Andrei Fursenko: "I think that for the educational system and economics we currently have in Russia a thousand universities with branches is enough. There are more than three thousand now?". This school year has started with a sensation: the country found out that the educational system needed a reform again. It was rumored that USE would be called off, profile schools would be forgotten, almost all the universities would be closed, and the fundamental knowledge wouldn't be included to the new educational standards? "Itogi" asked the minister of education and science Andrei Fursenko what is really happening in our system of education.

- Andrei Alexandrovich, how long are you going to frighten people? Your ministry is saying that the educational system needs fundamental reforms again. Only a year ago you said all the necessary laws were passed and the reform started in the interview to "Itogi". Was it a mistake?

- I said there would not be any revolutions, but there will always be changes. That is not frightening. In my opinion people are not afraid of changes which they get accustomed to with pleasure, they are afraid they will be forced to do things they don't like. No one is going to force any one. But they shouldn't expect they won't change themselves while getting new comforts and opportunities. Do we want to live well, to be needed at labor-market and to realize our potential? We do. Let's do it. For example, there is a serious problem in the country - it a low efficiency of labor. The disease will not recede itself. In this case we should find the causes of this problem and to remove them. But let us call it neither reform nor modernization. We may not call it anyhow but we must do something.

- To change Russian mentality? The volume of knowledge our people get is not less than abroad.

- That is not always the knowledge required for real life and work. We may know everything, but we are not able to collect this "everything" and to apply it. There is a struggle against USE - everyone says the children will stop thinking independently and inventively. But no-one says that in some sense USE is a test of ability to give a correct answer to a clearly defined question. As in life, here all the knowledge must be used to give a correct answer of a single meaning. I will say in a strict way - the production line worker shouldn't argue, he should do what he was taught to for achieving a concrete result. Unfortunately in our life economics has more "production lines" than purely creative work. You have the right to choose your job, but after that do what is expected of you. But we still continue arguing.

- Do you mean USE won't be canceled?

- It won't be. It can be changed, but not canceled. We had a meeting recently and we discussed the issue of Mathematics exam for one more time. I understand all the arguments for canceling USE on this subject both like a person and official. But I'm sure it can bring more damage than benefit today. Mathematics and Russian will remain the compulsory subjects for the time present. I admit that when we build not one-time but prolonged and independent system of knowledge testing - not only for the 11th but for the 9th, 6th and other grades, - we will be able to keep the examination in the final grade only for those who will want to go further in this direction. It is still difficult for me, though, to understand how someone can be a specialist in law, management and even psychology without knowing mathematics. From the point of systematic approach to any problem the basic mathematical education is very important. This year we kept up with USE results and heard people complaining that the tasks were too difficult. But controlling and measuring materials should check the knowledge optimally and give a clear opportunity to define minimal and outstanding levels. And they do that, the problems appear at the interfaces between 'fours' - 'fives' and 'twos' - 'threes'.

- At these interfaces 25% children stumbled and fell by getting 'twos'. This year they got an additional mark to their certificates, but next year the country will get hundreds of thousands of "poor" school-leavers. Does that suit you?

- It doesn't. But nevertheless USE draws an impartial picture of the children's knowledge of subjects. This result shows that some children study badly or do not have mathematical abilities and some are taught badly. The marks analysis in schools gives a clear reason - a semiskilled teacher or a necessity to take appropriate measures. Today we have skilled young teachers who are ready to go to schools, but nobody expects them there. The number of children is reducing, the teachers' wages are increasing faster than pensions. Many didn't care about the quality and new methods while teachers estimated themselves on their own. The additional mark played a negative role, by the way: many children handed bland sheets without making efforts and got a "three" in the certificate.

- While you bring to light bad teachers, children will go out to life with a reference and not a certificate.

- The decision on certificates hasn't been approved yet. There are several variants in discussion, but it is absolutely obvious that we mustn't allow the situation when a schoolchild who learned normally, I repeat, learned and did not spend time at school would leave school and enter life without a document of obtained education. The attestation system must consider both the whole course of education and the level of teachers.

- What will the children be taught now, when the new educational standards come into force?

- Nobody cancels the fundamental education, but there should be a sensible balance: the competences are no less than important. The structure of the new standards is less oriented at a set of some knowledge and information. The information is available to all - there are books, Internet and so on. A teacher cannot just read a sheet of paper, he/she must teach children to get the knowledge, to analyze, to systematize and to apply it. It is not necessary to remember how many stamens and pistils every flower has. It is vital to know that they exist, to be able to find the information about them and, what is principal, to realize the reasons to search all that. Teachers' competitions show that the best teachers are able to train in that way. And these very competitions guide other teachers on what is required for schools today. New methodical manuals are aimed at that. Besides, on a legislative level the standards provide modern terms of education. They include a wide spectrum of requirements from a fast Internet and to warm toilets. Another important thing is that within the standards we lay special emphasis on not how the lesson is maintained but on what a pupil knows and how he can use the knowledge.

- Therefore we have to wait for new manuals. Will they be as ambiguous as the recent manual of History by Danilov? Have you read it? Do you agree with everything?

- I have read it. And I gave it to the others. The people who was terrified by what they had heard about the manual from various commentators, later said: there was the truth. No manual had such a wide public discussion in the country. No manual! There were teachers' and scientific audiences, very diverse ones - from liberals to conservators. Many asked: why is it written so considerately? Why is Stalin justified? The book doesn't contain that. No-one justifies anything - the reasons why Stalin's regime was of that kind and not another are analyzed there. It is stated that this man was not a pathologic or insane villain, but a scoundrel with absolutely clear priorities and schemes. Is that a justification? As for the facts, the experts came to a consensus. Someone may not agree, because the views of people - the participants of the events - vary a lot. But the manual was discussed throughout the country. That must always be so. Especially concerning humanitarian manuals.

- Does it agree with the current concept of the reform?

- It does as well. But the key target of changes is much more global - starting the systematic changes in the educational field. All the programs, both approved and discussed - are aimed at the realization of absolutely concrete tasks. The federal program of educational development which was called a reform by some people is actually integrant - it allows to define clearly a complex approach to the modernization and to the development of education. It shouldn't take stock of all spoons in a school canteen, the task is to formulate the key issues, providing the real system changes, and all the required resources. Do you remember how the government approved the priority directions of educational development in 2004? There also was a try to define the resources necessary for the project. Then there were much less resources. But the program was brought to life, then came the national projects, and everything was changed: as long as the issues we want to achieve are clearly defined, the tools and resources for meeting the challenges appeared.

- Many people won't agree that all the priority directions were right.

- They will be correct. The approach to the organization of preschool education has changed, though we insist that a child should be prepared to school in the kindergarten. We had quite another understanding, for example, on how to organize basic and additional curriculum in school. But these are not principal changes, they are submitted in real-time procedure. But as for vocational training - we underestimated the caliber of problems. They turned out to be much more profound.

- Do you mean the failed situation with secondary vocational training?

- And with higher as well. But I wouldn't call the situation as 'failed'. It is changing. We create resource centers supporting institutions of primary and secondary vocational training. 148 schools of the kind have received methodic and material help, which is significant - from 20 to 30 million rubles a year from the federal budget on conditions that at least the same co-financing will be given from other sources. This is not little, this is the money which allow to improve the quality of work in an educational institution. In September a decision to invest approximately 3 billion rubles into primary and secondary institutions due to the savings this year was made at the National Projects Council.

- What are you going to save one?

- There are enough items. For example, an economy on payment for form-mastering has appeared. Demography reduction is evident, there are less children at schools, so the teachers' salary is less. The money compensating children's maintenance at kindergartens were put up with reserve. If there is some economy next year, we will send the money to primary and secondary vocational education. We will also consider a possibility to increase state financing of this direction in 2010-2011.

- Should this be understood as a priority of primary and secondary vocational education?

- Today it is the principal point of force application, because there is a catastrophic lack of specialists at this level. If we manage to create the resource centers at least at 7-10% institutions and to provide sufficient financing, it will influence personnel training for economics. Another important direction is establishing integrated structures of technical and vocational schools with institutes of higher education, if to call those as before. Besides, employers and enterprises will not stay aside. We have already spoken about it before and now we are starting a pilot project with Kazan technological university and KAMAZ. The plant management is interested to get back to the system of technical colleges: it needs specialists which could be at production during the training process. It is a well-forgotten past but nevertheless on a new basis.

- Do you believe that someone will want to learn at vocational schools?

- At one of the colleges in Lipeck there are almost 10 candidates for one place. Even people with higher education go there! This is not a paradox, this is life. It is already impossible to get a good job with a pseudo-higher education. And people go to get a real profession and a high-paid job afterwards.

- Then perhaps is it better to give craft professions at schools, as before? What were you as a school-leaver?

- A turner and after the building group at university - a carpenter. The girls left as cooks and seamstresses. And we were able to work by those professions. Was that good? Not bad. We have taken up the questions of technological schools' profile development to make appear not only the computers but the technological equipment as well. There is some production of inexpensive equipment in Russia, the price of which goes in that very million given to the best schools.

- Doesn't it seem to you that while popularizing vocational education the ministry goes too far? You said recently the graduates of various colleges and technical schools would be equated with university graduates.

- In most so-called developed countries there is an idea of outside-university education, the level of which is considered to be rather high. These are parallel lines - academic and technological. Both level and status of a specialist in each of them doesn't differ - each is a professional in his/her occupation. Of course we don't speak about automatic equating: each has its own system of qualification. How shall we call these technical specialists? Perhaps, even bachelors. At present the issue of technological baccalaureate is not legally registered anywhere. First of all we have to understand what can stand behind. We started the experiment with several rather strong technical schools. When we build the system, it may be very successful. People will realize that it is a good professional path, giving respect, status and high salary.

- In spite of the new formulations it looks like a return to a Soviet system of education. You may be accused in plagiarism.

- So be it, because to take the best and to adapt it to the new demands of life is not plagiarism. Did you know that in the 80s there was a question of educational reform? The professionals knew and economics sensed that the quality of education started to fall. The turn to technical and defense sector made itself felt. Many social problems of the 90s were caused by the lack of qualified sociologists, political scientists, economists, psychologists, historians and so on. Our problem is that society and authorities and business bethink when we have radical turns and force-major. It need not be a crisis, for example, it is a sudden economical upturn. All of sudden it turns out that we need specialists required here and now. But we must train them in good time. When in the successful years someone said it was necessary to reform the educational system, nobody wanted to listen. In 2004 we repeated over and over again: the demographic crisis was approaching, we had too many lawyers and too few professional labor force, it was vital to change the system. Luckily we managed to do something, though not in the required volume,

- What didn't you have time to do?

- We spoke about secondary vocational education. If employers joined the training process earlier, the situation in our economics wouldn't be so complicated. The same for higher educations: there are entire fields without enough specialists.

- But here is a blunder of the state. It is the state that orders professions by its policy, including economics.

- There is not doubt. And we are changing the situation and showing that today the professions connected with the real economics are in demand. For example, we are increasing the number of budget places for necessary specialties. At present that has happened to the professions for energy and transport. Today everybody knows that informational technologies are a prospective. There is a new word "nanotechnologies", and people ask where they can become "nanotechnologists". I think that little by little the interest to ecology and environmental problems is increasing.

- In all the world these trends are popular. Are we again rushing after the others?

- This trend has been actual there for 15 years already. But before we didn't have a sense that we were able to go in for that, and now we do - as we all, the whole country, are becoming competitive. But you are right, it can be very dangerous if we start to build our educational system similar to western. Not all of what is in demand today and was created in other countries is optimal. We have possibilities to cut the way and to find ourselves up-to-date or perhaps even ahead of all the planet. The question is how. It is discussed today by the whole society.

There are debates about the correlation between fundamentality in education and various active approaches. I think it is vital to keep a fundamental component for all people who are able to build their trajectory of education and development. What do I mean: When each item of the program is chewed over for you and you're trained for a concrete activity - that is one thing: you become a good practical expert. The other thing is when the matter concerns the real scientific work. Those who are motivated and trained for it should have other terms of education. There are not many people of this kind. I may be denounced for such an opinion but we must create a "reserve" for them and to give them a unique and elitist education. It is them who will be building the science and the educational system in future. Everyone should have the opportunity to step inside this circle. There mustn't be any barriers. The only criterion is desire, readiness and ability to get a fundamental education.

- How can this "reserve" look in practice?

- Very simply: give these people an opportunity to work with scientific advisers, starting from course two or three, for example. Let them make up a free time-table. Strictly speaking it always existed. Today, and it is an obvious fact, higher education is more an industry training high-classed specialists. It is not reprehensible, but if higher education has become mass, if it trains people who will be just performing a certain job, using the technologies and knowledge made by other people, I suppose such a process of "creators" training should be of another kind. The professional practical experts should have more importance for the first, and the fundamental knowledge - for the second.

- Apparently we will see the realization of these ideas in the research universities which are now being established. How soon?

- Till the end of the year the scientific and educational centers should be defined in the country. The necessary legislative base is almost prepared. The law on federal national research universities is on the agenda. There are tools for resource provision of the program. The institutions are getting ready to take part in the corresponding competition. Believe me, it is very important for them. There is one more task fitting in it - defining the approaches to the efficiency evaluation of scientific organizations' work.

- Will the financial crisis influence these plans?

- Both yes and now. If to speak about the budget component, it won't influence. At present there is no wish to economize on education. The treasury gives approximately 300 billions rubles for higher education. The rise of consolidated educational budget is 25-30% every year. This year it was a trillion and 400 billion rubles. Budget financing will continue to grow. As for off-budget resources, the situation is different. At present the money comes to the educational system from families in the volume comparable with budget. But the crisis will negatively influence the financial position of many families and the afflux of off-budget money will decrease. I.e. the number of "paying students" will fall. We had the first signal last year: admission to paid places at universities started to decline.

- It means that not all the universities will stay afloat. How much will be the number of universities reduced when it is pressed for more?

- I think that for the educational system and for the economics existing in the country a thousand of universities with branches are enough. There are 3 600 of them now. We do not plan to carry out strict administrative resolutions to reduce the number of universities. I can tell you for sure that we are going to toughen the requirements for a university or academy status - there cannot be about 400 universities in the country! We will encourage universities' consolidation in the regions. It'll allow to improve the teaching personnel, the quality of education and so on. I'd like to mention that this process is proceeding in the regions already.

- Last week the Presidential Council On Education was held. Did you discuss a financial question there?

- The questions of new educational standards, teachers' status and modern approaches to their training, modernization of evaluation tools for educational qualities, including USE development, the questions of a qualitative improving the training environment for our children were discussed. All debated ideas have concrete suggestions for their realization from our side. Naturally, the financial estimation was made, too. A more detailed discussion is planned at the meeting of the Council for national projects in the beginning of November.