Russian education in the conditions of reform. The structure of the education system in the Russian Federation

The education reform in Russia is a set of measures taken by the Government of the Russian Federation to modernize the Russian education system.

Basic provisions:

Introduction of the unified state examination.

Introduction and development of multi-level higher education, in accordance with the Bologna process. Within the framework of this direction, higher professional education is divided into two cycles - bachelor's and master's programs. The bachelor's degree is designed to satisfy the massive demand for higher education, the master's degree is to contribute to the formation of a professional elite and top-level scientific and educational personnel. A multi-level system of higher education most of all meets the needs of a market economy, in which the labor market makes special demands on the flexibility and mobility of the workforce. At the same time, the introduction of a two-tier system does not cancel the classical traditions of Russian (Soviet) higher education. For a number of specialties, multi-level training leading to the award of the degree of “graduated specialist” will be retained.

Reduction of teaching and teaching staff. On January 1, 2011, the State Duma of the Russian Federation adopted a law. As noted, "the document gives such institutions the right to engage in activities that generate income, which they can manage on their own." At the same time, Minister of Education Fursenko, Prime Minister Putin and President Medvedev stated that "secondary education in the Russian Federation will remain free."

Reducing the number of universities. In the fall of 2012, the Ministry of Education assessed 502 Russian state universities (taking into account the average USE score for first-year students, the level of infrastructure, etc.). As a result, 136 educational institutions were recognized as inefficient, the most problematic of them were promised "reorganization" - closure with accession to another university.

The Bologna process is a process of rapprochement and harmonization of higher education systems in European countries with the aim of creating a single European higher education area. The official start date for the process is considered to be June 19, 1999, when the Bologna Declaration was signed.

The decision to participate in the voluntary process of establishing the European Higher Education Area was formalized in Bologna by representatives of 29 countries. To date, the process includes 47 participating countries out of 49 countries that have ratified the European Cultural Convention of the Council of Europe (1954). The Bologna Process is open to other countries to join.

Russia joined the Bologna process in September 2003 at the Berlin meeting of European ministers of education. In 2005, the Minister of Education of Ukraine signed the Bologna Declaration in Bergen. In 2010, in Budapest, a final decision was made on Kazakhstan's accession to the Bologna Declaration. Kazakhstan is the first Central Asian state recognized as a full member of the European educational space.

One of the main goals of the Bologna process is "to promote mobility by overcoming barriers to the effective exercise of free movement". This requires that the levels of higher education in all countries be as similar as possible, and the scientific degrees awarded on the basis of the results of training - the most transparent and easily comparable. This, in turn, is directly related to the introduction of a credit transfer system, a modular training system and a special Diploma Supplement in universities. This is also closely related to curriculum reform.

The beginning of the Bologna process can be traced back to the mid-1970s, when the Council of Ministers of the European Union adopted a resolution on the first cooperation program in the field of education.

In 1998, the ministers of education of four European countries (France, Germany, Great Britain and Italy), participating in the celebration of the 800th anniversary of the University of Paris, agreed that the segmentation of European higher education in Europe hinders the development of science and education. They signed the Sorbonne Joint Declaration (1998). The purpose of the declaration is to create common provisions for the standardization of the European Higher Education Area, where mobility should be encouraged both for students and graduates, and for staff development. In addition, it was supposed to ensure that qualifications meet modern requirements in the labor market.

The objectives of the Sorbonne Declaration were reaffirmed in 1999 with the signing of the Bologna Declaration, in which 29 countries expressed their willingness to commit themselves to enhancing the competitiveness of the European Higher Education Area, emphasizing the need to preserve the independence and autonomy of all higher education institutions. All provisions of the Bologna Declaration were established as measures of a voluntary negotiation process, and not as rigid legal obligations.

The main objectives of the Bologna process are: to increase access to higher education, to further improve the quality and attractiveness of European higher education, to increase the mobility of students and teachers, and to ensure successful employment of university graduates by ensuring that all academic degrees and other qualifications should be oriented to the labor market . Russia's accession to the Bologna process gives a new impetus to the modernization of higher professional education, opens up additional opportunities for the participation of Russian universities in projects funded by the European Commission, and for students and teachers of higher educational institutions in academic exchanges with universities in European countries.

Main provisions of the Bologna Declaration

The purpose of the declaration is to establish a European Higher Education Area, as well as to activate the European system of higher education on a global scale.

The Declaration contains seven key provisions:

Adoption of a system of comparable degrees, including through the introduction of a Diploma Supplement to ensure the employment of European citizens and increase the international competitiveness of the European higher education system.

Introduction of two-cycle education: preliminary (undergraduate) and graduation (graduate). The first cycle lasts at least three years. The second must lead to a master's degree or a doctorate degree.

Implementation of the European work-intensive credit transfer system to support large-scale student mobility (credit system). It also provides the student with the right to choose the disciplines studied. It is proposed to take ECTS (European Credit Transfer System) as a basis, making it a funded system that can work within the concept of "lifelong learning".

Significant development of student mobility (based on the implementation of the two previous points). Increase the mobility of teaching and other staff by taking into account the period of time spent by them working in the European region. Setting standards for transnational education.

Promoting European cooperation in quality assurance with a view to developing comparable criteria and methodologies.

Implementation of intra-university education quality control systems and involvement of students and employers in the external evaluation of the activities of universities.

Promoting the necessary European attitudes in higher education, especially in the areas of curriculum development, inter-institutional cooperation, mobility schemes and joint programs of study, practical training and research.

Countries join the Bologna process on a voluntary basis through the signing of a relevant declaration. At the same time, they assume certain obligations, some of which are limited in time:

from 2005 to start issuing free of charge to all graduates of universities of the countries participating in the Bologna process European supplements of a single sample to bachelor's and master's degrees;

by 2010 to reform national education systems in accordance with the main provisions of the Bologna Declaration.

The Bologna process includes 47 countries (2011) and the European Commission. Thus, Monaco and San Marino are the only members of the Council of Europe not participating in the process. All countries - members of the European Union are involved in the process.

Ministerial Conference

Ministerial conferences are held every two years as part of the Bologna Declaration, where ministers express their will through a communiqué.

The Prague Communiqué of 2001 increased the number of member countries to 33 and expanded the objectives to achieve an increased attractiveness and competitiveness of the European Higher Education Area in a context of lifelong learning. In addition, ministers committed themselves to ensuring the further development of national qualifications frameworks and the quality of education. This goal was supplemented by provisions on lifelong learning as one of the important elements of higher education, which should be taken into account when creating new educational systems. The topic of public control of the learning process was also first raised in the Prague Communiqué.

The next ministerial conference took place in Berlin in 2003; The Berlin Communiqué increased the number of countries participating in the Bologna Process to 40. The main provisions of this communiqué consider expanding the goals in terms of linking the European Higher Education Area into the European Research Area, as well as measures to promote quality learning. Another important issue addressed in the Berlin Communiqué was the creation of new structures to support the processes initiated within the framework of the two ministerial conferences. Based on this, the Bologna Group, the Bologna Council and the Secretariat were created. In this communiqué, the ministers also agreed that appropriate national structures should be established in each of the participating countries.

In 2005, a ministerial conference was held in Bergen. The final communiqué emphasized the importance of partnerships, including stakeholders - students, universities, teachers and employers, as well as further expansion of scientific research, especially in relation to the third cycle - doctoral studies. In addition, this communiqué highlights the importance of making higher education more accessible, as well as making the European Higher Education Area more attractive to other parts of the world.

The London Communiqué of 2007 expanded the number of participating countries to 46. This communiqué focused on assessing the progress made so far, raising questions about mobility, degree structures, the level of recognition of the Bologna system as a whole, qualifications structures (both general and national), lifelong learning, ensuring the quality of education, public control of the learning process, as well as set many priority tasks for 2009, the main of which are: mobility, social control, which was proposed in the Prague Communiqué and first defined here, data collection and accounting, employment opportunities. It was emphasized that there is a need for further cooperation, considering it as an opportunity to reform the value systems and concepts of the educational process.

In 2009, the conference took place in the Belgian city of Leuven (Louvain-la-Neuve - New Leuven); the main working issues concerned plans for the next decade, with an emphasis on: public control, lifelong learning, employment, methods of communicating the goals of education to the student. The issues of international openness, student mobility, education in general, research and innovation, data collection, funding and various tools and methods for ensuring the transparency of the educational process were also considered. All these issues were reflected in the final communiqué, showing the new direction of the Bologna Process - a deeper reform that will ensure the completion of the Bologna Process implementation process. Another change concerns the internal arrangements related to the presidency of the Bologna Council. If previously the Bologna Process was chaired by the EU Presidency, now the process will be chaired by two countries: both the EU Presidency and the non-EU countries in alphabetical order.

The next ministerial conference was held in March 2010 in Budapest and Vienna; the conference was jubilee - the decade of the Bologna process. In honor of the anniversary, the official announcement of the creation of the European Higher Education Area took place, which means that the goal set in the Bologna Declaration has been achieved. In addition, since this conference, the European Higher Education Area has been expanded to 47 countries.

Organizational forums are held in conjunction with ministerial conferences within the framework of the Bologna process.

The first organizational Bologna Forum was held in Leuvenev in 2009. It was attended by 46 members of the Bologna Process, as well as a wide range of third countries and non-governmental organizations. The main issues discussed within the framework of the forum were: the key role in the development of a higher education society based on a continuous educational process and the possibility of all segments of society to receive education. The importance of public investment in higher education despite the economic crisis, the importance of international exchanges in higher education, the need for a balanced exchange of teachers, researchers and students between countries in order to promote a fair and fruitful "brain exchange" as an alternative to "brain drain" were considered.

The second organizational Bologna Forum took place in Vienna in March 2010; it was attended by 47 countries and eight advisory members, as well as third countries and non-governmental organizations. The main topics of discussion were the following questions: how higher education systems and institutions respond to growing needs and expectations, ensuring a balance between cooperation and competition in international higher education. Also, most participants recognized the need to create contact methods for each of the participants in the process, such as the appointment of responsible contact persons for each participating country who will act as a link, will help improve information exchange and coordination of joint actions, including the preparation of the next organizational Bologna Forum . The need to promote and develop a global dialogue between students from all countries was also recognized.

Benefits of the Bologna process: expanding access to higher education, further improving the quality and attractiveness of European higher education, increasing the mobility of students and teachers, as well as ensuring successful employment of university graduates due to the fact that all academic degrees and other qualifications should be oriented to the labor market. The accession of Russia to the Bologna process gives a new impetus to the modernization of higher professional education, opens up additional opportunities for the participation of Russian universities in projects funded by the European Commission, and for students and teachers of higher educational institutions in academic exchanges with universities in European countries.

The United States not only observes the process of European educational integration, but also actively participates in it. In 1992, a working group was established at UNESCO to develop a regulatory framework to ensure the possibility of mutual recognition of documents on education in Europe and America. However, in two years it was not possible to reach a consensus: it turned out that one of the main problems on the way to the convergence of the two educational systems is the problem of comparing the European system of mutual recognition of credits (ECTS) with the American system of credits (English credits). In the United States, a more diverse and flexible system of studying workload is used, consisting of a system of credits (credits), calculation of total marks according to the criteria of quantity (GPA) and quality (QPA), as well as additional points for successful academic and scientific work (Honors).

According to Russian education experts, Russia's accession to the Bologna process may lead to temporary confusion with curricula. Employers who studied during the Soviet era should be informed that all modern higher education degrees are full-fledged, but some degrees are more intended for scientific and pedagogical activities in a university, such as a master's degree and a doctor of philosophy. There is no specialist degree in most of the countries that participate in the Bologna Process. One of the serious problems of integrating the Russian education system into the Bologna process is the lack of awareness of officials both about the current state of affairs in Russian and European education, and about the goals of the Bologna process.

In 2010, there was a "heroic" work to create a draft of a new law "On Education". The first version of the project did not withstand any criticism and was sent for revision. But the question arises: why, in general, is it necessary to correct what is disastrous for Russian education?

From December 1, 2010 to February 1, 2011, a finalized draft law was put up for public discussion on the Internet. The first thing that struck me was the volume, 240 pages, a medium-sized novel. Well, not "War and Peace", but "Fathers and Sons", not from Turgenev, of course. Why is there a novel, a draft law contrived to surpass even the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, there are 48,000 less printed characters (a computer is without (c) passionate in counting characters)! Imagine: the list of all crimes committed by Russians, with their definitions, punishments, etc., is smaller than the draft law on education! And in fact, a significant part of its text could be presented in two articles:

Article 1 The Ministry of Education and Science can do anything if it wants to.

Article 2. For those who do not understand, see Article 1.

The concrete embodiment of these grandiose plans in the field of education is known as the "Bologna process", which started in 1988, when the so-called "Universal Charter of the Universities" was adopted, proclaiming completely harmless things - the autonomy and equality of universities, as well as the inextricable link between educational and research processes.

But the potential of the document was appreciated by the European neo-liberals, who immediately took control of the process into their tenacious hands. Under their strict guidance, the emphasis placed in the "Charter" gradually shifted. While maintaining the general benevolent professorial tone, the concepts of “mobility of citizens with the possibility of their employment for the general development of the continent” and “competitiveness of the European system of higher education”, as well as the idea of two-stage education (joint statement of the European Ministers of Education, 1999) became key.

The mobility of the labor force, which should be ensured by the standardization of training programs and knowledge assessment (the former "equality and cooperation of universities"), is extremely important in a global market. Without it, it is impossible to freely move production to regions of “economically favored” (cheap labor and low social and labor guarantees), as well as the movement of capital from industry to industry in pursuit of higher profits. Both require the ability to quickly and without retraining (or with minimal retraining), i.e. at no additional cost, recruit a sufficient number of qualified employees at any time and in any place. The competitiveness of educational services in translation from politically correct to intelligible means:

The transformation of educational institutions into full-fledged capitalist enterprises, producing the most popular goods with minimal costs.
Decrease in wages, cancellation of scholarships, reduction of the material base, closing of "unprofitable" faculties and, most importantly, tuition fees. "Nothing extra".

Under this unspoken motto, higher education is divided into two cycles: undergraduate and graduate.

In 2003, Russia officially joined the Bologna process. Everyone is aware of the zeal, worthy of a better use, with which our government seeks the WTO. The results in domestic policy are evident.

In 1997, 2002, 2005, an agreement on loans for the modernization of education was signed between the Government of the Russian Federation and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD). The strategy for the development of education included: the weakening of state influence and the orientation of education to the requirements of the labor market. Here are some of the IBRD's priority recommendations: “close pedagogical institutes”; "close vocational schools"; enter “per capita financing of schools”; “do not increase the share of spending on higher or secondary vocational education in total GDP”; "eliminate" the injustice and inefficiency of the examination system.

According to the IBRD recommendations, the school should become a tool in the fight against morality and spirituality in Russia. It was proposed to establish "minimum standards of citizenship", which were reduced by the authors of the report to "the ability to read maps correctly, to explain in a foreign language, to correctly fill out tax returns ... this list may also include the ability to perceive Russian art and literature, as well as tolerance for other social groups".

In December 1999, the Center for Strategic Research was established on the basis of the HSE. G. Gref became its president, E. Nabiullina became its vice president. In 2001, on the initiative of Yaroslav Kuzminov, the husband of E. Nabiullina, the Russian Public Council for the Development of Education was created. In 2004, Ya. Kuzminov, rector of the Higher School of Economics, presents a report on improving the structure of education in Russia. The three most important principles of education - universality, free of charge and fundamental nature - were subjected to a complete revision as unprofitable. According to Kuzminov, our country is too educated: “... 98.6% of teenagers aged 16 study in impoverished Russia,more is spent on secondary education than on higher education..

By 2010, a number of measures were implemented to reform Russian education:

40 pedagogical institutes have been closed;
The system of vocational schools is actually destroyed;
The Russian school is already moving towards “minimum standards of citizenship”;
The unfair” examination system was replaced by the Unified State Examination.

In 2003, the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation conducted audits of the effectiveness of public spending in the implementation of IBRD projects. As is clear from the Bulletin of the SP RF for 2008, “ for the entire period of using borrowed funds in the field of education, the Russian side did not evaluate the effectiveness of any of the IBRD projects”. I note that the repayment and servicing of loans was carried out at the expense of the federal budget.

In 2001, the Ministry of Education "had" to spend all its funds on the introduction of the Unified State Exam, GIFO (State Named Financial Obligations) to ensure multi-channel financing of educational services, restructuring rural schools, etc. At the same time, as evidenced by the materials of the Accounts Chamber, the Russian Academy of Education was actually removed from the development of the main directions for the development of education: "the development of scientific projects was entrusted to organizations ... that do not have the scientific potential necessary for such a level of development." According to the materials of the Accounts Chamber, all educational experiments were carried out with numerous legislative violations (Civil Code, Tax Code, Budget Code, etc.).

Education reform is one illegal experiment for which no one is responsible, this is what Russian reformers are trying to hush up all the time. But on the other hand, the amounts invested by the IBRD in Russian education ended up in the “right” hands.

This reform will shake up the entire education system, from preschool education to universities. Already at the school level, the first stage of social division will take place. The level of education of children will depend entirely on the availability of money in the pockets of their parents.

How will this look in practice?

Higher education will basically become paid. This happened due to inclusion in the Bologna process, training was divided into predominantly paid bachelor's degree (3-4 years) and exclusively paid master's degree. Also due to a general reduction in free (s) paid budget places and other state guarantees, due to an increase in the total cost of education in large cities in the best universities in the country (cost of living, connection with home, etc.).

The point is to destroy the type of higher education that has developed in Russian culture over 300 years. Our universities produced specialists adequate to our natural, cultural and economic reality. Now they will become inadequate. The Russian education system has always been the envy of Western scientific circles. The world scientific community cannot be deceived. Scientists all over the world at all times paid tribute to the highest potential of the Russian scientific school. Both the European royal courts and the democratic clans of bourgeois America hunted for Russian minds. The intellect of the nation is, perhaps, the only thing that our country managed to preserve even in the years of difficult hard times. It is thanks to the intellect that Russia has always been the greatest power in the world.

General secondary education is prepared for the introduction of paid education in high school.

The developers of federal state educational standards (FSES) identified six subject groups.

The first group is the Russian language and literature, as well as the native language and literature;
The second group - foreign languages;
The third group - mathematics and computer science;
The fourth group is the social sciences;
Fifth group - natural sciences;
The sixth is art or a subject of choice.

In each of the groups, according to the authors of the standard, the student will be able to choose one or two subjects, but there are three subjects for which variations will be impossible - the courses "Russia in the world", life safety and physical education will be mandatory for everyone. Thus, the number of subjects in the upper grades studied by the student will be reduced from 16-21 to 9-10. From now on, the school disappears as a multidimensional, main public institution for the development and formation of the child's personality, the school becomes a kind of market appendage for the provision of educational services to the population.

The network of preschool institutions will continue to shrink. Full-fledged programs of preschool education (nurseries and kindergartens) will be smoothly translated into various kinds of fragmented programs, such as services for temporary stay centers for children, etc. The cost of preschool education will rise significantly.
The same thing as with pre-school education will happen with additional general education (palaces of creativity, child development centers, etc.) and rural schools.
Purposefully and cynically, the system of creative schools, colleges, universities is falling apart. Music and art schools are equated with the standards of additional general education, and educational institutions are trying to drag them into the Bologna process and divide actors and musicians into bachelors and masters. According to the logic of the Ministry of Education and Science, it turns out that the skill of an actor does not depend on talent, but on the number of years spent at the university. I studied for five years - perhaps for the role of Hamlet, and if four years - sorry, you can’t rise above Kolobok in a provincial theater.
The Russian school ceases to be unified and finally stratifies in two directions:
a) a narrow stratum of schools and universities for the "rich" and a mass school for the "poor";
b) for schools and universities in metropolitan areas, as well as in non-subsidized regions and educational institutions in other regions and cities.
At all levels of education, from preschool to higher education, due to the reduction of educational places, there is a significant reduction in teaching and service personnel.
General education - the basis of the reproduction, development and basic security of the country - has become tied to the results of the test unified exam (USE). As a result, the fundamental nature of general education, which allows the formation of higher abilities (thinking, understanding, imagination) and other basic characteristics of consciousness and thinking, is destroyed.
The degradation of all “environments” surrounding the sphere of education is sharply increasing: scientific, cultural, advanced industrial (such as mechanical engineering, high-tech, etc.). In science, for example, a sharp reduction in the number of organizations and scientists is accompanied by a complete erosion of the status of scientific activity and the identification of science with any other, primarily commercial and trading activity.
The sphere of education will finally be tied to the “market”, i.e. to the existing level of development of industry and the social sphere. From the sphere of "production of the future" education turns into the sphere of "service of the present". World - class education will become inaccessible to the majority of the country 's population . In general, not only will there be no improvement in the quality of Russian education, another systemic failure will occur, degradation will take on an accelerated and irreversible character. The Russian school will become colonial, and Russia will become a third world country, a "banana republic", where bananas are our northern oil and gas. Behind the reforms stands a very definite image of Russia in the 21st century. And this is not an image of a world power, to the size and scale of which Russia should, obviously, curtail its power.

In total, over 10,000 comments and remarks were received during the two-month discussion of the draft law “On Education”.

Leonid Ivanovich Volchkevich - professor at Moscow State Technical University N.E. Bauman, Doctor of Technical Sciences, Honored Worker of the Higher School of the Russian Federation, in the article “A bag of instructions with a hidden bomb” (http://www.ng.ru/education/2011-02-01/8_zakon.html) says: “The first impression of the text of the draft law “On Education”, specifically Chapter 15 “Higher Education”, is exorbitant bloat, an abundance of self-evident and insignificant provisions, at the level of departmental instructions; just declarative, without semantic load. Why, for example, at the level of the law of the Russian Federation, to chew on the long-established procedures for extending the term of graduate school? If the authors of the draft law set out to reduce the regulation of higher education to the smallest detail, I propose the following addition: “Students are required to come to class in shoes and wipe them at the entrance.”

Jokes aside, the more carefully you read the texts of ch. 15, the more confidence grows that all this verbosity is a proven way to hide the most important between the lines. I cannot get rid of the feeling that in the texts of Ch. 15 hidden at least two "bombs" that can undermine the national higher education.

Bomb number one. Today there are about 600 public universities in the country with federal management and funding. However, Articles 133 and 135 directly state that only three categories remain under the jurisdiction of the Russian Federation: 1) Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov and St. Petersburg State University; 2) federal universities; 3) national research universities with a total of about fifty specific universities. What is the fate of the rest? Molchok.

True, in further texts one can “catch” such terms as “regional and municipal educational institutions”. But in ch. 15 - not a word about their status, organization, funding, quality assurance of training, etc., as is done for the mentioned three categories. Should it be understood that the state simply leaves 90% of the current state universities to the mercy of local authorities, from governors to village chairmen?

There is not a word in the law on the responsibility of regional and local authorities. As a result, after a period of stagnation and degradation, the current state universities may cease to exist or be transformed into commercial "offices for the sale of university diplomas." The unified state system of higher education, which was the pride of the Soviet country, authoritative throughout the world, will be “blown up”.

Bomb number two. Article 131 implies the legal equality of two-level (bachelor-master) and one-level (specialist) systems of higher education. Both have advantages and disadvantages, reasonable scope. So, a two-level system (colloquially - "bologna"), apparently, is rational for scientific specialties. And for technical ones, this is a sure means of strangulation. Since it is impossible to train a high-class designer, technologist, operator in 3.5-4 years, especially for the defense industries. This has been said and written so many times, and with evidence and examples, that I simply do not want to repeat myself. By the way! The deaf response silence of the Ministry of Education and Science cannot be interpreted otherwise than tacit agreement with criticism, apparently, there is nothing to say in response.

The draft law is silent about the main thing - who will have the right to choose educational trajectories for specific universities and specialties. In reality, everything can be in the power of nameless bureaucrats-managers who are not responsible for anything. The authors of the draft law "On Education" follow the beaten path. In 2006, the State Duma of the Russian Federation adopted the Forest Code, according to which the state threw off its worries about the country's greatest national wealth - forests. One of the results is last summer's national disaster. Will it not turn out that in a few years the broad masses of the people will realize that they have been excommunicated from high-quality higher education, and therefore from opportunities for worthy work and a worthy life. And then the country will blaze so that last year's fires will seem like the flickering of a candle.

And here is what Vasily Vashkov, head teacher of a Moscow school, writes about the draft law “On Education” (http://newsland.ru/news/detail/id/626967/cat/42/): “We have before us a draft law, which, no doubt, will be adopted and according to which we, starting from January 1, 2013, will have to live. I do not pretend to a full-fledged analysis, I will only allow some comments on the bill.

Article 8 The state ensures the realization of the right of everyone to education by creating an education system and appropriate socio-economic conditions .

What conditions? Will we raise wages or switch to subsistence farming? Will everyone be given a fountain pen or a laptop? Will they be sent to study in a barn or in a palace? Nothing concrete either here or further. Continuous declarations: the state guarantees, provides, promotes... What specifically guarantees, what provides, what does it promote?

Articles 10-14.

Five articles on education management, listing the powers of a variety of bodies. It turns out that OU (governing bodies) can command EVERYTHING! Almost three thousand words about authority, and NOT ONE ABOUT DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES!

Article 22. Experimental and innovative activities in the field of education.

I don’t know about universities, but this is the most shameful thing that exists in schools today! Ten years ago there was no such thing. Quite rightly, it was believed that the work of a teacher in its essence is a constant search, an experiment. This is true: there are no two identical children, two identical classes and two identical lessons. But in the late 90s, this normal activity of the teacher began to be driven into official, bureaucratic, ugly forms. Excess funding, concentrated in the hands of officials, has led to the creation of countless experimental platforms, meaningless and stupid, generating only a wave of accountability and justifying the need for the existence of a host of bureaucratic posts. To date, many schools are involved in 3 - 5 sites at the same time. It is very, very worth it...

At a meeting in February 2010, the head of one of the districts of Moscow announced the amount spent by the district on this type of activity: 150 million rubles in 2009! At that moment, it seemed to me, she herself was frightened by the named figure. There are 10 districts in Moscow. 1.5 billion down the drain! With per capita funding, this is money for the education of 50,000 children during the year! But this is the number of schoolchildren in a city with a population of 400-500 thousand people! Now there is nothing to fear, it will all become legal.

Article 28. Management of an educational organization.

The sole executive body of an educational organization is the head of the educational organization ...

All other vague discussions about collegiate bodies (council, teachers' council...) without defining the powers of these very bodies are just a fig leaf covering up the shame of the absence of even a hint of democratization of management.

Article 31 Competence, rights, duties and responsibilities of the educational organization.

An educational organization does have rights and competencies, but the draft law interprets them in a very peculiar way, in fact, all of them, one way or another, come down to what the organization must DO, that is, to its duties. All in all,« she has the right to POW." As for the responsibility that the bodies listed in Articles 10-14 are deprived of, it is entrusted to the educational organization to the fullest extent. She is responsible not only for what she did herself, but also for what these bodies directed.

Chapter 5 Pedagogical, managerial and other employees.

The law establishes the need for these workers to meet the qualification requirements provided for by the Unified Qualification Handbook. Everything would be fine until you read what this manual requires. The director and the head teacher, for example, should not have a pedagogical, but a managerial education, the teacher should know the theory of management, be able to use browsers, but there are only three words about knowledge of their subject:« fundamentals of general theoretical disciplines...»

In fact, the law, together with the reference book, turns the school into an emasculated bureaucratic structure that has lost its original meaning.

If this is the state policy in the field of education, and not disclosed in Article 9, then its goal is the destruction of the school.

Article 73. Licensing of educational activities .

Hooray! Finally a perpetual license! But will it make life easier? I doubt. A few years ago, the procedure for attesting schools was officially abolished. But they rejoiced early! This procedure was simply quietly introduced into the state accreditation procedure. Officials were not reduced, they did not even bother to change the plates in the GSLA. So it hung two years after the cancellation of the procedure, the sign« Head of the department of attestation of schools. Will this happen again?

Article 74 State accreditation...

Good article. Accreditation for a school for twelve years is great, although why not an indefinite one, like a license? Removes a lot of bureaucratic insanity. But other articles make it easy to revive it.

Article 75 State supervision.

God, the same song again! The last (responsible) is always the educational organization. But what about those structures that are legally defined in articles 10-14? And if the organization followed their instructions? A year ago, during the licensing of our school, in response to the comments of experts, I repeatedly referred to direct instructions from the authorities (management and methodological center), to which I received an unambiguous answer:« By law, they can only recommend to you, and you decide. School Responsibility. It is, of course, so, but, I disobey these« recommendations”, it would not seem enough. Accounting, for example, refuses to fund a curriculum unless it is« agreed ”(read - approved) with the methodological service, which is even an advisory body under the current law.

I am afraid that the new law will not improve the situation. Yes, we agree to answer, we agree! But only for your work, and not for following other people's instructions! The project prepares the widest field for the manifestation of bureaucratic voluntarism.

Try not to participate in educational activities - you do not comply with the law, and if classes are disrupted as a result of participation, you are also violating. Because of the events, lessons are disrupted, but they have to be paid for - two violations at once! Just like in the old movie:« The whites will come and plunder, the reds will come and plunder... Where can the peasant go?”

BUT« rob” education for all and sundry. For example, the story of the certification of workplaces, carried out on the basis of the order of the Ministry of Health and Social Development of the Russian Federation dated August 31, 2007 No. 569. According to this order, a bunch of pieces of paper should be issued for each workplace (teacher's desk, for example). In practice, only specially created firms could do this. The cost of certification of one place cost about 2000 rubles. The school needs to certify about 50 such places. About 100 thousand rubles in cash. There are more than 1500 schools in Moscow. According to the most conservative estimates - 150 million.

Where did the schools get this money? (They are not in the estimate!) Let's keep silent about this. I can only say one thing: any director who has paid for certification can be safely fired for various financial violations. And they all paid for it.

What about kindergartens? What about universities? Colleges? The proposed draft law does not in the least protect against such robbery.

Chapter 9. Economics and Finance.

In principle, it’s normally conceived, it’s good that additional funding is provided for small rural schools, but there is no specifics, everything is at the mercy of the local bureaucracy, which today considers any expenditure of public funds that is not related to personal enrichment to be wasteful.

Additional funding for their development programs - the idea, it would seem, is a good one. But what happened in the process of its approbation within the framework of the national project« Education”, inspires, to put it mildly, some concerns. Getting the notorious million was instantly turned into a kind of competition between educational bureaucratic structures. The most advanced schools, and not the most needy, were nominated as participants. Getting a grant depended solely on how« beautifully ”the development program was written and how solid the rest of the papers looked. The evaluation of these programs was carried out by pedagogical theorists and officials. The requirements for the programs strongly resembled those for solid scientific research or doctoral dissertations. For the sake of victory, some schools simply hired the right ones.« specialists" in writing scientific treatises. As a result, the costs could exceed the grant. I am afraid that this law, which interprets this issue in a very vague way, will make it possible to turn this disgrace into the norm.

Article 88 Features of compensation for damage caused by poor-quality education.

Education is not yesterday's stew with sour sauce and subsequent diarrhea. Education cannot be GIVE, it can only be TAKE! The article is categorically harmful, a tribute to legal casuistry, an imitation of Americans distraught on this basis.

Chapter 10 Preschool education.

Somehow quite modestly, only a hundred lines. But the problem is burning! Kindergartens are sorely lacking, about 30 percent of today's children under the age of 7 will come to school without getting into kindergarten. The salary in kindergartens is not just small, but humiliatingly beggarly. The Moscow kindergarten, where my son goes, is looking for a nanny for 0.75 rates, with a salary of 5,000 rubles! And what is happening in the regions?! What, the drafters of the draft law do not even suspect about the existing problems? Or are they not going to solve them? Or did they only see children in pictures?

Chapter 11 General education.

It's funny, already in the third paragraph he signs in which cases it is possible to leave the child for the second year. Right after the phrase:« General education is compulsory.” Apparently, even for the drafters of the project, the causal relationship of these points is obvious. And what if this same fool, who, according to the law, must be left for the second year, according to Article 88 of the same law, accuses the school of giving him a poor-quality education? And who wants to deal with it? Probably, it was worthwhile to more clearly understand the responsibilities of students and their parents and replace the concept of compulsory general education with the right:« Any citizen of the Russian Federation has the right to receive free general education.

Chapter 12 Professional education.

« The priest missed the eggs when Easter passed, ”my grandmother used to say. Why did they tear everything apart so that now it can be rebuilt again? Where are you, UPC, where are you, highly professional masters, ready to teach children? However, it's good that you remembered.

Enough, perhaps, let me sum up some results:

In itself, the idea of a law on education is not bad, but it was probably not worth collecting everything into this law, inflating it to such a size.
There are a number of sensible, necessary articles, the urgent need for which has long been felt by educators.
The vast majority of articles are declarative in nature, something like« Statements of intent."
Financial issues are discussed without specifying any specific values.
The law is extremely« bureaucratic” (sorry for the new, clumsy term). Its adoption in its current form will not only not lead to a reduction in the apparatus and duplicating bureaucratic structures, but will give rise to a lot of new ones. This is a law written by officials for the convenience of officials.

All these shortcomings are generated, most likely, by the fact that practices were removed from the drafting of the law. Those who TEACH! The draft of the new law does not even try to touch upon the burning issues, well-known to practitioners:

The real quality of knowledge is of no interest to anyone, officials only need good reports confirming the success of their leadership.
Profile education has failed miserably, it can only work if the high school is separated - to create separate educational organizations with a large number of different profiles. There is not even a word about it.
All the guarantees for teachers prescribed in the draft should be replaced by one - to recognize them as civil servants. (Who works for the state if not them?) Instead, they are reduced to the status of stupid executors of bureaucratic will.

There is another thing that is characteristic of our country - life is not according to laws, but according to concepts. For example, according to the law, even today Moscow schools sort of manage their own finances. According to concepts, this is done by centralized accounting departments. Before the New Year, the accounting departments of several districts announced that« I've run out of money, I'll have to cut something ... ". At the same time, most schools did not have overspending. Some kind of mystic:« Ugh! Your money is on fire! And you say the law ... "

Today, domestic education - from preschool education to higher education and science - most of all resembles the notorious "Trishkin's caftan". It's too late to patch: no matter where you poke - one continuous hole. Measures are required cardinal. The option proposed by the Government of the Russian Federation: the destruction of the education system as a social institution and the creation of a commercial institution under the same guise. Politically correct is called: "bringing the structure of the education system to meet the real needs of the economy". With this approach, Russian schools, formerly "sovereign children", get "free" to find their own source of funding. Free (c) paid education, proclaimed by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, inevitably turns into paid education.

As soon as the state transfers education from the sphere of its primary social and political functions to the category of commercial services, it will collapse. And no investments and no foreign loans will be able to raise it. A moral default is much worse than an economic one, because after it there will be no one to raise.

Never, at any time, education was not a subject of sale and purchase. This is a debt that the older generation always repays to the younger generation for the loan that they, in turn, received from their fathers and grandfathers. And the destruction of this chain can have tragic consequences for all mankind.

Every person in our country has an equal right to share in the greatest historical experience accumulated by the ancestors. And no official has the right to decide whether a child has the right to receive a decent education or not.

The main task of the state is to provide equal opportunities for obtaining the entire amount of knowledge for any citizen of the country. Therefore, the introduction of the concept of "educational services", for which a citizen must pay out of his own pocket, is a gross violation of human rights.

What are we seeing today?

For starters, preschool education ceases to be education as such. Classes are becoming a paid service, and speech therapists and psychologists are taken out of the state. Last summer, speaking about the problems with kindergartens, the President of the Russian Federation D. Medvedev for the first time uttered the words - "a group of supervision and care." This wording means that the Russian authorities are taking seriously the transformation of kindergartens into "storage chambers", where there is no place for education, intellectual or aesthetic development. There is no need for the state to educate smart citizens. Stupid people are easier to manage. The fact that, in addition to preparing children for school, kindergartens played a significant role in the liberation of a woman, giving her the opportunity to receive an education, work, and fulfill herself in society after the birth of a child, is suggested to be safely forgotten. Of course, childcare services will continue to be available, but on a commercial basis. This means that the blow will fall primarily on young families, single mothers, and female workers.

In secondary education, the curriculum will be significantly reduced. At the same time, all subjects “reduced” from the compulsory program will be introduced as paid electives. And if parents want to give their child a good education, they will have to fork out. The displacement of "peripheral" subjects from the curriculum will be accompanied by the introduction of profile education: high school students will have to focus on studying those subjects that will be useful to them for entering a university of a certain profile.

In the field of higher education, V. Putin outlined the direction of work in his time, when in his Address of 2004 he said that there were too many students in the country, and the state of education did not meet the requirements of the labor market.

National universities will train highly qualified specialists and managers of a wide profile. Mostly people from wealthy families will study here - since it is they who will be able to pay for both preparation for admission and education, which will not be cheap. Federal higher education institutions will form a layer of narrow-profile specialists. This category will become an alma mater for people from the middle strata, as well as for the Lomonosovs, who will be poor but capable. The third group of universities are “commercial firms” that sell not so much knowledge as diplomas to those who have not made it to free (with) paid places or cannot pay for their studies in a more prestigious institution, but want to have at least some kind of education.

Education is a means of revealing and developing a personality, so it should be given to everyone and to the maximum so that everyone can find their talent and develop it. Russian education for many centuries has evolved as an integral fundamental system of knowledge, formed on the basis of the classical approach. This means that knowledge has always been considered from the point of view of not teaching a person any practical actions, but forming him as a PERSONALITY. The breadth of the spectrum of knowledge is necessary for a person to understand his place in this world, to comprehend the essence of his existence on Earth. Only such a system of education can fill a person's life with moral meaning, make him a Creator.

The consequence of the education reform will not only be a drop in the quality of education, a sharp reduction in the opportunity for the majority to gain knowledge, and the prospect of cultural degradation of Russian society as a whole. Consolidating the relations of domination and subordination, social inequality and competitive market struggle "all against all", the ruling class objectively begins a historical movement back to those times when Knowledge, the ability to independently Think and Create was the privilege of the few.

If we are still people and want to maintain respect for ourselves, we cannot allow the government to consider itself as a consumable for the defective economic system it created, which has long since become obsolete all over the world, not like in Russia. The fight to maintain affordable education today is a fight for a better future against the new barbarism. And the outcome of this struggle can depend only on ourselves!

Many people think that once the law is passed, nothing can be done. In fact, if you look at the practice of legislation, changing laws, amending them, repealing some laws is an ordinary legislative process in which there is nothing supernatural. The developers of orders from the Ministry of Finance themselves say: “What can be expected from the order if it was prepared in an emergency order before the new year?! Now it will be finalized, numerous changes will be made, etc.”

We must remember that our passivity can play a cruel joke on us. You will not sit out of the budget reform, you will not fence yourself off. Only an active life position can help the cause. It is necessary to massively demonstrate to the authorities that we, the people, really do not want these reforms!

Usually we don't write much about government initiatives in education, but at the end of the year we decided to make a small chronicle of incidents on this front.

What's new happened over the past year in the relationship between the state and the educational sector? What reforms have begun or continue to be introduced in our schools and universities? We have identified 5 main points that are worth paying attention to.

1. Merger of universities into "core" universities

The Ministry of Education has set a course for the creation of a federal network of multidisciplinary universities: by 2020, it is planned to reduce the number of higher educational institutions by 40%.

The purpose of the reform is to concentrate education and science in network centers in order to improve the quality of training of specialists and collect enough resources for research work in each of them. So far, this is happening like this: the academic council of the regional university sends an appeal to the ministry, and there they finalize the merger plan and allocate the necessary budget.

Mergers and acquisitions have become one of the main educational trends in recent years. This year alone, a number of metropolitan and regional universities have merged (MSGU + MGGU, MATI + MAI, OGUM + OSU, etc.), although the reason for this may simply be a shortage of students.

And as part of the new reform, 15 universities are candidates for “core” universities, including Voronezh Technical University, Volgograd State University, Dagestan State and Technical Universities, Tyumen Oil and Gas University and others.

It is assumed that by 2020 we will have about 100 flagship universities throughout the country. Dmitry Livanov and Andrey Volkov have even identified this as the main structural reform in educational policy for the coming decades.

2. Merger of secondary schools

The process of merging schools and kindergartens into large-scale educational complexes began several years ago, and this year it also swept across the country. Most notably, it took place in Moscow, where out of 4,000 schools, 1,000 centers of a new type turned out.

In words, the reform was going to be carried out according to such successful examples as the Tsaritsyno training center by Efim Rachevsky, only this time the reform was often carried out ill-conceived, in a very short time, without taking into account the opinion of parents and only on the basis of the territorial location of the school, and not its level and features .

By the beginning of the reform, there were about 60,000 schools across the country - now there are already 40,000. It is assumed that the main goal of the reform is to improve the quality of education in lagging behind schools, strengthen their "material base", provide students with more special courses and additional opportunities.

But it is no less important that after the merger, school funding from the budget can be significantly reduced: instead of five directors' salaries, pay one, dismiss some of the staff, simplify bureaucratic control and make it more centralized.

3. Testing and gradual implementation of the teacher's professional standard

The professional standard of a teacher, approved back in 2013, is beginning to be applied in practice. Although its full introduction throughout the Russian Federation is planned only for 2017.

The point of the new standard is to replace obsolete qualification requirements, to standardize recruitment, to streamline the set of skills and abilities that any teacher should possess.

It is not yet clear whether something will change in teaching practice after the introduction of the standard, but it may affect the requirements for graduates of pedagogical universities. Often these requirements do not coincide with those specified in the standard - in terms of, for example, the legal aspects of education or the psychological knowledge and skills of the teacher.

4. Teaching a second foreign language in schools has become mandatory

From September 1 of this year, students from the 5th grade will be required to learn two foreign languages. Few people are ready for this reform yet, so it is being introduced in stages: schools need to find the right teachers, refine teaching methods and revise educational programs.

According to Dmitry Livanov, this reform "returns us to the best traditions of classical Russian school, and earlier gymnasium, education," where French or German were indeed taught along with Latin - only the education itself was much more elitist.

The criticism is that the introduction of a second foreign language will reduce the teaching hours allocated to other subjects. Most schoolchildren leave general education institutions with a very poor command of even one foreign language (often even poorly knowing Russian), and the new reform may only make this situation worse.

Chinese is gradually becoming one of the options for which language to study - it is already being taught in some schools in Moscow, and there are even proposals to make it a compulsory subject.

5. Introduction of standard test papers from the 4th grade of school

An analogue of the State Final Attestation and the Unified State Examination may appear already in the elementary grades of the school. The Ministry of Education proposed to carry out all-Russian verification work, developed according to a single standard at the federal level. This practice can replace the so-called "intermediate assessment", the content of which is approved at the level of the school itself.

This year, tests of a new type in the Russian language, mathematics and the world around us have already been carried out in the 4th grade of some schools. In the near future, such “unified state exam preparation” may become a mandatory part of testing school knowledge in other subjects and in other grades, up to the 9th grade. Assignments will be the same type throughout the Russian Federation, but their verification will be carried out at the level of individual institutions.

As the head of Rosobrnadzor Sergey Kravtsov said, "we decided to focus on objectivity not only at the final exams, but throughout the entire training." Such a check should establish at what level, relative to a single standard, each school and each of its students is.

But for many, such standardization raises even more doubts than the USE itself: the requirements for students in different schools with different specializations are very different, and the educational system should take these differences into account.

Of course, we missed a lot about the relationship between power and education in the past year: for example, the introduction of uniforms for teachers in certain regions and sensational comparisons of grants with vacuum cleaners - but general trends can be seen from this brief review.

In the context of the budget deficit, the state is trying to reduce its spending: in education from January to September, they have already decreased by 10% compared to last year. And in 2016, according to some estimates, the reduction in costs (compared to 2012) will already be 36%, while spending on higher education will decrease by 22%.

The state seeks to streamline the educational system as much as possible, to make it more permeable to bureaucratic control. Therefore, the key words in almost all of these reforms are "standards" and "mergers".

But the adopted reforms, as a rule, turn into paperwork and do not bring the results that are announced in public.

As a result, there is a growing feeling that the average level of education in schools and universities is only declining, and the state is not pursuing any well-thought-out policy in this regard. At the same time, there is a widening gap between mainstream and "advanced" institutions (like the top 5-100 universities) that maintain higher teaching standards and demand more from students.

The desire for standardization and centralized control leaves little room for everything qualitative and different: as a result, we are left with separate exemplary institutions, separate excellent schools, excellent teachers and interesting local initiatives - and everything else.

Of course, here our attention was drawn to just a few of the characteristic things that happened this year between the state and the educational sphere. Maybe you see these trends in a different way? Share your opinion.

ANALYSIS OF THE STATE AND PROSPECTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF SCIENCE IN RUSSIA

Russia has been undergoing a reform of education for several years now, which is now increasingly called the more politically correct word "modernization". These transformations did not go unnoticed in society, divided into their supporters and opponents. In 2004, the problems of national education were also discussed in the highest echelons of power. In particular, President Vladimir Putin paid much attention to them in his Address to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation. And in early December 2004, the Government of the Russian Federation approved the priority directions for the development of the domestic education system, prepared by the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation. Prime Minister Fradkov also identified three main areas of reform: ensuring the availability of education for all segments of the population, improving the quality of teaching and improving the financing of the sphere.

The essence of the reform comes down to the introduction in Russia of a two-level system of higher education (bachelor and master), the creation of a system of preschool education, reducing the weekly load on school students, giving them the opportunity to choose those subjects that they need more in the future, and receive additional education.

The transition to a two-tier system is the task of the Bologna process. In 1999, in the Italian city of Bologna, a joint declaration was signed by the ministers of education of a number of European states, announcing the creation of a common European educational space. The countries that signed this declaration pledged by 2010 to develop comparable national education systems, criteria and methods for assessing its quality, to cooperate in the recognition of national education documents at the European level.

In general, the Bologna process provides for a set of interrelated measures aimed at bringing together educational systems and methods for assessing the quality of knowledge, academic degrees and qualifications in European countries. As a result of all the transformations, students should have greater freedom in choosing a place and study program, and the process of their employment in the European market will become easier.

In September 2003, Russia joined the Bologna Declaration. But it will be very difficult for our country to join the pan-European process, since the domestic educational system is traditionally far from the foreign one. In particular, the difficulty lies in the system of training Russian graduates. The transition to a two-tier education system was started in many Russian universities back in 1992, but it is not popular with us.

First of all, many did not understand the bachelor's degree, which most Russians continue to consider evidence of incomplete higher education. Domestic bachelor's programs, which differ significantly from Western ones, are also problematic. For four years of study, Russian universities, with rare exceptions, do not provide their bachelor graduates with full-fledged knowledge in the specialty, sufficient for them to be able to use it in practical work, since more than half of the academic hours are devoted to teaching fundamental disciplines. As a result, after receiving a bachelor's degree, most students continue their studies and receive traditional Russian diplomas of specialists or become masters.

In addition to the two-tier system of Russia, in order to fully enter the common European educational space, it will soon be necessary to adopt a system of credits for recognizing learning outcomes, as well as a supplement to a diploma of higher education similar to the European one, and organize a system comparable to the European quality assurance system for educational institutions and university programs.

In addition, the modernization of education involves a new form of its financing, including the transition to the so-called normative per capita method, when "money follows the pupil and student." However, the privatization of the educational system and the widespread introduction of paid higher education in the near future is out of the question. At the same time, the Ministry of Education proposes to give, in particular, secondary school teachers the opportunity to provide additional paid services to students.

Perhaps, none of the areas of modernization of the domestic system of higher education has caused so much controversy as the introduction of a unified state exam. The experiment on the introduction of the Unified State Examination has been going on in Russia since 2001, and every year more and more regions of the Russian Federation take part in it. And all this time, the confrontation between supporters (among them - officials, directors of secondary and secondary specialized educational institutions) and opponents of the unified state exam (which included most of the leaders of higher education) continued. The arguments of the former were that the USE is an effective tool for fighting corruption in universities, it is able to objectively identify the level of knowledge of students and the level of teaching in schools in various regions of Russia, as well as make it more accessible for young people from the outback to enter elite higher educational institutions. Opponents of the USE pointed out that it completely excludes a creative approach in the selection of future students by universities, which, as you know, is best implemented in a personal conversation between the examiner and the applicant. In their opinion, this is fraught with the fact that not the most gifted students, but those who managed to properly prepare and answer most of the test questions, will get into higher education.

However, the three years during which the experiment lasts have led to the fact that the opposing sides have suddenly taken a step towards each other. The rectors admitted that the Unified State Examination really helps children from remote places in Russia to get a higher education, that the work of admissions committees has become less laborious and more transparent. And the supporters of the experiment understood that corruption had migrated from universities to secondary schools, that the introduction of the Unified State Examination was associated with a number of organizational difficulties, that the unified state exam could not be the only form of testing the knowledge of applicants, and listened to the arguments of the rectors, who had long been talking about the need to provide benefits to applicants universities to winners of Olympiads, including regional ones.

It was previously assumed that the USE would be officially introduced throughout Russia in 2005. However, the shortcomings identified during this experiment led to the fact that, at the initiative of the Minister of Education and Science, Andrei Fursenko, the experiment was extended until 2008.

The experiment related to the Unified State Examination on the introduction of state nominal financial obligations (GIFO) has also been extended. The essence of GIFO is that a graduate, based on the points scored during the Unified State Examination, is issued a monetary certificate, which is intended to pay for tuition at a university. Unlike the USE, this project was less promoted and information about it rarely became available to the general public. Perhaps this is due to the fact that over the several years during which the experiment lasted, more questions appeared than answers.

Initially, it was obvious that GIFO was an expensive project, so it was carried out on a smaller scale than the USE experiment. It was attended by only a few universities from Mari El, Chuvashia, Yakutia. But the results of the experiment for the 2002/03 academic year revealed the fact of overspending of public funds. It turned out that the cost of category “A” GIFO (the best results in the Unified State Examination) was too high and it was beneficial for universities to accept as many excellent students as possible.

Rates were immediately cut and the next year the GIFO experiment was carried out according to a different scheme. It ceased to bring material benefits to universities. To the rectors' objections that even the highest GIFO rates cannot fully compensate for the cost of educating one student, the initiators of the experiment responded that the GIFO provides for covering only part of the costs.

However, despite all the imperfection and cost of the GIFO experiment, it is impossible to completely abandon it today. Because in essence this is a scheme of the so-called per capita principle of financing universities. This is an alternative to the estimated principle of financing, from which, as is known, the Russian education system intends to leave, and in addition, an alternative to the introduction of fully paid education in the country. Now many, in particular the Russian Union of Rectors and a number of high-ranking officials of the Ministry of Education and Science, are proposing to back up the GIFO with a system of educational loans that students will take from public and private banks, as well as from commercial companies. The first positive results of providing educational loans to students of the country's leading universities are already there. However, this idea has many critics who believe that not all regions of Russia are ready for the introduction of educational loans today, but only the most economically developed ones, and the majority of the country's population does not yet trust the new financing mechanism. In addition, even in the United States, which is prosperous from the point of view of the financial and credit system, where education on credit is widely developed, the return of such loans is a big problem, to say nothing of Russia.

Article 1 The Ministry of Education and Science can do anything if it wants to.

Article 2. For those who do not understand, see Article 1.

The specific embodiment of these grandiose plans in the field of education is known as the "Bologna Process", which started in 1988, when the so-called "Universal Charter of the Universities" was adopted, proclaiming completely harmless things - the autonomy and equality of universities, as well as the inextricable link between educational and research processes.

The transformation of educational institutions into full-fledged capitalist enterprises, producing the most popular goods with minimal costs.
Decrease in wages, cancellation of scholarships, reduction of the material base, closing of "unprofitable" faculties and, most importantly, tuition fees. "Nothing extra".

Under this unspoken motto, higher education is divided into two cycles: undergraduate and graduate.

In 2003, Russia officially joined the Bologna process. Everyone is aware of the zeal, worthy of a better use, with which our government seeks the WTO. The results in domestic policy are evident.

In 1997, 2002, 2005, an agreement on loans for the modernization of education was signed between the Government of the Russian Federation and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD). The strategy for the development of education included: the weakening of state influence and the orientation of education to the requirements of the labor market. Here are some of the IBRD's top-priority recommendations: "close teacher training institutes"; “close vocational schools”; introduce “per capita funding for schools”; “not to increase the share of spending on higher or secondary vocational education in total GDP”; "eliminate" the injustice and inefficiency of the examination system.

According to the IBRD recommendations, the school should become a tool in the fight against morality and spirituality in Russia. It was proposed to establish “minimum standards of citizenship”, which the authors of the report reduced to “the ability to correctly read maps, explain in a foreign language, correctly fill out tax returns ... this list may also include the ability to perceive Russian art and literature, as well as tolerance for other social groups.”

In December 1999, the Center for Strategic Research was established on the basis of the HSE. G. Gref became its president, E. Nabiullina became its vice president. In 2001, on the initiative of Yaroslav Kuzminov, the husband of E. Nabiullina, the Russian Public Council for the Development of Education was created. In 2004, Ya. Kuzminov, rector of the Higher School of Economics, presents a report on improving the structure of education in Russia. The three most important principles of education - universality, free of charge and fundamental nature - were subjected to a complete revision as unprofitable. According to Kuzminov, our country is too educated: “... 98.6% of teenagers aged 16 study in impoverished Russia, and more is spent on secondary education than on higher education.”

By 2010, a number of measures were implemented to reform Russian education:

40 pedagogical institutes have been closed;
The system of vocational schools is actually destroyed;
The Russian school is already moving towards “minimum standards of citizenship”;
The "unfair" examination system was replaced by the USE.

In 2003, the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation conducted audits of the effectiveness of public spending in the implementation of IBRD projects. As it is clear from the Bulletin of the SP RF for 2008, “for the entire period of use of borrowed funds in the field of education by the Russian side, no evaluation of the effectiveness of any of the IBRD projects was carried out.” I note that the repayment and servicing of loans was carried out at the expense of the federal budget.

In 2001, the Ministry of Education "had" to spend all its funds on the introduction of the Unified State Exam, GIFO (State Named Financial Obligations) to ensure multi-channel financing of educational services, restructuring rural schools, etc. At the same time, as evidenced by the materials of the Accounts Chamber, the Russian Academy of Education was actually removed from the development of the main directions for the development of education: “the development of scientific projects was entrusted to organizations ... that do not have the scientific potential necessary for such a level of development.” According to the materials of the Accounts Chamber, all educational experiments were carried out with numerous legislative violations (Civil Code, Tax Code, Budget Code, etc.).

The education reform is one illegal experiment for which no one is responsible, this is what Russian reformers are trying to hush up all the time. But on the other hand, the amounts invested by the IBRD in Russian education ended up in the “right” hands.

How will this look in practice?

Higher education will basically become paid. This happened due to inclusion in the Bologna process, education was divided into a predominantly paid bachelor's degree (3-4 years) and an exclusively paid master's degree. Also due to a general reduction in free (s) paid budget places and other state guarantees, due to an increase in the total cost of education in large cities in the best universities in the country (cost of living, connection with home, etc.).

General secondary education is prepared for the introduction of paid education in high school.

The developers of federal state educational standards (FSES) identified six subject groups.

The first group is the Russian language and literature, as well as the native language and literature;
The second group - foreign languages;
The third group - mathematics and computer science;
The fourth group is the social sciences;
Fifth group - natural sciences;
The sixth is art or a subject of choice.

The network of preschool institutions will continue to shrink. Full-fledged programs of preschool education (nurseries and kindergartens) will be smoothly translated into various kinds of fragmented programs, such as services for temporary stay centers for children, etc. The cost of preschool education will rise significantly.
The same thing as with pre-school education will happen with additional general education (palaces of creativity, child development centers, etc.) and rural schools.
Purposefully and cynically, the system of creative schools, colleges, universities is falling apart. Music and art schools are equated with the standards of additional general education, and educational institutions are trying to drag them into the Bologna process and divide actors and musicians into bachelors and masters. According to the logic of the Ministry of Education and Science, it turns out that the skill of an actor does not depend on talent, but on the number of years spent at the university. I studied for five years - perhaps for the role of Hamlet, and if four years - sorry, you can’t rise above Kolobok in a provincial theater.
The Russian school ceases to be unified and finally stratifies in two directions:
a) a narrow stratum of schools and universities for the "rich" and a mass school for the "poor";
b) for schools and universities in metropolitan areas, as well as in non-subsidized regions and educational institutions in other regions and cities.
At all levels of education, from preschool to higher education, due to the reduction of educational places, there is a significant reduction in teaching and service personnel.
General education - the basis of the reproduction, development and basic security of the country - has become tied to the results of the test unified exam (USE). As a result, the fundamental nature of general education, which allows the formation of higher abilities (thinking, understanding, imagination) and other basic characteristics of consciousness and thinking, is destroyed.
The degradation of all “environments” surrounding the sphere of education is sharply increasing: scientific, cultural, advanced industrial (such as mechanical engineering, high-tech, etc.). In science, for example, a sharp reduction in the number of organizations and scientists is accompanied by a complete erosion of the status of scientific activity and the identification of science with any other, primarily commercial and trading activity.
The sphere of education will finally be tied to the “market”, i.e. to the existing level of development of industry and the social sphere. From the sphere of "production of the future" education turns into the sphere of "service of the present". World-class education will become inaccessible to the majority of the country's population. In general, not only will there not be an improvement in the quality of Russian education, there will be another systemic failure, degradation will take on an accelerated and irreversible character. The Russian school will become colonial, and Russia will become a third world country, a “banana republic”, where bananas are our northern oil and gas. Behind the reforms stands a very definite image of Russia in the 21st century. And this is not an image of a world power, to the size and scale of which Russia should, obviously, curtail its power.

In total, over 10,000 comments and remarks were received during the two-month discussion of the draft law “On Education”.

Leonid Ivanovich Volchkevich - professor at Moscow State Technical University N.E. Bauman, Doctor of Technical Sciences, Honored Worker of the Higher School of the Russian Federation, in the article “A bag of instructions with a hidden bomb” says: “The first impression of the text of the draft law “On Education”, specifically Chapter 15 “Higher Education”, is exorbitant bloat, an abundance of self-evident and insignificant provisions, at the level of departmental instructions; just declarative, without semantic load. Why, for example, at the level of the law of the Russian Federation, to chew on the long-established procedures for extending the term of graduate school? If the authors of the draft law set out to reduce the regulation of higher education to the smallest detail, I propose the following addition: “Students are required to come to class in shoes and wipe them at the entrance.”

Bomb number two. Article 131 implies the legal equality of two-level (bachelor-master) and one-level (specialist) systems of higher education. Both have advantages and disadvantages, reasonable scope. So, a two-level system (colloquially - "bologna"), apparently, is rational for scientific specialties. And for technical ones, this is a sure means of strangulation. Since it is impossible to train a high-class designer, technologist, and operator in 3.5–4 years, especially for the defense industries. This has been said and written so many times, and with evidence and examples, that I simply do not want to repeat myself. By the way! The deaf response silence of the Ministry of Education and Science cannot be interpreted otherwise than tacit agreement with criticism, apparently, there is nothing to say in response.

And here is what Vasily Vashkov, head teacher of a Moscow school, writes about the draft law “On Education” (http://newsland.ru/news/detail/id/626967/cat/42/): “We have before us a draft law that , no doubt, will be adopted and according to which we, starting from January 1, 2013, will have to live. I do not pretend to a full-fledged analysis, I will only allow some comments on the bill.

Article 8 The state ensures the realization of the right of everyone to education by creating an education system and appropriate socio-economic conditions.

Articles 10-14.

Article 22. Experimental and innovative activities in the field of education.

I don’t know about universities, but this is the most shameful thing that exists in schools today! Ten years ago there was no such thing. Quite rightly, it was believed that the work of a teacher in its essence is a constant search, an experiment. This is true: there are no two identical children, two identical classes and two identical lessons. But in the late 90s, this normal activity of the teacher began to be driven into official, bureaucratic, ugly forms. Excess funding, concentrated in the hands of officials, has led to the creation of countless experimental platforms, meaningless and stupid, generating only a wave of accountability and justifying the need for the existence of a host of bureaucratic posts. To date, many schools are involved in 3-5 sites at the same time. It is very, very worth it...

Article 28. Management of an educational organization.

The sole executive body of an educational organization is the head of the educational organization ...

Article 31. Competence, rights, duties and responsibilities of an educational organization.

An educational organization does have rights and competencies, but the draft law interprets them in a very peculiar way, in fact, all of them, one way or another, come down to what the organization must DO, that is, to its duties. In general, "she has the right to POW". As for the responsibility that the bodies listed in Articles 10-14 are deprived of, it is entrusted to the educational organization to the fullest extent. She is responsible not only for what she did herself, but also for what these bodies directed.

Chapter 5. Pedagogical, managerial and other employees.

The law establishes the need for these workers to meet the qualification requirements provided for by the Unified Qualification Handbook. Everything would be fine until you read what this manual requires. The director and the head teacher, for example, should not have a pedagogical, but a managerial education, the teacher should know the theory of management, be able to use browsers, but about knowledge of his subject, there are only three words: "the foundations of general theoretical disciplines ..."

In fact, the law, together with the reference book, turns the school into an emasculated bureaucratic structure that has lost its original meaning.

If this is the state policy in the field of education, and not disclosed in Article 9, then its goal is the destruction of the school.

Article 73. Licensing of educational activities.

Hooray! Finally a perpetual license! But will it make life easier? I doubt. A few years ago, the procedure for attesting schools was officially abolished. But they rejoiced early! This procedure was simply quietly introduced into the state accreditation procedure. Officials were not reduced, they did not even bother to change the plates in the GSLA. Two years after the cancellation of the procedure, the sign “Head of the School Attestation Department” hung like that. Will this happen again?

Article 74. State accreditation...

Article 75

God, the same song again! The last (responsible) is always the educational organization. But what about those structures that are legally defined in articles 10-14? And if the organization followed their instructions? A year ago, during the licensing of our school, in response to the comments of experts, I repeatedly referred to direct instructions from the authorities (management and methodological center), to which I received an unequivocal answer: “By law, they can only recommend you, but you decide. School Responsibility. It is, of course, true, but if I had disobeyed these "recommendations", it would not have seemed small. The accounting department, for example, refuses to finance the curriculum if it is not “agreed” (read - approved) with the methodological service, which is even an advisory body under the current law.

Try not to participate in educational activities - you do not comply with the law, and if classes are disrupted as a result of participation, you are also violating. Because of the events, lessons are disrupted, but they have to be paid for - two violations at once! Just like in the old movie: “The whites will come - rob, the reds will come - rob ... Where should the peasant go?”

And everyone is not too lazy to "rob" education. For example, the story of the certification of workplaces, carried out on the basis of the order of the Ministry of Health and Social Development of the Russian Federation dated August 31, 2007 No. 569. According to this order, a bunch of pieces of paper should be issued for each workplace (teacher's desk, for example). In practice, only specially created firms could do this. The cost of certification of one place cost about 2000 rubles. The school needs to certify about 50 such places. About 100 thousand rubles in cash. There are more than 1500 schools in Moscow. According to the most conservative estimates - 150 million.

What about kindergartens? What about universities? Colleges? The proposed draft law does not in the least protect against such robbery.

Chapter 9. Economics and Finance.

Additional funding for their development programs - the idea, it would seem, is a good one. But what happened in the process of its approbation within the framework of the national project "Education" inspires, to put it mildly, some concerns. Getting the notorious million was instantly turned into a kind of competition between educational bureaucratic structures. The most advanced schools, and not the most needy, were nominated as participants. Getting a grant depended solely on how “beautifully” the development program was written and how solid the rest of the papers looked. The evaluation of these programs was carried out by pedagogical theorists and officials. The requirements for the programs strongly resembled those for solid scientific research or doctoral dissertations. For the sake of victory, some schools simply hired the right "specialists" to write scientific treatises. As a result, the costs could exceed the grant. I am afraid that this law, which interprets this issue in a very vague way, will make it possible to turn this disgrace into the norm.

Article 88

Chapter 10. Preschool education.

Chapter 11. General education.

It's funny, already in the third paragraph he signs in which cases it is possible to leave the child for the second year. Right after the phrase: "General education is compulsory." Apparently, even for the drafters of the project, the causal relationship of these points is obvious. And what if this same fool, who, according to the law, must be left for the second year, according to Article 88 of the same law, accuses the school of giving him a poor-quality education? And who wants to deal with it? Probably, it was worthwhile to more clearly understand the responsibilities of students and their parents and replace the concept of compulsory general education with the right: "Any citizen of the Russian Federation has the right to receive free general education."

Chapter 12

“The priest missed the eggs when Easter passed,” my grandmother used to say. Why did they tear everything apart so that now it can be rebuilt again? Where are you, UPC, where are you, highly professional masters, ready to teach children? However, it's good that you remembered.

Enough, perhaps, let me sum up some results:

In itself, the idea of a law on education is not bad, but it was probably not worth collecting everything into this law, inflating it to such a size.
There are a number of sensible, necessary articles, the urgent need for which has long been felt by educators.
The vast majority of articles are declarative in nature, something like a "Declaration of Intentions".
Financial issues are discussed without specifying any specific values.
The law is extremely "bureaucratic" (sorry for the new, clumsy term). Its adoption in its current form will not only not lead to a reduction in the apparatus and duplicating bureaucratic structures, but will give rise to a lot of new ones. This is a law written by officials for the convenience of officials.

The real quality of knowledge is of no interest to anyone, officials only need good reports confirming the success of their leadership.
Profile education has failed miserably, it can only work if the high school is separated - to create separate educational organizations with a large number of different profiles. There is not even a word about it.
All the guarantees for teachers prescribed in the draft should be replaced by one - to recognize them as civil servants. (Who works for the state if not them?) Instead, they are reduced to the status of stupid executors of bureaucratic will.

There is another thing that is characteristic of our country - life is not according to laws, but according to concepts. For example, according to the law, even today Moscow schools sort of manage their own finances. According to concepts, this is done by centralized accounting departments. Before the New Year, the accounting departments of several districts announced that "the money has run out, something will have to be cut ...". At the same time, most schools did not have overspending. Just some kind of mysticism: “Fu! Your money is on fire! And you say the law ... "

Today, domestic education - from preschool education to higher education and science - most of all resembles the notorious "Trishkin's caftan". It's too late to patch: no matter where you poke - one continuous tear. Measures are required cardinal. The option proposed by the Government of the Russian Federation: the destruction of the education system as a social institution and the creation of a commercial institution under the same guise. Politically correct, this is called: "bringing the structure of the education system to the fulfillment of the real needs of the economy." With this approach, Russian schools, formerly "sovereign children", get "free" to find their own source of funding. Free (c) paid education, proclaimed by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, inevitably turns into paid education.

The main task of the state is

to ensure equal opportunities for obtaining the entire amount of knowledge for any citizen of the country. Therefore, the introduction of the concept of "educational services", for which a citizen must pay out of his own pocket, is a gross violation of human rights.

Academician Nikolai Viktorovich Levashov writes in one of his books: “Under STATE CAPITALISM, everything belongs to the state, including the people themselves. When any person is just a small "cog" of the state system, which does only what the state needs. But what is a state? First of all, these are the people who will determine what everyone else should do. The only question is who, why and for what purposes gives a certain group of people the right to decide for everyone and everything?! Is it the people themselves? Of course not...".

And more “... In the EXTRAUTERINE development of a person, four evolutionary stages can be distinguished:

ANIMAL stage.
The stage of an INTELLIGENT ANIMAL.
The stage of the PERSONAL PERSON.
The stage of a HIGHLY DEVELOPED HUMAN.

Man is born POTENTIALLY INTELLIGENT. What does it mean!? And this means that the born child is an animal, with the possibility of evolutionary development to the level of a highly developed person. And this development is happening in stages. During the phase of development of the second material (etheric) bodies of neurons, the brain of a born human child must absorb some minimally critical amount of information. If this does not happen during the period of active development of the second bodies of human brain neurons, the humanoid creature will remain an ANIMAL. Basically, the process of formation of neural circuits of the brain is completed at the age of eight to nine years of age.

The child receives the necessary minimum of information in the family circle and when getting acquainted with the outside world, developing the ability to speak in himself. Mastering speech and objective thinking at this stage of evolutionary development is the key to the transition to the second stage of extrauterine development of a person - a rational animal. If, for one reason or another, a human child DOES NOT GET THE NECESSARY AMOUNT of information, he (the child) WILL ALWAYS STAY AT THE ANIMAL STAGE. And these are not theoretical assumptions. There are cases when, for one reason or another, wild animals raised human children. In cases where these "Mowglis" were returned to human society over the age of nine, they could never acquire at least the minimum skills inherent in a person. They FOREVER remained in behavior those ANIMALS that raised them, despite the fact that physically they were absolutely healthy. And until the end of their days, they could not learn to speak and behave as a person should. Thus, a person is born only potentially sentient, and there is a time interval during which the child has the opportunity to become sentient or remain forever in the animal stage.

In the vast majority of cases, children brought up in a family environment, by the age of nine, accumulated a critical amount of information necessary for the brain neurons to be able to unfold at the third material level, and the development of the third material (astral) bodies of neurons began. Growing man enters the second phase of his development - the PHASE OF REASONABLE ANIMAL...

A person BECOMES a HUMAN ONLY in the HUMAN COMMUNITY. And the reason for this is simple. In order for the neurons of the human brain to have the opportunity to develop third material bodies, without which the APPEARANCE OF CONSCIOUSNESS IS IMPOSSIBLE, the necessary amount of information for this can be obtained only in the human community. One's OWN LIFE EXPERIENCE, the experience of one person, is NOT ENOUGH even for the transition from the evolutionary stage of an animal to the stage of a rational animal. THE CRITICAL AMOUNT OF INFORMATION necessary for the transition to the STAGE OF A REASONABLE ANIMAL requires the cumulative experience of at least SEVERAL PEOPLE, which is provided in most cases in the family.

The necessary critical amount of information for the transition from the stage of a REASONABLE ANIMAL, to the stage of ACTUALLY REASONABLE HUMAN, requires the combined experience of at least SEVERAL GENERATIONS OF THE ENTIRE HUMAN COMMUNITY. And the greater the number of people involved in the creation of this information bank of the human community, the faster a single person will be able to go through the evolutionary phase of a rational animal and begin development at the stage of Homo sapiens proper. In this development, not only the amount of information received from the community is important, but also the quality of this information, and its diversity. The diversity of high-quality information allows a person to harmoniously develop his brain, when not one, but many parts of the cerebral cortex are able to develop full-fledged third bodies of neurons.

The more DIFFERENT DEVELOPING ACTIVE ZONES of the cerebral cortex a person has, the faster and easier this person will go through the stage of evolutionary development of a rational animal.

And the sooner the child moves from the stage of a rational animal to the evolutionary stage of a human being, the more qualitative the foundation is created for the possibility of development at the stage of a highly developed person. In addition, if the child reaches the stage of ACTUALLY REASONABLE HUMAN before the teenage hormonal explosion, the danger of EVOLUTIONARY FREEZING at the stage of REASONABLE ANIMAL disappears. Development during puberty, when powerful sex hormones are raging in the body, sharply slows down, and in the presence of SEXUAL ACTIVITY it becomes practically IMPOSSIBLE. The instincts of sex begin to control human behavior and do not allow to overcome the evolutionary stage of a rational animal. This is determined by two main reasons:

The "EVOLUTIONARY DOOR", which is open to passing through the intelligent animal stage, closes at the age of 16-18 years old.
The POTENTIAL produced by the human body is LIMITED. And therefore, the expenditure of this potential for sexual activity DOES NOT LEAVE ENOUGH ENERGY for the proper development of the brain, in particular, and the whole organism as a whole.

What are we seeing today?

Many people think that once the law is passed, nothing can be done. In fact, if you look at the practice of legislation, changing laws, amending them, repealing some laws is an ordinary legislative process in which there is nothing supernatural. The developers of orders from the Ministry of Finance themselves say: “What can be expected from an order if it was prepared in an emergency order before the new year?! Now it will be finalized, numerous changes will be made, etc.”

Portal for the student. Self-training

1. Merger of universities into "core" universities

2. Merger of secondary schools

3. Testing and gradual implementation of the teacher's professional standard

4. Teaching a second foreign language in schools has become mandatory

5. Introduction of standard test papers from the 4th grade of school

RELATED ARTICLES