Rossiyskaya Gazeta > November 25, 2008 > Maria Agranovich, Yuri Medvedev > The teacher's code / Minister Andrei Fursenko forecasts 20% universities reduction

Is there alternative for uniform state exams? What salary will the teachers get? How to evaluate the researcher's work? The Minister of education and science of Russia Andrei Fursenko answered these and other questions of the journalists and "RG" readers at the "business lunch".

The mitten task

"Rossiyskaya Gazeta": Andrei Alexandrovich, new educational standards have been testing in fourteen regions of Russia for two months already. Here is the question from a second-year's mother from Omsk: "At a test lesson the children were seated in pairs: they had to decide how to draw a mitten better. In other words to show their communicative skills. I wonder, will they have to solve an equation with three unknown quantities in senior school together as well?" What will be taught by the new standards?

Andrei Fursenko: In fact, the minister is not the person to be asked about it. The experts are responsible for the standards, especially the experts of the Russian academy of education. I'm only going to say the following. We are to start their wide approbation in the regions in 2009 - so says the law. That does not mean that all 13 millions of Russian schoolchildren will start to learn according to the new standards from September 1. First of all, the standards will be applied in the schools which won the competition within the national project "Education". It is a worthy team which is able to take such a responsibility. After that there will be changes and additions. But you should not be afraid of. The standards are a lively activity, an attempt to find a new educational approach. By the way, the teachers participated in their elaboration. It is very important.

RG: Some people think that the general aim of the new standards - which is to form a creative personality - differs from what the Uniform state exam demands from schoolchildren. What is your opinion?

A. Fursenko: I cannot agree. I wish we stopped demonizing USE at last. It is an examination. Like any exam it cannot check entirely everything. But at the same time I believe it gives a rather adequate picture of what is happening in the educational field: the level of teaching and the level of schoolchildren's knowledge. Look at the competitions which are held by some universities to select the most talented school-leavers: a question with four variants of answer to be chosen. Doesn't it resemble anything?

It is quite another matter that the examination system must not be of one-time character and used only in the end of education. It is necessary to consider the children's achievements during the whole school life. We don't say no to attestation, and in that system the marks are made regardless of USE. But there is a strict control - if you don't pass a compulsory "uniform" in Mathematics or Russian, you won't receive a certificate.

RG: Has it been finally decided that the one who gets "poor" at any subject of USE will leave school with a reference and not a certificate?

A. Fursenko: Not exactly. The school-leaver who gets "poor" at one compulsory subject will be able to repeat the examination in additional term of the same year. Only if he/she gets the unsatisfactory result again, he/she will receive a reference about training in the educational institution instead of a certificate. If the school-lever gets "poor" on both compulsory subjects, he/she will get a reference at once, but he/she will have right to repeat the examinations in a year and to get a certificate.

Speaking about the situation, when a schoolchild gets "poor" on non-compulsory subjects chosen by him- or herself, this "poor" won't influence neither the certificate receiving nor the mark for this subject in the certificate. Though he/she will not be able to enter a university or a secondary specialized schools which require this examination results.

RG: Lyubov Nikitichna from the Penza region asks: "Apart from compulsory exams the eleven-forms also pass USE in five subjects of their choice. There are still no guiding documents on what these exams will be. When will they appear? We need distinctness today and not in spring".

A. Fursenko: The subjects to choose will be only defined by the children's desire. If a schoolchild wants to enter a university, it is advisable to find out the required subjects and to pass the necessary USEs. If he/she is not going to enter anything, it is possible to go through the compulsory ones only. Some universities had open houses in the beginning of October and announced the required exams. The lists should be posted on their websites.

RG: Evgeniy Romanov from Ekaterinburg asks: "Is it exactly known that USE in Russian and Mathematics will stay compulsory? Or will the subjects be changed every year?"

A. Fursenko: It is possible that in several years we will come to the decision that only USE in Russian is compulsory and the knowledge of Mathematics is to be checked, for example, after grade 9. But this may happen not tomorrow and not next year.

RG: Moscow Institute Of Open Education has elaborated so-called alternative tests in Mathematics. There is no choice of several variants in them. What is the perspective of the alternative exam?

A. Fursenko: Good. This variant's tasks aim at a creative approach to the subject. Another advantage is that they all can be easily accessed. A schoolchild which solves them all during the school year can be absolutely sure in his/her training for USE. I think the key component of Mathematics is the skill to use the knowledge in life and to solve various tasks.

RG: What about the golden medals?

A. Fursenko: It is a solved matter. The medals will remain as a schoolchild's order for good studies. But neither golden nor silver medal won't give any additional points for entering a university.

Purse or lesson

RG: We have a collective letter from a Malta secondary school of the Irkutsk region, in which there are 30 teachers and 200 schoolchildren: "The Government promised that during the transfer to a new salary system teachers won't lose anything. In fact, since September 1 the purses of our village teachers have lost 2-8 thousand rubles. Judging by our correspondence with other colleagues the situation is similar everywhere but Moscow".

A. Fursenko: According to all accepted legislative normative acts during the transfer nobody will lose his/her salary. We will certainly settle this concrete issue. But there is another aspect concerning incomplete village schools in general. There are 5 thousand schools with 10 or even less schoolchildren in them. If in 1998 there were 22 million schoolchildren, today there are 13.5 million. Unfortunately the demographic recession hasn't finished yet. But the number of teachers hasn't almost changed. I understand all social aspects of this problem, but I think the school mustn't substitute the system of the unemployed support.

RG: Now it is turn for Shvedova from the Penza region: "Where does the Ministry of education and science take data on average wage of 10-15 thousand rubles? In our school the teachers get 5-6 thousand in general. And the new salary system is only worsening the situation. The teachers quit the job and leave for money".

A. Fursenko: We get the data from the official statistics which is coordinated with tax officials and includes all bonuses, both regional and municipal. But the bonuses rise differently in different regions. Nobody promised the salary would increase by 20-30% itself. It increases exactly because the school system regulation is happening somewhere. I'm aware that these measures are not always popular. But today, according to the conservative estimates, approximately one third of educational resources are spent inefficiently. Very small classes, maximum A and B in the parallel. But the money which is sent to schools, say, with five pupils could be used more efficiently if to move these children to a bigger school in the neighborhood.

From nursery to machine

RG: The program of education development in 2009-2012 includes the task to increase the number of children covered by preschool education from 61 to 64%. Why is this increase so small? Why not 100%?

A. Fursenko: Nobody speaks about total coverage. Russia has regions, e.g. in the south, in which parents are not going to send their children to kindergartens or nursery schools. It is not customary there. And nobody speaks about compulsory preschool education. Our aim is to provide its availability for all comers. Not only through the kindergartens but also through some groups or courses for small children at schools.

RG: The national project of developing the network of basic and secondary vocational institutions is conducted for the second year. Are there any obvious changes?

A. Fursenko: True, the support of establishing the BVI and SVI resource centers was included to the national project. The federal budget has provided more that 6 billion rubles for two years, And 7 billions for co-financing. The result? Approximately 250 resource centers are creating throughout the country. A significant figure, in my opinion.

RG: Not all people clearly understand what these centers are.

A. Fursenko: These are the centers with material and technical equipment (in which considerable funds were invested), with the best instrumentation for not only the students' training but also for teachers and masters' re-training. Their establishment will continue on a competitive basis. It is necessary that at least 10% of BVI and SVI would become research centers. At present less than 5% of more than 6 thousand institutions of this kind received the support.

RG: The President said that it was vital to attract various professionals (including scientists) to Russian schools. There are schools in which candidates and doctors of science mostly teach, but there are not many. How to attract scientists to schools?

A. Fursenko: We have purchased a first part of modern equipment including nanotechnology complexes for physical-mathematical schools which actively work with profile universities. I'm sure no scientist would refuse to work in a laboratory with such instrumentation. For any specialist of a research institute or university it is pleasure to communicate with youth. And children and youth are interested, too.

RG: What about yourself, are you ready to set an example and to go to a school? To conduct a lesson of Mathematics or Physics, for example?

A. Fursenko: We are speaking about scientists, not officials. When I worked at the Academy of Sciences, I did that with pleasure.

Virtual university

RG: You said that of more than 3 thousand universities and branches there will be not more than a thousand in Russia. What methods of reduction will be used?

A. Fursenko: I really think that if there were approximately a thousand so-called higher education "points", including university branches, this network would allow to both finance and develop the Higher school more efficiently. But we should start not from here.

This summer when answering the question how many there were seriously competitive universities in Russia I mentioned a figure of 50 and added that approximately 150-200 universities provided good education of narrower type. At present there are 1.5 thousand accredited universities and 2.2 thousand branches. I'm not speaking about university offices which often exercise training which is completely illegal. Many regions are demanding to close the branches which sometimes accept school-leavers via simple correspondence. How? Sign a form, get a receipt, pay for it and you are a student. This discredits the education. It makes possible to write "milk" as "meelk" and to enter a university.

We should get rid of double branches - for example, when there are four training branches of similar specialization in a town with 50,000 population. Of course, we must think about the their students. At least about those who honestly entered and honestly study. They must have an opportunity to continue education in normal conditions.

RG: The incident with status depriving of two respected universities became sobering for many others. Will such policy be continued?

A. Fursenko: That is not an incident. According to the current rules and parameters these institutions don't fulfill the requirements provided for universities. It was found out that by some parameters these institutions were not universities. But I have to say that they continue to be very good institutes of higher education. There was time when institutes willingly renamed to universities, expecting to get some preferences. It was an easy thing to do. But in fact nothing changed much. The status doesn't influence wages or financing.

At present accreditation activities are not fulfilled in some extent by approximately one thousand branches. We should support efficient universities and to increase their financing without wasting money on pseudo-education. I believe that in the nearest future the number of university branches will be halved - some will be closed, the others will become a part of higher-qualitative ones. We estimate that the number of universities will be reduced up to 20% in four years - also by means of reorganizing and reducing.

RG: Will there be anything new in the national project next year?

A. Fursenko: The principal thing is that it won't disappear and will continue its work. We are going to develop the direction which was formulated by the President - "Our new school". There is a basis for this already: competitions of the best schools and teachers, a school nutrition project, complex projects of educational modernization in a number of regions.

RG: Whose idea is to declare the year 2010th as the Year of Teacher?

A. Fursenko: The President's.

RG: Much is being done, but still there are many problems, aren't' there?

A. Fursenko: Education in Russia has really become a national priority. As never before much attention is paid to teachers and schools. It is connected not only with the increase of financial investment within the national project. Everybody has realized that there is not way without it. I suppose the Year of Teacher, if carried out properly, will play a large part for perspective.

Who is who in science

RG: Inna Baklanova from Ekaterinburg asks: "Is our science able to afford researches of 'extended front' as before? Or must the priorities be chosen?"

A. Fursenko: Regardless of the fact if there are financial problems or not we should first of all speak about the researches' quality. We have prepared a Government resolution draft of evaluating the results of scientific organizations' work. We suggest the establishing of clear criteria and indicators which will help to understand who is who in the scientific society. What are the criteria? There is nothing new. First of all it is a "weight" of scientific institutions in the world space of science which can be evaluated, for instance, by the number of magazine publications and by the quoting index.

It is said that there are scientists who likewise Ilya Muromec don't stir from a place for 33 years and then produce a unique result. And how to use the formal criteria to them? True, there are unique exceptions, but they only verify the rule. As a rule such scientists only appear at very powerful universities. The mathematician Grigori Perelman, the case of which is a favorite argument for criteria opponents, grew up and worked at the famous branch of V.A. Steklov Mathematical Institute in Saint-Petersburg. Its average quoting index is very high and its headmaster academic Faddeev is one of the most citing Russian scientists. Of course both he and the others know perfectly well who Perelman is and what his potential is. It is clear that the Institute can and must support such scientists. But that doesn't contradict the requirement to establish evaluation criteria. In this case they concern not an individual scientist but the institute. Powerful groups should get more considerable financing. And it is the scientific organization's business how to distribute the money within. Though the impartial criteria must function along with expert evaluation here.

The same concerns the field of operations. The Academy of Sciences has more independence today and it has the right to choose the fields for financing. But the money is limited. I think that the Academy should take the responsibility and to choose the priorities to be financed.

RG: Many experts call this project revolutionary and thus are against it. Especially the Russian Academy of Sciences. Is there a chance that the project will be approved by the government?

A. Fursenko: We only suggest an evaluation tool. Then each department or academy decides if it should accept these concrete indicators. Are other indicators necessary? We can discuss that issue, but we cannot work without them. It is principal. It is vital to realize what the efficiency of each institution is and to distribute the money accordingly.

Now about the academy and its position against the evaluation system elaborated by us. True, the scientists' attitude is absolutely different. I met with many, both very celebrated and very young (but famous) who find this system necessary.

RG: But the Academy presidium is against?

A. Fursenko: Let's call a spade a spade. Many members of the presidium are against, but the presidium is not homogeneous. For example, Viktor Antonovich Sadovnichiy, the MSU rector and RAS vice-president, says with pride that MSU's quoting index leaves behind any academic institute. He hardly believes that the index doesn't show anything and doesn't reflect the efficiency of a scientific organization's work.

We cannot and must not thrust the concrete criteria. But it is obvious they must be introduced. Within the Academy everybody knows perfectly well who is who. We only suggest: let's formalize this knowledge and redistribute the resources accordingly.

RG: Exactly this provokes aversion - today it's you, tomorrow it's me?

A. Fursenko: Academies of sciences are state organizations. They must take into account the state viewpoint and its interests. The interest is to choose the best scientists and to support them. But I repeat the best and the worst should be chosen by the scientists themselves.

RG: Has the draft been submitted to the Government already?

A. Fursenko: Not yet. In comparison with the original variant there were included some changes considering the suggestions of various experts. In particular it was stated that a number of criteria was too formalized, there were too many of them. We are going to have a new round of agreements. I hope the new project will be approved.

RG: Yuri Podkopaev from Saratov writes: the business, which paid little attention to the implantation of scientific researches' results even in favorable finance situation, will totally stop giving money now, when there are problems. Then the innovative path of development will be forgotten for long. Your opinion?

A. Fursenko: I don't think the state support of science will be changed. Perhaps it won't be conducted as fast as desirable, but it won't sink. But there is a serious problem. We built our policy in the field of applied science relying on the partnership with business. In other words, the state invested one part of funds into a perspective project and the business invested another. Now some difficulties may arise.

In the nearest year or so we are going to pay more attention to infrastructure development and to the centers of collective usage, to support the science which is ready to carry out technological progress. Together with partners from the other ministers we should formulate several global directions of priority character, for example, energy-saving, rational nature management, fight against diseases of social importance. Here the state can become a customer forming future markets.

RG: American professor Konstantin Severinov appeared in print on "RG" pages. He came back to Russia, but he had lots of troubles while receiving an academic grant won by competition. Granting is delaying for half a year. If we cannot create appropriate conditions for such an authoritative world specialist how are we going to bring other scientists back to Russia?

A. Fursenko: The situation with grants is a problem. Not only ours. I spoke to the Russian scientists who received grants within EU frame programs. It is necessary to overcome lots of bureaucratic barriers and to fulfill rather strange requirements.

I know Severinov well. He isn't the only one who came back, he is the most famous. Let's say, some scientists returned to Belgorod University from abroad, because they got appropriate conditions for that. The governor helped with accommodation. Within the national project they received a very good equipment. These scientists can get money for their researches themselves both in Russia and abroad.

Recently I met our compatriots in France, they carried out a conference of Russian diaspora by their own initiative. They are engaged in nanotechnologies. I was asked what we could do together and suggested three directions: help in education of our students and candidates, participation in the expertise and in joint projects. All these directions are interesting for them. I suppose it is only the beginning of our contacts.