector psychology of Yuri Burlan, the future intellectual and cultural elite of the country is formed from children with and. The percentage of such children does not depend on the status and wealth of the parents. The developed properties of the vector give society a happy person and an excellent professional, realized in his profession for the benefit of people. Undeveloped properties increase the number of psychopathologies.
By developing some and leaving others undeveloped, we lay a time bomb that is already starting to work. Teenage suicides, drugs, murders in schools are still a small part of the retribution for the selfish upbringing, disorientation and underdevelopment of our children.
How to raise the level of school education again?
All children need to be nurtured and nurtured. How can this be done without unifying, without driving education and upbringing into the Procrustean bed of equalization, taking into account the individual abilities of each? The exact and practical answer to this question is given by the system-vector psychology of Yuri Burlan.
The problem of teaching and educating children is directly related to the understanding of psychological laws. Parents and teachers should be clearly aware of the processes that take place in the psyche of the child, in a particular school and in society as a whole. This is the only way to influence the current situation. In the meantime, there is no such understanding, we will swim in the syrup of Western ideas alien to us about what education should be. An example of this is the introduction of the USE system at school, which does not reveal knowledge and does not contribute to their deep assimilation, but is aimed only at stupid memorization of tests.
The secret of effective education lies in each student. This does not mean that you need to completely return to the former Soviet education system or switch to the Western standard and abandon successful methods. It is only necessary to bring them under the modern format, which system-vector psychology tells us about. Thanks to knowledge about human vectors, it becomes possible to reveal the natural predisposition of the child, his potential abilities at a very early age. And then even the most “incapable” student acquires an interest in learning and a desire to perceive knowledge that will help him realize himself as much as possible in later life.
It is necessary to return to the school and the educational aspect. The Soviet school instilled in children basic values in line with our urethral mentality, which is why real citizens and patriots of our country came out of it. But not only this is important. It is necessary to teach the child to live among other people, interact with them and enjoy the realization in society. And you can teach this only at school, among other people.
When a positive psychological climate is created in the family and at school, a personality will grow out of the child, he will realize his potential, and if not, he will be forced to fight with his environment all his life. If there are children in a school, in a class who have a difficult life situation or psychological problems, everyone suffers from this. And if with the help of elite schools it is possible to give some of the children an elite education, then this is not a guarantee that they will be able to be happy in a society torn apart by hostility. It is necessary to create a system conducive to the upbringing and development of all children. Only then can we hope for a happy future for our children.
How to establish communication with a child, create a comfortable microclimate in the family and school, make the class friendly, raise the level of education and upbringing at school, system-vector psychology tells. Register for free introductory online lectures by Yuri Burlan.
The article was written based on the materials of the training " System-Vector Psychology»Soviet education, as you know, was the best in the world, and was very popular. I think that the Russian language should be recognized as the second (if not the first in number) international language. Now foreign specialists with excellent knowledge of the Russian language work in many countries of the world. To the question from where: - "I studied in the USSR." The Soviet Union raised a generation of specialists that many countries are proud of. Doctors, teachers, engineers, architects are ordinary workers for us, but in the countries of the East, Africa, Brazil, etc., they are very respected specialists with high salaries and positions in society.
They were accustomed to learn and learn from birth - proof of this - a lot of published books that are cheap in price and invaluable in content, a huge number of circles and sections in school years, development by a deficit of ingenuity and resourcefulness (the ability to replace a missing item with cash and make everything that whatever). Coming to study, foreign citizens for 5-6 years completely mastered, if not all the tricks, then certainly a part of our national consideration.
In the world of science, Herald of Knowledge, World Pathfinder, Inventor and Innovator, Science and Life, Science and Technology - all these magazines popularize science and tell the laws of nature, physics, and technology in an accessible language. Even high school students enjoyed reading them.
History of Russian tea. New experiments on far-sightedness. - Underwater radio. - New English radio stations of "directional" action. News about the expedition of Professor I. I. Vavilov. — Use of the thermal energy of the oceans. — The mechanism of laying eggs by the silkworm. Questions of the universe and interplanetary communications. About going to the moon. — About the telescope. - About comets. — On the principle of relativity. — Atoms and molecules. — Light and its distribution. — On the phenomena of thunderstorms. — The study of chemistry. — Questions of biology. - Speech and thought. - Acmeism. — Studying the literature of the past. — Internal combustion engines and turbines.- these are the topics of the 4th issue of the Journal of Knowledge for 1927.
In production, such concepts as rationalization and invention were spread and encouraged. A creative approach to work was welcomed, in which each employee sought to simplify and make the labor process more perfect.
In the film "Rain in a Strange City" love experiences unfold in parallel with the labor process of the protagonist, during which a new idea is born - rationalization.
Rational proposal - so, in conscience, an innovation in the labor process was abbreviated. The accepted rationalization proposals made the workflow more advanced - faster, less costly, and therefore more profitable. Creative teams were created at the factories, which competed with each other in making more rational proposals.
In order to further develop the mass technical creativity of the working people, the All-Union Society of Inventors and Rationalizers (VOIR) was created in 1958. Its tasks included the development of rationalization and inventive movement - lectures were given, competitions were held and the exchange of experience was widespread - that is, employees of one enterprise were sent to another similar enterprise and adopted labor skills from each other. They moved both within the country and abroad. To get on a business trip abroad for the exchange of experience was the highest chic.
There was a list of regulations governing relations in this direction - The methodology (basic provisions) for determining the economic efficiency of using new technology, inventions and rationalization proposals in the national economy (approved by the Decree of the State Committee for Science and Technology, the State Planning Committee of the USSR, the USSR Academy of Sciences and the State Committee for Inventions of February 14, 1977), Regulations, instructions and explanations and one of the most important for employee - Regulations on bonuses for promoting invention and rationalization (approved by a resolution of the USSR State Labor Committee of June 23, 1983).
Rewards were determined based on the amount of annual savings realized from the implementation of the proposal. The holiday "Day of the Inventor and Innovator" was celebrated annually, on the last Saturday of June. On this day, the USSR Academy of Sciences selected the best inventions and rationalization proposals made over the past year and awarded the best with state awards, prizes and honorary titles “Honored Inventor of the Republic” and “Honored Innovator of the Republic”.
It was beneficial for the country to raise smart citizens and encourage innovation. This is a guarantee of the development of the country.
Myth: The Soviet education system was perfect
This myth is actively replicated by the communists and people who are simply fiercely nostalgic for the USSR. In reality, Soviet education was comparatively strong in the natural sciences, mathematics and engineering, and sports. However, in most other areas it was comparatively weak, both in comparison with Western counterparts of that era and in comparison with modern education:
History, economics, philosophy and other humanitarian disciplines in the USSR were highly ideologized, their teaching was based on a deeply outdated 19th-century Marxist paradigm, while the latest foreign achievements in these areas were largely ignored - or were presented exclusively in a negative way, as "bourgeois science". In general, the students of Soviet schools and universities formed a rather simplified and distorted humanitarian picture of the world.
Foreign languages in Soviet schools were taught on average at a very low level. Unlike Western countries, in the USSR there were practically no opportunities to invite native teachers, and at the same time access to foreign literature, films and songs in the original language was difficult. Almost no exchange of students was carried out, which allows to seriously raise the level of language proficiency while living abroad.
A rather sad situation developed in art education, architecture and design in the late USSR, which is clearly seen in the deterioration of the architectural appearance of Soviet cities in the 1960s-1980s, as well as in the mass desire of Soviet citizens to buy foreign things - qualitatively. and beautifully made.
If it seems to someone that all these humanitarian areas are not important, then it is worth noting that it was precisely because of the underestimation, because of the insufficient or incorrect development of these areas that the Soviet Union eventually collapsed so easily.
Myth: problems in the education system began in the era of perestroika and the collapse of the USSR
In reality, there were always certain problems in the Soviet education system, and the main crisis phenomena that modern Russia had to deal with began to grow back in the late USSR and were already noticeable in the 1970s and 1980s.
Until the 1960s Soviet education had a key task: to train as many workers, engineers and scientists as possible in order to meet the country's needs for specialists and labor during rapid industrialization, and also to make up for the colossal losses of educated people and skilled workers caused by the civil war, white emigration, the Great Patriotic War, as well as repressions. Moreover, workers and specialists needed to be prepared with a large margin in case of a new war and new human losses (in the same way, duplicate enterprises and production sites were built in the USSR in case of war). In the then conditions of a serious shortage of personnel, any graduates of universities and vocational schools were very quickly "torn off with their hands", arranging for work at various great construction sites, new factories, and design bureaus. A lot of people were lucky, and they got interesting and important jobs, they could make a good career. At the same time, the quality of education was not critical: everyone was in demand, and often they had to finish their studies right at work.
Approximately in the 1960s. the situation has changed. The rate of urbanization and industrial growth in the country has dropped sharply, industry and science have had time to fill up with personnel, and their overproduction in the conditions of a long peaceful period has lost its meaning. At the same time, the number of vocational schools, universities and students had grown sharply by that time, but if earlier they were in super demand, now the state could no longer provide everyone with the same attractive jobs as before. New industries were created in insufficient quantities, in the old ones the key positions were firmly occupied, and the old men of the Brezhnev era were by no means in a hurry to give up their places to the youth.
Actually, it was then, in the last decades of the USSR, that problems in education began to grow, which can be summarized approximately as follows:
A sharp increase in the contingent of universities and vocational schools, which led to a drop in the average level of students and a drop in the ability of the state to provide everyone with good jobs (the obvious solution would be the development of the service sector, the permission of entrepreneurship in order to create new jobs, the development of self-employment opportunities - but due to its specificity, the Soviet state could not or did not want to take such steps).
The fall of the social role of the teacher and teacher, the decline in salaries in the field of education in the late USSR (if in 1940 the salary in the Soviet education system was 97% of the industry average, then in 1960 it was 79%, and in 1985 it was total 63%.
The growing lag behind the West in a number of disciplines, caused by the closed borders and the ideological interference of the state in science.
These problems were inherited by modern Russia, were partly resolved, partly aggravated.
Myth: Soviet education was better at raising a person
From the point of view of those who are nostalgic for the USSR, Soviet education brought up the Man and the Creator, while modern Russian education brings up the townspeople, consumers and businessmen (it is not entirely clear why the latter are denied the right to be both people and creators).
But is it really so good to bring up people in the USSR?
Soviet education brought up entire generations of alcoholics - from the 1960s to the 1980s. alcohol consumption in the country has more than tripled, as a result of which, since 1964, life expectancy for men has stopped growing in the RSFSR (unlike Western countries), alcohol mortality and alcohol crime have sharply increased.
Soviet education brought up a society of people who, since the late 1960s. ceased to reproduce itself - the number of children per woman fell to less than 2.1, as a result of which the number of subsequent generations became smaller than that of the previous ones. At the same time, the number of abortions in the USSR exceeded the number of children born and amounted to about 4-5 million per year. The number of divorces in the USSR was also colossal, and remains so in Russia to this day.
Soviet education brought up a generation of people who destroyed the USSR and relatively easily abandoned much of what they had been taught before.
Soviet education brought up people who massively joined the ranks of organized crime in the 1980s and 1990s. (and in many ways before).
Soviet education brought up people who easily believed the many charlatans of the times of perestroika and the 1990s: they joined religious sects and neo-fascist organizations, carried their last money into financial pyramids, read with rapture and listened to various freaks-pseudo-scientists, etc.
All this indicates that with the upbringing of a person in the USSR, to put it mildly, not everything was perfect.
Of course, the point here is not only in the education system, but also in other aspects of the social situation. However, Soviet education could not reverse this situation and largely contributed to its formation:
- insufficiently brought up critical thinking;
— the initiative was not sufficiently encouraged;
- Paternalism and excessive reliance on authorities were actively nurtured;
- there was no adequate education in the field of family and marriage;
- ideological framework narrowed the view of the world;
- many negative social phenomena were hushed up, instead of studying them and fighting them.
Myth: Capitalism is the main cause of problems in education
From the point of view of communist-minded critics, the main cause of problems in education is capitalism. We are talking not only about the commercialization of education and the general approach to educating a person, but also about the capitalist structure of society and the economy in general, which is supposedly in a deep crisis, and the crisis in education is just one of the manifestations of this.
The capitalist crisis of society and education can be conceived as a global one or, above all, as an internal Russian one - allegedly, surrounded by enemies and ruined by capitalists, Russia can no longer afford capitalism and capitalist education.
From the point of view of Marxists, the main types of crisis associated with capitalism are the crisis of overproduction and the crisis associated with the lack of resources. The first is caused by the overproduction of goods that consumers cannot or do not want to consume, and the second is the lack of resources to produce and maintain the achieved standard of living in an ever-expanding capitalist economy (resources include land and labor). Both types of crises force the capitalists to reduce the consumption of the population of the country and at the same time start wars - for new markets or for new resources. Now the West is in a state of double crisis, and therefore Russia is in danger - partly because they want to profit from its resources, and partly because it itself has adopted capitalism instead of socialism.
The world crisis does indeed take place, but all these constructions linking it with the opposition of capitalism and socialism, as well as with the problems of education, are rather shaky and dubious.
Firstly, crises of overproduction and lack of resources also take place under socialism - for example, the same overproduction of workers and engineers in the late USSR, or the crisis of the lack of good teachers in foreign languages (more famous examples are the overproduction of tanks and children's shoes in the late USSR). ).
Secondly, in the current global crisis, Russia has a very high chance of resisting, both thanks to the Soviet military heritage (a strong army and military-industrial complex), and thanks to the royal heritage in the form of a vast territory with rich resources.
Thirdly, the way out of the crisis is not necessarily associated with war - the development of technologies can help develop new resources or create new markets. And here there are good chances for both the West and Russia.
It is also worth remembering an obvious fact: the Western education system (of which the Russian system is an offshoot, and after it the Soviet system) was created precisely under capitalism in the era of the New Age. As for the Soviet system, it is a direct continuation of the education system in the late Russian Empire, which was created under capitalism. At the same time, although the education system covered only a part of society by 1917, it quickly grew in scale, and already in the middle of the 19th century Russia had excellent higher and engineering education by world standards, and in the early 1910s. Russia has become the European leader in the number of engineering graduates.
Thus, there is no reason to oppose capitalism and quality education. As for attempts to explain the degradation of education not simply by capitalism, but by capitalism in the stage of crisis, then, as already mentioned, crises also occur under socialism.
Myth: Russian education has changed dramatically compared to the Soviet one
From the point of view of critics, the education reforms have incredibly changed the educational system in Russia and led to its degradation, and only a few last remnants of Soviet education still survive and keep everything afloat.
But is modern Russian education really that far removed from the Soviet one? In fact, for the most part, Soviet education in Russia has been preserved:
In Russia, the same class-lesson system operates as in the USSR (originally borrowed from German schools of the 18th-19th centuries).
The specialization of schools is preserved.
The division of education into primary, complete and incomplete secondary, secondary specialized and higher education is preserved (at the same time, higher education has been largely transferred from 5 years of study to the bachelor's + master's system - 4 + 2 years, but by and large this has not changed much ).
Almost all the same subjects are taught, only a few new ones have been added (at the same time, the programs for some humanitarian subjects have been greatly changed - but, as a rule, for the better).
There is a strong tradition in the teaching of mathematics and science (compared to most other countries).
In general, the same system of assessments and the same system of work of teachers have been preserved, although accountability and bureaucracy have noticeably increased (introduced to improve control and monitoring, but in many respects turned out to be unnecessary and burdensome, for which it is rightly criticized).
The accessibility of education has been preserved and even increased, and although about a third of students are now paid students, a significant part of out-of-school education has also become paid. However, this is nothing new in comparison with the Soviet era: paid education for students and high school students operated in the USSR in 1940-1956.
Most of the school buildings remained the same (and the renovations carried out clearly did not worsen them).
Most of today's Russian teachers were trained back in the USSR or in the 1990s, before the reforms in education.
The Unified State Examination was introduced, which is the most noticeable difference between the Russian system and the Soviet one, but it is worth emphasizing once again that this is not some kind of teaching method, but simply a more objective method of testing knowledge.
Of course, various experimental schools have appeared in Russia in a noticeable number, in which the organization and teaching methods differ to a much greater extent from Soviet models. However, in most cases we are dealing with slightly modified and modernized Soviet-style schools. The same is true for universities, if we exclude frankly profanity "degree-building" institutions (which began to actively close since 2012).
Thus, in general, Russian education continues to follow Soviet patterns, and those people who criticize Russian education, in fact, criticize the Soviet system and the results of its work.
Myth: A return to the Soviet education system will solve all problems
First, as shown above, there were many problems and weaknesses in Soviet education.
Secondly, as shown above, Russian education as a whole is not that far removed from the Soviet one.
Thirdly, the key modern problems of Russian education began in the USSR, and no solutions were found there for these problems.
Fourthly, a number of modern problems are associated with the development of information technologies, which were simply absent in the USSR at such a level, and the Soviet experience will not help here.
Fifth, if we talk about the most successful period of Soviet education (1920s-1950s), since then society has seriously changed, and in our time we have to solve largely different tasks. In any case, it is now impossible to reproduce the socio-demographic conditions under which Soviet successes became possible.
Sixth, education reforms do carry a certain risk, however, conservation of the situation and the rejection of reforms is a sure path to defeat. There are problems and they need to be addressed.
Finally, objective data show that the problems of modern Russian education are largely exaggerated and, with varying degrees of success, are being gradually resolved.
The transition of Russian universities to the Bologna system, which involves four years of study in higher education, was a mistake. This recognition was made by the rector of Moscow State University named after M. V. Lomonosov Viktor Sadovnichiy, speaking on Wednesday - December 7 - at the III Congress "Innovative practice: science plus business", which takes place at the university site.
“I can’t resist and I’ll say it again. I consider the transition to a four-year education in higher education a mistake we made, ”TASS quotes the words of the head of the country's main university.
Europe - he noted - "did its job" - unified professional standards and built education accordingly. “Unfortunately, we transferred this four-year education, now it is already three years in some cases, to our higher school,” Sadovnichiy said. In his opinion, education in Russian universities should last five or six years, as in leading Western universities.
It is not entirely clear why the rector did not remember the Soviet system of higher education with the same five or six years. However, the very fact that he touched on this topic at all already says something. And, above all, about the fact that the Bologna system, designed to adjust higher education in Russia to European standards, is not very justified. And it made no sense to enter it.
I spoke about the fact that the transition to the Bologna system was a mistake when we were just beginning to plant this system. Further experience both in our country and abroad quite clearly proved that it is indeed extremely harmful to the country and the world. Therefore, I fully agree with Sadovnichy that it must be canceled as soon as possible.
Moreover, now we still have such an opportunity. Since almost all teachers still know how to work in a normal system, and not in Bologna. There are methodological materials for such work. But if we miss a whole generation, as happened in Europe, then we risk losing the opportunity to quickly return to a reasonable system of teaching. And then we will be forced to recreate it practically from scratch.
"SP": - And what do you not like about the Bologna two-stage system of higher education?
The main problem is that this system, as they say, puts the cart before the horse. A future bachelor has to memorize practical professional recipes for three or four years, having no idea about the theoretical foundations of this knowledge. They become a master after two years of in-depth study of theory, when a significant part of practical skills is already half-forgotten. This, of course, leads to a sharp drop in the effectiveness of education, since less is learned in six years than under the classical system in five years.
"SP": - It turns out that a bachelor's degree gives an inferior education? As they used to say, "unfinished higher education"?
It turns out like this. But the main thing is not that it is unfinished, but that it is not started. What is taught in the bachelor's degree follows from the theory, as I said. And since theory itself is not taught (they are now beginning to be taught in magistracy), much of what is reported turns out to be misunderstood. The correct sequence is to start with the basics of theory, and then get practical knowledge based on this theory.
"SP": - What's the difference if in any case the same document is issued - a diploma of higher education?
According to the Bologna system, this is considered normal. But there is another side of the problem here. Because Russian diplomas are beginning to be recognized in the West. And, we know, there is a very serious interest in our most talented graduates. But is it worth it then to spend money and effort so that our best minds leave the country immediately after training?
"SP": - Nevertheless, Sadovnichiy proposes to focus again on "leading Western universities." Why?
I think the rector did not refer to the Soviet system solely for ideological reasons. Now it is not customary to mention it. It is generally accepted that everything connected with the Soviet Union was obviously bad.
Otherwise, it is not clear why we, in fact, abandoned the Soviet system and switched to a market system, if it is obviously bad.
The Bologna process is precisely the process of harmonizing the interests of different countries. In order to ensure academic mobility of students and teachers. Align the requirements for the quality of programs implemented by the university. Switch to a modular system. And each student should form his own educational program depending on his interests and the tasks that he sets for himself as the tasks of professional development.
In this sense, this is a process of coordinating interests, requirements for the future development of education as a joint all-European, but - in general - global.
Two-stage is one of the implementation mechanisms. He assumes that in the areas of training - namely in the areas of training - bachelor's programs are being implemented. And in many countries of the world (first of all, developed countries, including the USA), this education, as a rule, is absolutely enough to work in most professions. And which does not close, but opens a long, almost continuous, professional education. It, in particular, can be more profound in the magistracy.
"SP": - Explain?
It does not matter where a person graduated from a university in a particular area of training - in America, Europe, Russia or China - he has certain competencies. And employers understand this.
Nobody forbids a specialty in Russia (five-year higher education - ed.). It is allowed in our country and is assigned by law to the second level of higher education, as well as the magistracy. Moreover, many of the world's leading universities are already implementing integrated six-year programs at once - bachelor's and master's degrees.
You know, the UK didn't join the Bologna system at first either. They believed that they already had the best education in the world. But then they quickly realized that the Bologna process is the design of a joint future education. And it's pointless to stand aside. No one will make someone else's past the best for their common future.
"SP": - But in our country, employers quite often treat specialists who have completed a bachelor's degree with prejudice. They are perceived as half-educated and refuse to be accepted to more or less significant positions. Do you know about it?
Any employer has the right to set certain requirements for a particular workplace. Lacking qualifications? Let me finish my master's degree. See what position you are applying for. Often after all, higher education is absolutely not necessary. We need workers with secondary vocational mass education.
In the modern world - the concept of continuous education. A person changes at least several professions, jobs, etc. throughout his life. And mobility in a working career is a top priority today. During the first three years after graduation, young people change jobs at least two or three times.
"SP": - Are there any statistics, how many bachelor's graduates do we then go to the magistracy?
No more than thirty percent. Moreover, if almost 60% of us study at their own expense in the bachelor's program, then only 15% study in the master's program. Many people think that you can go to the magistracy later, not necessarily right away. That is, continuing education in the magistracy is not such an unambiguous inseparable trajectory.
But if we are talking about integration into the global educational space, then, of course, this mutual recognition, as it were, agreement on common research quality standards, they are extremely important. In this sense, I am not a supporter of any isolationism. I am in favor of discussing and designing general requirements in the interests of academic mobility for both students and teachers.
Minister of Education and Science that Russian schools need to return to the best traditions of Soviet education - "the best in the world." According to her, education has lost a lot in recent years, abandoning the conservative line of behavior. Teachers from Yekaterinburg responded to her call. They developed a project according to which it is necessary to return the classical Soviet teaching methods to schools, as well as Soviet textbooks “tested over the years”. An employee of the Department of Rare Books and Manuscripts of the Scientific Library, a historian of Russian education, the head of the Humanities Master's program at the University
Lenta.ru: Is it true that Soviet education was the best, like everything else in the USSR?
Lyubzhin A: I didn't notice it. If the opinion about the superiority of Soviet education were at all close to reality, it would be logical to assume that Western countries would have to organize an educational reform in their country, following the example of the USSR. But none of the European states - neither France, nor England, nor Italy - ever thought of borrowing Soviet models. Because they didn't appreciate them.
How about Finland? They say that at one time she borrowed her techniques from us. At the same time, it is believed that today this country has no equal in schooling.
I cannot agree that Finland is out of competition. This is due to the peculiarities of local education, which is not designed for high results of individual individuals, but to raise the average level of education of each citizen. They really succeed. First, Finland is a small country. That is, everything is easier to organize there. And secondly, very benign people go to teachers there. So the Finns manage to pull out the guys at the expense of strong teachers, and not at all due to a good program. But at the same time, higher education is seriously sagging there.
Many believe that the structure of Soviet education is rooted in the educational system of Tsarist Russia. How much did we take from there?
Exactly the opposite - Soviet education is the complete antipode of the imperial one. Before the revolution, there were many types of schools in Russia: a classical gymnasium, a real school, a cadet corps, a theological seminary, commercial schools, and so on. Almost everyone who aspired to this could learn. There was a "own" school for all abilities. After 1917, instead of educational diversity, a single type of school began to take root.
Back in 1870, in the book of the Russian historian Afanasy Prokopyevich Shchapov, “Social and Pedagogical Conditions for the Mental Development of the Russian People,” the idea was expressed that the school should be the same for everyone and that it should be based on the natural sciences. What the Bolsheviks did. Comprehensive education has come.
This is bad?
It was the elementary school, where elementary literacy was taught, that fit well into the concept of universal education. It was organized at the level in the USSR. Everything that went on is already a fiction. The secondary school program offered the same set of subjects to everyone, regardless of the abilities or interests of the children. For gifted children, the bar was too low, they were not interested, the school only interfered with them. And the lagging behind, on the contrary, could not cope with the load. In terms of the quality of training, a graduate of a secondary Soviet school was equal to a graduate of the Imperial Higher Primary School. There were such schools in Russia before the revolution. Education in them was based on primary school (from 4 to 6 years, depending on the school) and lasted four years. But this was considered a primitive level of education. And a diploma from a higher primary school did not give access to universities.
Did the level of knowledge fall short?
The main skills of a graduate of a higher primary pre-revolutionary school: reading, writing, counting. In addition, the guys could pick up the beginnings of various sciences - physics, geography ... There were no foreign languages \u200b\u200bbecause the compilers of the programs understood that it would be a fiction.
The preparation of a graduate of the Soviet school was about the same. The Soviet high school student mastered writing, counting, and fragmentary information on other subjects. But this knowledge filled his head like an attic. And in principle, a person interested in the subject could independently assimilate this information in a day or two. Although foreign languages were taught, the graduates practically did not know them. One of the eternal sorrows of the Soviet school is that the students did not know how to apply the knowledge gained within the framework of one discipline to another.
How then did it happen that the "attic" Soviet people invented a space rocket, carried out developments in the nuclear industry?
All the developments that glorified the Soviet Union belong to scientists with pre-revolutionary education. Neither Kurchatov nor Korolyov ever attended a Soviet school. And their peers also never studied in a Soviet school or studied with professors who received pre-revolutionary education. When the inertia weakened, the margin of safety was depleted, then everything fell down. There were no own resources in our education system then, and there are none today.
You said that the main achievement of the Soviet school is the beginning. But many people say that mathematical education was adequately organized in the USSR. This is not true?
This is true. Mathematics is the only subject in the schools of the Soviet Union that met the requirements of the imperial high school.
Why is she?
The state had a need to make weapons. Besides, mathematics was like an outlet. It was done by people who were disgusted in other scientific fields because of the ideology. Only mathematics and physics could hide from Marxism-Leninism. Therefore, it turned out that the intellectual potential of the country was gradually artificially shifted towards the technical sciences. The humanities were not quoted at all in Soviet times. As a result, the Soviet Union collapsed due to the inability to work with humanitarian technologies, to explain something to the population, to negotiate. Even now we see how monstrously low the level of humanitarian discussion in the country is.
Is it possible to say that the imperial pre-revolutionary education corresponded to international standards?
We have been integrated into the global education system. Graduates of the gymnasium Sophia Fischer (founder of a private women's classical gymnasium) were admitted to any German university without exams. We had a lot of students who studied in Switzerland, Germany. At the same time, they were far from the wealthiest, sometimes vice versa. It is also a factor of national wealth. If we take the lower strata of the population, the standard of living in Imperial Russia slightly exceeded the English, slightly inferior to the American and was on a par with the European. Average salaries are lower, but life here was cheaper.
Today?
In terms of the level of education and the level of knowledge, Russians are uncompetitive in the world. But there was a “lag” during the USSR as well. The historian notes that, unlike other countries, the Soviet elite had the worst education among the intelligentsia. She was inferior not only to academic circles, but also to any where higher education was needed. Unlike the West, where countries were run by graduates of the best universities. And after the collapse of the USSR, the model of Soviet general education ceased to make sense. If the student is not interested, because the subjects were taught superficially and for the sake of show, some kind of social pressure is needed so that the children still study. In the early Soviet period, the very situation in the country forced a person to become a loyal member of society. And then the pressure eased. The scale of requirements crept down. In order not to deal with repeaters, teachers had to deal with pure drawing of grades, and children could quite easily not learn anything. That is, education does not guarantee a career. In other countries, this is practically not the case.
As a mother of a fourth-grader, I get the feeling that today, compared to the Soviet period, they don’t teach at school at all. The child comes home after classes - and the "second shift" begins. We do not just do homework, but study the material that we seem to be learning in the lesson. Friends have the same picture. Is the program really that complicated?
It's just that the school has moved from normal teaching to supervising. In the 1990s, this was a forced step on the part of the pedagogical community. Then the teachers were left in complete poverty. And the method of "do not teach, but ask" for them has become the only way to guaranteed earnings. For tutoring services, their student was sent to a colleague. And he did the same. But when teaching salaries increased in the same Moscow, teachers could no longer and did not want to get rid of this technique. Apparently, it will not work to return them to the former principles of education.
I see from the experience of my nephew that they don’t teach him anything at school and didn’t teach him anything, but they carefully ask about everything. In schools, tutoring is common from the fifth grade, which was not the case in the Soviet school. Therefore, when they check the school and say: the results are good, then you can’t really believe this. In our country, in principle, it is no longer possible to isolate school and tutoring work.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union in Russia almost every year there are reforms to improve education. Have there been any positive developments?
Spears broke around important issues, but of the second order. The knowledge test system is very important. But much more important is the program and a set of subjects for study. And we are now thinking about the fact that tougher exams can improve learning. No way. As a result, the difficult exam has only two options: either we must lower the bar so that almost everyone can get a certificate. Or the exam will simply turn into a fiction. That is, we are again returning to the concept of universal education - so that only everyone can receive a secondary education. Is it really necessary for everyone? Approximately 40 percent of the population is capable of mastering a full-fledged secondary education. The imperial school serves as a reference point for me. If we want to cover everyone with “knowledge”, the level of education will naturally be low.
Why, then, in the world, the need for universal secondary education is not only not questioned, but even a new trend has appeared - universal higher education for all?
This is the cost of democracy. If we call simple things higher education - why not? You can call a janitor a cleaning manager, make him the operator of an ultra-complex broom on wheels. But most likely there will be no difference - he will study for about five years or immediately begin to learn how to handle the remote control of this broom right on the spot. Formally, the Institute of Asian and African Countries and the Uryupinsk Steel University grant the same rights. Both provide crusts on higher education. But in reality, one graduate will be hired for some jobs, but not the other.
What should parents do if they want to properly teach their child? Where to run, what school to look for?
You need to understand that there is no segregation of schools by programs now. Segregation exists according to what the school has - a pool or a horse. We have top 100 schools that are always at the top of the educational rankings. Today they replace the missing system of secondary education, as they prove their advantage at the Olympiads. But you need to understand that studying there is not easy. They just don't take everyone there. I don't think that anything can be done about the current educational system in Russia. Today, Russian education is a patient in need of a very difficult operation. But in fact, his condition is so fatal that he simply cannot bear any intervention.
