The Science Work
History
Site is for sale: mail@thesciencework.com
Category: History

Educational system: modern problems and experience of history



tolko that reform on monetization of social benefits with great difficulty came to the end.

Reform of health care revolves. As difficult as it is supposed, will be education reform which V.V. Putin in a conversation with journalists allocated the country, the first among four priority directions of development. Really, the pedagogical public did not manage to comprehend the reform of school announced by the Minister of Education V.M. Filippov on the basis of a dvenadtsatiletka as her fundamental criticism from the former Minister of Education E.D. Dneprov in the review of parliamentary hearings "Twelve questions on a dvenadtsatiletka" followed (www. iabloko.ru/Themes/Educ/12yschool — 30. K_sh!). In response to criticism Filippov on the official site, explaining difficulties of reform, categorically said: "Dvenadtsatiletke to be, but not now" (philippov.ru).

The idea of a dvenadtsatiletka was picked up by the new minister, now the Minister of Education and Science A.A. Fur-senko. In program article "Modernization of education on a new round: the purposes and means of their achievement" (Fursenko 2004) it hurried to assure the public that modernization of an educational system on the basis of a dvenadtsatiletka will be strictly carried out. Naturally, at the same time there is a question why was to change the previous minister halfway. Let would complete difficult reform for which he took the responsibility. Do not change horses on a crossing.

However, at the same time new minister made also the new innovative program which essence consists in orientation of teachers and pupils of the higher and high school to the advancing satisfaction of inquiries of economic development of society what have to correspond them innovatsion-to

L.I. Novikova

Educational system: modern problems and experience of history

ny programs. School education is designed to train "successful people for the successful country". However, the young man has to also to strive for success with orientation to innovative installations because, having only achieved success, he can feel the full-fledged person. Naturally there is a question and what to do with the "unsuccessful", "not innovative" children and teenagers who are not suitable under the set standards? By recognition of the minister of 15% of teenagers in our country do not get secondary education, at the same time statistics holds back how many children in general appear outside educational institutions.

The same motives sounded in an official speech of the minister at a meeting of the Government on September 22, 2005. "About measures for development of education". In Fursenko's report deserves a lot of things attention: it and concern about the expanded number of the higher education institutions and their branches which are not conforming to the increased requirements of the higher school that opens a possibility of trade in diplomas; it and insufficient development of a computerization, in particular, lack of the federal portal of distance program learning; it and shortcomings of financing of the higher and high school.

Summing up the result of the short review of the stated Fursenko's program, it is possible to note that in it maxims of the minister of science, but not education which was always focused on the teenage child — successful and not really — counting on a teaching and educational role of student teaching prevail. It is much said in program speeches of the minister about science in general and there is no appeal to pedagogical science that causes bewilderment. And meanwhile the pedagogical science developed and develops irrespective of change of ministers: it has problems and the difficulties. However scientific problems of pedagogics, apparently, disturb it the top organizational management a little. Thus, a peculiar gap between peda-was designated

gogiky, as science about education and education of younger generation, on the one hand, both practice and logic of the organization of an educational system, with another.

In development of the Russian pedagogical science it is possible to allocate three coordinates: didactics, the theory of education and critically generalized history of pedagogical science and practice. Pedagogics history as theoretical discipline is rather in details presented in our science. However along with it the organization of any education system, or education, demands inclusion it in social and economic conditions of life, i.e. socialization. By A.V. Mudrik's definition, "each society, each state, each social group (big and small) develop in the history a set of positive and negative formal and informal sanctions — ways of suggestion and belief, instructions and the bans, coercive measures and pressure, up to application of physical abuse, the system of ways of expression of recognition, difference, awards. By means of these ways also died behavior of the person and the whole groups of people it is brought into accord with the samples accepted in this culture, norms, values" (Mudrik 2000: 27).

Unlike history of a pedagogical thought the history of the social organization of educational systems in connection with development of the Russian society is on the periphery of science, though it has a certain faktualny basis (Christmas 1902; Badgers of 1891; Medynsky 1929; Milyukov 1994; Tsirulnikov 2001; Mudrik 2002). This aspect of history of socialization of pedagogical systems has a direct bearing on the discussed problem. Therefore it is elected by us as a consideration subject. Besides one of warning facilities is unpredictable undesirable consequences of the forthcoming education reforms we see in the appeal to the Russian history of the organization of education systems which met similar difficulties more than once and found (or not

found) a way out of them. But even mistakes in this case are instructive, because as V.O. Klyuchevsky emphasized, "History teaches even those who at it do not study; it prouchivat them for ignorance and neglect" (Klyuchevsky 1968: 265-266).

Ways to the European education in Russia were opened by young very uneducated tsar Pyotr. By force of the character and mind he understood that the isolated development of Russia pulls it to barbarization, and resolutely turned facing Europe. The young tsar tuned into radical reorganization of the Russian statehood regarded education of the nation on the European harmony as of paramount importance, having taken the advice given to it by Leibniz into account: "Such plan — Leibniz advised — it has to be expedited and it is rectilinear, creative mind of one person; just as the city is always more beautiful when it is built at once than when it arose gradually, in stages" (Tikhomirov 1998: 319).

To educational activity of Pyotr, though fragmentary, it is necessary to carry the translation of the Church Slavonic alphabet on a modern Russian harmony that, having given to education secular character, promoted separations of school from church. Introduction of a civil font allowed to base also the first Russian newspaper Vedomosti. At the initiative of the tsar the European books, including scientific and philosophical contents began to be translated into Russian. But, perhaps, the main thing the foundation was laid for that, this opening secular, though specialized in the spirit of Pyotr's interests, schools: navigation, engineering, tsifirny schools. The last were soon transferred to the provincial cities, performing the functions of primary and secondary education in the province and also training teachers of arithmetics for all education system. Distribution of initial mathematical knowledge was promoted also by replacement of slavyano-alphabetic references of figures by the Arab decimal system and made on this basis by Leonti Magnitsky

the first arithmetics (1703) — some kind of encyclopedia of mathematical knowledge.

Pyotr's undertakings in the field of education owing to positive inertia, though it is fragmentary, but nevertheless were continued by his successors. Perhaps, realization of a plan of Pyotr and Lomonosov's ideas — opening in 1755 in Moscow of the University and at it two gymnasiums for noblemen and commoners became the most considerable event of the Russian education.

It is necessary to recognize an important, though contradictory role of Catherine II in distribution of the ideas of Education in Russia. The contemporary of Voltaire, Diderot, Russo and other educators, she with many of them was in friendly correspondence. Esteeming itself the vospriyemnitsy and istolkovatelnitsy ideas of the French educators for the benefit of Russia, Catherine used many of their texts and the ideas in the compositions, including in the well-known "Order" representing itself something like the constitution of the educated absolutism. "Make that education extended between people" — she addresses in "Order" members of the Laid commission. The ideas of education really became widespread in the country, though not in that appearance what she expected. Against the background of volteryansky flirting of the empress, russoistsko-prophetical intensions of A.N. Radishchev in the annex to the Russian reality drama sounded and many-sided educational activity of N.I. Novikov was developed. All this created the atmosphere of the Russian Education in which the new generation of noble youth from future lyceum students to Decembrists was brought up.

Educational undertakings of Catherine were apprehended by her grandson Alexander I. However the ideas of Education in the light of palace experience left a little refracted mark in the emperor's soul. Recognizing "appeal of the liberal reforms", Alexander at heart understood that their acceptance has to change abruptly and its own situation

as autocrat By the grace of God who is obliged to nobody by the report. But nevertheless, it is necessary to refer reform of the state administrative personnel, data of diverse public authorities in the relevant ministries to number of the reforms which are carried out by it at the initiative of "Secret committee". According to the Manifesto on September 8, 1802 the Ministry of national education which, united all administrative, program and supervising functions in education was for the first time provided in this system. With establishment of the Ministry of Public Education the education becomes final a public affair. Its main functions, by definition, combined "education of youth" and "distribution of sciences".

Since foundation of the Ministry of national education (1802) before establishment of the Soviet power 25 ministers were replaced (Tsirulnikov 2001: 65). At the time A. Homyakov noticed that in Russia the bad and good governors alternate through one. Something similar happened also to ministers of education. In ministerial leapfrog it is possible to allocate, perhaps, only five ministers whose activity left behind a positive trace. However, and experience of reactionary ministers contains, according to Klyuchevsky, an instructive lesson.

The count P.V. Zava-dovsky (1802-1810) became the first minister. According to its project approved by the tsar, the whole country was divided into educational districts, at the head of each of which the university possessing big autonomy was put. Under its scientific protection there were gymnasiums which district schools and, at last, parish schools followed.

Ideally all education system was under construction on the principles of uniformity and continuity of programs, textbooks, "that did not vosposledovat neither in teachers nor in what books of debauchery to harm of the general advantage". In the curriculum elementary schools remained on arrival care, high schools proceeded from curricula of the universities. All

the system was under construction from top to down that, as envisioned by reformers, assumed kind of natural transition of pupils from elementary school in average (gymnasiums and real schools) and from high school in the universities. However in practice this project was unrealizable. The state undertook financing only of the higher and high school which graduates — children of nobility — filled up bureaucracy of the state. Initial education "national, in close sense of this word, education, has to be provided with means of the population... Such is the main thesis defining in total our projects material aspect of educational reforms" — S.V. Rozhdestvensky sums up the problem result (Christmas 1902: 25). Needless to say that "means of the population" had very illusive character what there corresponded also the condition of elementary school to. But without sufficient elementary school all system of national education hangs in emptiness.

And in general, creation of the state systems, including the systems of national education, "from the top floors" fairly underwent sharp criticism the chief adviser Alexander M.M. Speransky. "Education in Russia went hitherto and’ геЬои^, i.e. illogically. Common sense demands to begin things always with their bases and a message to perfection gradually, and, therefore, would have to begin national schools and finish academy" (The anthology of a pedagogical thought of Russia...1987: 49).

On same in relation to a school system also K.D. Ushinsky insisted later: "In a basis of any strong improvements in national life has to it is necessary, inevitably lay down national school", he wrote (Ushin-sky 1948: 254). According to P.F. Kapte-rev's remark, some of the most visible modern shortcomings of the Russian society K.D. Ushin-sky recognized also lack of public beliefs in the Russian educated society "And meanwhile society without the stated public beliefs — the most dangerous

society for the government" (Kapterev 1915: 564). History confirmed this remark of both scientists.

S.S. Uvarov (18331849) was the minister who tried to solve in own way this problem. The simplified characteristic of activity of Uvarov is usually given in modern literature. He is carried to conservatives, and even to reactionaries. Actually Uvarov for the time represented the figure of rather large scale (Solovyova of http://www.Metakutura/ru/ vogora/mttaist/solov.htm). Brought up on literature of the French Education, he was convinced that a universal formula of liberalism "Freedom, Equality and Brotherhood", is unsuitable for traditional Russian society. The liberal ideas borrowed from the West ended in Russia with the national tragedy of decembrism. And Uvarov decided to oppose to the disseminated, but not destroyed liberalism and the arising extremism of revolutionaries the ideology based on "truly Russian guarding the beginnings".

Proving I reign need of change of ideological orientation of education on the basis of the "correct" education training loyal servants to the tsar and the fatherland, the minister emphasized that he for this purpose "follows, having gradually taken control of minds of youth, to give it education correct, thorough, necessary in our century, with deep belief and warm belief in truly Russian guarding beginnings of Orthodoxy, Autocracy, Nationality making the last anchor of our rescue and the most right pledge of force and greatness of our Fatherland is almost insensitive to that point where have to merge, to permission of one of the most difficult problems of time," (Barsukov 1891: 82-83). It is worth to remember that Uvarov acted in the set circumstances. And in these circumstances the formula offered them, really gave new national ideology for Russia, including for national education.

The appeal to Orthodoxy at that time made big sense because the noble youth was fond of freemasonry. Masonic lodges included the high-ranking persons up to the former minister of education and spiritual affairs both at the same time many of Decembrists and their friends. The Russian Orthodoxy was considered as the center "fanaticism, religious intolerance and dead piety, a ceremony and an external form", alien to Christ's Spirit. And among common people strong was an Old Belief, new sects like switches, skopts appeared, etc. Uvarov understood that in these conditions it is necessary to raise authority of orthodox Orthodoxy.

As for "autocracy", in consciousness of the nobility were still fresh in memory triumph of Parisian "crowd" when to the "most lawful" monarch and his wife the guillotine cut the heads. Also bloody fights for the power were not forgotten at home. And as not healing wound, December collision at Senate Square of noble youth (sons and brothers) with autocracy chafed souls. Strengthening of the principle of autocracy irrespective of the identity of the autocrat, especially was necessary for Russia where the order kept only on the power of the autocrat.

the Concept "nationalities" belongs German to the scientist Wilhelm von Humboldt, Uvarov's friend. In 1814 after the victory of allies over Napoleon it as follows defined this concept: "All vital force, simplicity and freshness of the nation are embodied in the people which — as it always acts as weight — has also the corresponding character. & lt;...> The Nature of the people by education and other means should be put in the state in such conditions that it not only commanded to itself(himself) deep respect of the highest estates which from the people it is up to the end impossible to separate, but also tendency to strengthen and update their delicacy by its force and its freshness..." (From W. von Humboldt's letters of 1989: 236). In Russia after Patriotic war

1812 the concept of nationality also was in a great honor. However class and noble life more and more tightened also this concept a routine. It should have been updated and strengthened the authority of a royal word.

Initially uvarovsky triad formed an ideological basis to reorganization of a system of national education. The universities used special care and attention of the minister. The universities, first of all Moscow, seemed to Nicholas and his environment nurseries of the revolutionary ideas. For the purpose of rehabilitation of the Moscow university in the opinion of the tsar the minister in 1832 carried out audit of this educational institution. Uvarov managed to convince the emperor that "the spirit and arrangement of minds of young people expect only the considered direction to form in bigger number of these useful and diligent tools of the government" (Barsukov 1891: 827). At the same time, Uvarov who was firmly standing on the principles of class education wanted to turn the universities mainly into noble educational institutions. For this reason within 10 years the tuition fee in them raised twice.

The policy of the minister in the field of secondary education came down to universal distribution of "classical education", i.e. system of training which was based on teaching Latin and Ancient Greek languages. The admirer of ancient art, Uvarov proclaimed that "introduction of thorough classical education is the purpose to which we have to aspire in every way". At the same time he perfectly understood that development of Russia in new conditions demanded the experts having real knowledge. Therefore from the second half of the 1830th years at gymnasiums real classes begin to open. However paying attention to high school which, according to it, had to pass completely under control of the state, Uvarov, as well as his predecessors, left to the mercy of fate elementary school which, thus, remained with -

as if discharged of the general system of education.

The emperor highly appreciated Uvarov's activity on the minister's post, having granted it a count title on which coat of arms the well-known motto was cut: "Orthodoxy, Autocracy, Nationality".

After Uvarov a number of reactionary or "any" ministers followed. And only on a wave of the liberal movement of the 1860th years the minister A.V. Golovnin spiritualized by the liberal public moods came to the Ministry of Public Education (1861-1866). It was the era of "great reforms" of Alexander II's reign. Alexander understood Speransky's lesson, having begun reforms "from below", with an abolition of serfdom. It is significant that education reform became the second after an abolition of serfdom.

Golovnin began transformation of a system of national education in several directions at once. The purpose and the plan of reform of a system of national education were stated by the minister publicly in "An overview of the activities of the Ministry": "On the Ministry of national education the duty, first, to care for the correct, broad moral and religious, intellectual, physical, esthetic education of the younger generations, and, secondly, to assist expansion of area of human knowledge in general and in particular in their distribution in our fatherland" (Christmas 1902 lies: 396). Thus, under the authority of the ministry the education, education and education of the younger generation were coordinated. But education remained the main thing nevertheless. The transparency of his activity as minister was the indisputable dignity of Golovnin. Since 1864 the "Collection of orders on the Ministry of national education" available to not only experts, but also the public is systematically published. During the activity Golovnin, despite obstacles of conservatives, managed to implement a number of important reforms.

The greatest public importance was represented by the university charter. The draft of the new university charter was discussed on the commission of the State Council. The minister began the report with an explanation of the reasons of decline of the universities. It allocated four main reasons: 1) shortcoming of good professors; 2) excessive variety of obligatory objects; 3) insufficient preparation of arriving; 4) indifference of scientific estate and professorate to classes in view of scarcity of their material security and thereof low social status.

After detailed discussion the new university charter in the fifth edition was adopted in 1863. The basis for management of the universities it was their autonomies, providing non-interference of the governments to their affairs. Supreme authority in the universities is exercised by the Academic Council under the chairmanship of the rector. The charter provided the corporate structure of the universities, i.e. the original organization both professors, and students that, on the one hand, allowed them to resolve the professional and everyday issues and, with another, actively to influence professorial corporation students. In particular in relation to pupils the new charter pursued two main goals: 1) to strengthen influence of scientific corporation on them and 2) to excite and maintain in students interest in independent classes science (Christmas 1902: 420421). Financing of the universities, including keeping of professorate was at the same time increased. It led to growth of level of the faculty and, respectively, improvement of quality of the given lectures. Though training remained paid, also exempts from poor estates which were in whole or in part exempted from payment were provided.

In parallel with the adoption of the university charter there was a development of the basic principles of the organization of high school. According to the new charter of high school of 1864,

it was divided into three levels: the national schools, pro-gymnasiums and gymnasiums connected by continuity of the programs focused on the higher school, besides that in a gymnasium and a pro-gymnasium children of all states, without distinction of religion study. In the district cities the gymnasiums were preceded by pro-gymnasiums in which the ministry saw a basic basis of universal education. The graduate of a pro-gymnasium could serve as the official of the district and provincial cities, and could, having passed the top classes of a gymnasium, to go also to the university. Education at high school was considered as an independent profession, at the same time work of the tutor was equated to work of the teacher.

At discussion of the status of elementary schools in the ministry and near-ministerial circles the discussion erupted. Some insisted on that this case was entirely submitted to hands of the government which would support national schools at the expense of treasury to have an opportunity to influence development of elementary school. But at the same time necessary resources on the maintenance of schools and huge army of teachers were not counted. The ministry remained nothing else how to be guided by a popular initiative. N.A. Korf, the advocate of zemstvoes, insisted on submitting this case to their order, i.e. eventually to the order of the public. However zemstvoes were poor, and from the state instead of financial support to them there were only regulating requirements. Financial unsettledness of elementary territorial school in many respects became a brake of development of universal education in the country that constantly was a source of public irritation. Unfortunately, it should be noted that position of elementary schools remains to the most vulnerable in the system of national education also up to that moment.

The radical liberal program of Golovnin caused irritation of conservatives, especially after 1866 (Karakozov's shot). In a categorical form it was offered to minister to be guided ochre -

nitelny beginnings. However he preferred resignation. In "For the few" he with sad irony wrote a note about "high calling" of the minister of education: "... nobody needs it, it can be useful and necessary to nobody" (Tsit. on: Tsirulnikov 2001: 68).

The liberal Golovnin on a post of the minister of education was succeeded by the chief prosecutor of the Synod D.A. Tolstoy who in Alexander III's reign combined both of these positions. During this time he managed "to correct" reform of high school due to sharp increase in gymnasiums of Latin and downgrade of real gymnasiums. By 1880. Tolstoy presented the draft of the charter of the universities which is actually bringing their autonomy to naught. It was also accepted as new, "guarding" in essence, the charter of 1884

After the universities there came the line for gymnasiums which the power acting through the new minister I.D. Delyanov decided to turn into a nobility stronghold also. Having stated publicly that education is harmful to "the lowest classes", the minister of education signed in 1887 the decree according to which to directors of gymnasiums was forbidden to accept children without "the sufficient guarantee in their correct house supervision". The list of unreliable included "children of drivers, footmen, cooks, laundresses, small shopkeepers and to that similar people" (Milyukov 1994: 316) (in the people this decree received the nominal name as the decree on "kukharkiny children").

The reign of the last Russian emperor Nicholas II which actually coincided with the beginning of a new century showed full discrepancy of a condition of national education with economic, nauchnotekhnichesky and ideological and educational requirements of a century. The census of 1897 showed that 1/6 part of the population of Russia remained illiterate (we will remember 15% of the teenagers, according to Fursenko remaining outside compulsory secondary education). So Russia from the world power rolled down in a rear guard of the European and world economic and political life.

The crisis situation of the country was not saved also by economic recovery of 1910-1912, it only gave some hope.

The count P.N. Ignatyev (1915-1916) was the last minister of education who left on himself kind memory. The beginning of world war, growth of patriotic sentiments caused new turn to liberalism. And in this situation the minister began preparation of a series of the liberal reforms in education and their stage-by-stage realization. Acting in the State Duma, Ignatyev noticed concerning high school that here it is necessary to reform almost everything. "Russia is the talented country needing only education. Its school has to be a subject of the state value" — he said. And in this plan it carried out a number of the actions directed to rapprochements of gymnasiums and real schools and formation of uniform type of school, its approach to requirements of modern reality. In implementation of this project the following principles had to be carried out: 1) the school has to be national; 2) the school has to give the finished secondary education; 3) the school has to be presented by different types of orientation — humanitarian, real, polytechnical, commercial; 4) rapprochement of family and school is necessary; 5) increase in responsibility of teachers in preparation and implementation of school programs is necessary. At the same time Ignatyev in the conditions of war achieved increase in allocations for education, and in particular salary increase to teachers.

In relation to the higher school its return to the university charter of 1863 was accurately designated. At the same time as private directives were allowed to the higher education of the woman, especially on medical faculties. Development of the curriculum of the professionalnotekhnichesky higher schools was begun. During ignatyevsky reform in the country not less than 20 new higher educational institutions were open. Ignatyev's reforms were accompanied by the general

raising of a pedagogical thought in the country. In the summer of 1916 in Petrograd, Moscow, Kiev, Odessa, Kazan and other cities of Russia there took place pedagogical congresses at big

activities of participants.

However also reactionaries did not doze. In Ignatyev they saw the dangerous opponent who should have been knocked down. And when the situation in the Duma in view of increase of a revolutionary situation in the country and deteriorations in positions on fronts sharply moved to the right, they made it. Thereby ignatyevsky reform and remained incomplete. After attempts of reactionaries to turn back education business the revolution crossed out all counterreforms and reforms... New counting of time began.

But whatever the social order — class, class, financial and oligarchical was on the social structure, at last, civil — it should not restrain children and teenagers because the future cruelly revenges for injustice of the present in relation to its future.

Litas: Anthology of a pedagogical thought of Russia of the first half of the 19th century. M, 1987;

N. Barsukov. Life and N.P. Pogodin's works. SPb., 1891. Prince 4; From Wilhelm von Humboldt's letters//Foreign literature. 1989. No. 11; P.F. Kapterev. History of the Russian pedagogics. the 2nd prod. Pg., 1915; V.O. Klyuchevsky. Letters. Diaries. Aphorisms and thoughts of history. M, 1968; E.N. Medynsky. Pedagogics history in communication by economic development of society. M, 1929; P.N. Milyukov. Essays on the history of the Russian culture: In 3 TM, 1994. T.2. Part 2; A.V. Mudrik. Socialization as social and pedagogical phenomenon//Educational space as object of a pedagogical research. Kaluga, 2000; A.V. Mudrik. Social pedagogics. M, 2002; Christmas S.V. Historical overview of the activities of the ministry of national education. SPb., 1902; Yu. Solovyova. Empire shamrock: http:// www.Metakutura/ru/vogora/mttaist/solov.htm; L.A. Tikhomirov. Monarchic statehood. M, 1998; Ushinsky K.D. Soch. M.-L., 1948. T. 2; A.A. Fursenko. Modernization of education on a new round: purposes and means of their achievement. http://www/eurekanet.ru/ewww /

>info/965.html 06.12.2004; A.M. Tsirulnikov. The history of education in portraits and documents. M, 2001.

Lloyd Peter
Other scientific works: