|
Soviet Union [USSR] Pedagogy and Planning
Under the administrative oversight of the
Academy of Sciences (see Glossary) and the Ministry of
Education, the Academy of
Pedagogical Sciences was responsible for conducting research and
development in education. The Academy of Pedagogical Sciences had
thirteen institutes, several experimental schools, and other
facilities. Each institute focused on a specific area of research,
such as curriculum and teaching methods, general and pedagogical
psychology, visual teaching aids and school equipment, labor
training, and professional orientation. The academy's research
efforts also included special education (for the physically and
mentally impaired), teacher training, testing methodology, and
textbook preparation.
The academy brought together the country's leading researchers
in the pedagogical sciences, prominent teachers, and a small number
of foreign (mostly East European) education specialists. The
efforts of these pedagogues and educators were guided by the
academy's dual mission: first, developing a socialist mentality by
inculcating a Marxist-Leninist worldview; and second, providing
highly qualified and committed workers for the nation's economy.
The first component--developing a Marxist-Leninist worldview
and communist ethics--was geared to general character training as
well, impressing upon youth basic ideas of good and bad, honesty,
modesty, kindness, friendship, self-discipline, love of studies and
conscientiousness, and "correct social behavior." Although the
political content of school subjects had to be ideologically
correct, the materials were not necessarily overwhelmingly
politicized, as indicated by a Western study of reading topics in
secondary schools that found less than one-third of them dealt with
clear-cut sociopolitical themes.
The second chief concern of Soviet pedagogy was upgrading
vocational education and labor training in the general secondary
school. A related central goal was inculcating in youngsters a
respect for blue-collar work. This remained a difficult if not
insurmountable challenge because of Soviet society's traditional
view of manual labor as intrinsically inferior to work that
involved purely mental or intellectual effort.
The most important Soviet pedagogue historically was Anton S.
Makarenko (1888-1939), whose theories on child-rearing and
education, which rejected corporal punishment and stressed
persuasion and example, served as the foundation of contemporary
education and parenting. His methodology also emphasized
development of good work habits, love of work, self-discipline, and
collective cooperation. Makarenko's approach to discipline remained
the norm in Soviet schools in the 1980s. Physical punishment was
forbidden; disciplinary measures included oral reprimands by
teachers, collective pressure (peer disapproval), bad marks in
record books (demerits), consultations with parents, and, only as
a last resort, expulsion from school.
Change in pedagogy's predominantly conservative approach came
very slowly. Old-fashioned teaching methods, a regimented and
formal classroom environment, and the rote method of learning--
holdovers from tsarist Russia that became firmly entrenched in the
Stalin era--were still the norm in the Soviet schools of the 1980s.
But during the second half of the 1980s, theories and practices of
a number of progressive educators were being advanced in
conjunction with efforts to reform schooling. One of the important
figures in this area was Leonid V. Zankov, an education theorist
who had been influenced by the writings and philosophy of American
educator John Dewey and who had advocated in the 1960s the
elimination of the rote-learning approach. The leading figures in
the 1980s among those striving to develop the philosophy and
methodology for a "new school" were sociologist Vladimir N.
Shubkin, mathematician Mikhail M. Postnikov, and innovative teacher
M. Shchetinin.
The State Planning Committee (Godudarstvennyi planovyi komitet-
-
Gosplan; see Glossary), part of the Council of Ministers, played
a major role in Soviet education by influencing the training and
distribution of specialists in institutions of higher learning. Its
task was to ensure graduation of sufficient numbers of people
trained in certain specialties to meet the work force requirements
of the nation's economy. By directing the higher schools to admit
only a limited number of students in each specialty, Gosplan in
effect established a quota for student admissions.
But despite extensive planning efforts, Gosplan consistently
did more to cause than to alleviate the country's manpower
problems, primarily because planning was based on immediate rather
than long-term needs. The situation was particularly serious in the
1980s, when the push to modernize the economy with high technology
and automation was seriously hampered by the lack of skilled
engineering and technical workers. Although the schools graduated
a large number of engineers, their training was often too
theoretical, narrow in scope, and limited in practical experience.
Broader training and multiple-skill capability were needed. The
short-sightedness of the planning apparatus was exacerbated by a
continuing contradiction between student preferences and economic
and social demands, as well as by an inability to attract enough
young people into lower level technical fields.
Data as of May 1989
|
