Within "Juristic week" the dialogue is carried out by the Minister of education and science Andrei Fursenko and a member of presidium of Association of lawyers of Russia Mikhail Barshchevsky

Profanation in law

Mikhail Barshchevsky: Andrei, what do you think, what to do with so-called "false universities", i.e. those which appeared in the 90s on the wave of excess democracy, when everybody was let to do everything? I mean non-state universities, which give state diplomas - those, which we, consumers, suffer lately. At this universities which are not only juristic, but also medical, building, financial.

Andrei Fursenko: Firstly, I would not call "false" only non-state universities. We have today 1 500 universities and 2 000 branches plus some quantity of branches with non-full education. "False", as you said, education today is unfortunately given by state universities, too, at this in not less extent than non-state. Everything happened very simply: at first non-state universities were opened, which started to earn money, and then state ones decided - are we worse?

Barshchevsky: We can understand them. I.e. the problem has a systematic character and depends not from property from but from the level of permissiveness?

Fursenko: Yes, and from irresponsibility, as of those who study, so of those who teach. And today we have a lot of those who "as if studied".

Barshchevsky: We have the same anxiety, I suppose. Exams are passed for bribes, tests, course works and diplomas can be bought, downloaded from the Internet or, what is funnier, written by teachers. A friend of mine told me a nice story. She studies for a sociologist, a fashionable profession. An evening department, the frequency of studies - a week during the quarter, exams could be passed only with text-books, the authors of which are teachers of this very university. At this at the library this textbooks are not given out, but sold. I.e. what is more that teachers take money for teaching, they also busily sell their creations. It is a private, but not a single example. Can the ministry influence the situation?

Fursenko: It is like a Cinderella movie. They put on a shoe, the prince exactly knows that it is the wrong girl, but what can be done - he should dance. We will not achieve anything, if there is no external evaluation. Today's topic is a qualification exam, which would be accepted by the professional community. The revolutionary situation has appeared already. In the sense that neither these, nor those are satisfied. Neither those who give job, nor those who goes working. And there are lots of those who are ready to accept new rules. They understand that these rules which lead to appearance of qualified personnel, clearly formulated system of getting to work and career growth.

Barshchevsky: Do you agree that the state exam today is a clear profanation?

Fursenko: Alas, you are right. The exam, i.e. test, should be external. We break a lot of spears on the USE. But, discussing the technology, concrete pluses and minuses, we often forget the importance of meaning of external evaluation for the whole education system. External as towards those who taught, as towards those who is going to use the results.

Today the key problem of the USE is that the system of education was being for a long time destroyed, and as a result it was almost completely destroyed. And then the USE appeared, which showed it, which showed the obvious. And fear appeared. We always blame the mirror. But, unfortunately, we have to admit that teachers lost the art of teaching and pupils forgot how to learn. It is an objective situation, and it is more complicated and horrible.

The USE on chess

Barshchevsky: What USE should be passed so that a university could say: this USE shows that a person can become a lawyer?

Fursenko: Mathematics, I think.

Barshchevsky: A lawyer and mathematics?

Fursenko: There is logical thinking. Mathematics is a basis for the thinking process.

Barshchevsky: Perhaps, it is necessary to introduce a USE on chess?

Fursenko: Perhaps, but it is not a school subject. We are speaking on subjects, which are included to the program. For example, in the USA there is not a baccalaureate-lawyer, and it is not accidental. There jurisprudence starts from magistrate. It is the next step, rather a difficult step. I think that if we have turned to the universal higher education, and de-facto we have almost come to this, then the first step of higher education should have a more general character, to be a passage to detailed thorough entry to a concrete specialty. Technological baccalaureate is needed, if you want. I will never agree that a person at 17 can pass, for example, law or economics in full value. For the start, he/she should show some basic knowledge.

Barshchevsky: I.e. not knowledge of the future specialty, but the ability to be taught this specialty?

Fursenko: 100%. I am convinced that for a lawyer a skill to logically thinking is extremely necessary. Of course, there should be language knowledge - as native, as foreign, because jurisprudence today is an international science. And, let us say, for a humanitarian it is principally to know history.

Barshchevsky: Explain please, why from the special nomenclature has advocacy disappeared? You see, it is absent in the specialty 12.00.11.

Fursenko: The question is not to me. So was the decision of expert community, the Highest attestation commission.

Barshchevsky: In my opinion, it is wrong!

Fursenko: Maybe. But try to agree yourselves. You yourself are a doctor of science and a professor, so you have all the aces.

Theoretical physics as a dream

Barshchevsky: Who did you want to be when you were a student?

Fursenko: Definitely not a minister! (Laughs). I wanted to be a research assistant, I have become him. Father said, when I wrote an essay in the 7th form, when answering a question who I wanted to be, I wrote - "physicist-theorist". The headmaster laughed for a long time.

Barshchevsky: During student years did you have some concretization of your profession or, in general, to do science?

Fursenko: I entered the university in Leningrad, at mathmech. In Moscow - mechmath, and in Peter - mathmech. And so I studied at mathmech, but at mechanics. There was physical mechanics, it is between mathematics and physics. And through assignment I got to theoretical department of PTI of Ioffe.

Barshchevsky: And today are you an official or a scientist?

Fursenko: Official, for sure! Alas. But, perhaps, not alas. In science I have managed something, too.

Barshchevsky: Did you have "poor" or "not pass" at the institute?

Fursenko: There was a case when I was said: we can give you a satisfactory mark. I answered - no, I would come again. Then I re-passed it. I had a very decent diploma.

Barshchevsky: How did you, not lawyer, grasp law, when you became a deputy minister, also responsible for normative creative work? Did lawyers prompt or did you do all by yourself? And how did you like this profession then?

Fursenko: I tried to grasp starting from considerations of not just common sense, but also logic, a system approach. I think that juristic science has clearly formulated basic things and clearly built logic. Though, there are of course some fallings out of this logic.

It would be very difficult for me to do something starting from precedent right. But due to the thing that our right is based on a certain system of logic, I managed to grasp. And, for sure, I had consultations with professional lawyers.

Barshchevsky: Have you met in your life more bad doctors or good? Judging by the fact that you are alive, you have met few bad doctors. But if seriously, who is more dangerous?

Fursenko: Remember, when Stalin was asked what incline was better in the party - right or left, he answered "Both are worth!". Bad specialists are dangerous not only among doctors or lawyers, but also among teachers, builders or those who serve at APP. As for me, I am apparently lucky, because most often I have met good specialists. Either among doctors and lawyers.

Barshchevsky: Have you ever had legal proceedings?

Fursenko: No.

Barshchevsky: I.e. you have not used advocates' services at court, have you?

Fursenko: I have not.

Barshchevsky: Happy you are! Thank you!