Posts
I am going to describe the structure of soviet (before 1990) system of Education. It is more or less stays the same, though more options (private schools, gymnasiums) are available now. This should explain why I feel so strange and hesitant when seeing how education works in America. And keep thinking of sending my son to live with my mother in Ukraine despite the loss of everyday English in this life.
First, the grade school was set up to be completed in 10 years, starting at age 6 or 7. (They included a preparatory class -K- into it now, so it's 11years presently.)
There was no locational separation of elementary, middle, and high school grades - all grades from 1 to 10 were in the same school. And since taking ALL classes was mandatory for all grades, one would come to 1st grade and move on through the school with the same students in the class.
Teacher -generalists were teaching grades 1-4, with visiting art, music, and shop teachers. Looping was usual - your 1st grade teacher was staying with you until grade 4. Students stayed in one classroom. No more then 5 45min. periods were allowed in grades 1-4, with 5 min. breakes between the periods and one 15 min. lunch break. Afterschool (HW help and simple daycare) was free for working parents 5 days of the week.
In grades 5-10 all subjects were taught by teachers-specialists in their subjects. Again, there was looping: same teacher who taught you math in 5th grade would continue "to grow" with you until grade 10. So, the teacher HAD to know curriculum for all grades. After the whole "line" of this teacher's classes graduated, this teacher would return to grade 5. The same approach was taken with other subjects - language, literature, foreign language, physics, chemistry, biology, history, technical drawing etc.
Only 8 years of education were compulsory: After 8th grade the student could get into a vocational school to get a trade in hands or straight join the world of work. Those, who were bound to college, were staying in school until grade 10. (Best years! All misbehaving and failing students - gone!)
Repeating the year was an accepted practice for failing students (without filing paperwork or consulting parents, the decision was made by faculty), though In my 10 years of schooling there, I haven't seen anyone left to repeate the year.
Higher ed institutions (Universities, Academies, Institutes) did not rely on any state exams (state exams were introduced first when I was in 10 grade), rather testing the students on the school program themselves. For instance, to get into vet. shool after 10th grade I had to take oral exam in the school course of Biology, written exam in the school course of Chemistry, and write an essay from the course of Russian literature. To get into Technology school to study computer systems, my husband had to take an exam in the school course of math, school course of physics, and write an essay. Again, all entrance exams were tailored to the major (so one had select early!) and were completely in accordance with the school courses.
How was it possible? All schools in the country (15 republics during soviet times) had the same curriculum, logically alligned over the grades. If a student transferred from one school during the time they studied decimals in math , then the next day in the school across the country he would get to study decimals, too. And not miss anything. Since books were the same for everyone, one could perfectly catch up with missed portion, too. So the institutes knew the school program and were sure that everything needed had been taught. The schools were provided with the curriculum targeted on proper preparation for the higher education. Attention: NO REMEDIAL CLASSES in universities! Whatever was learned in school was taken as a basis to build on. Kids who did not satisfy the requirements could not enter the higher ed institutions. They would lose a year and try next time.
Thus, here some of the benefits of centralized system of education (there are disadvantages, too... but I'll bring them up later):
1)connection between the grades in terms of the same place, same teachers, same classmates
2)gradual and logical arrangement of the curriculum
3)connection between school and higher ed institutions
4) teachers - specialists in their subjects, not just educators.
5)vocational schools for students who do not succeed in academics.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
wow!
OK, I MUST track down the Russian mathematics professor I mentioned.
I have questions for you but I will wait until you are finished. This was a nice post.
This is very interesting. I'm glad you are going to discuss some of the disadvantages in a future post, as the advantages are very apparent.
I'm immediately struck by how the organization of the education system reflects the nature of the state. Russia, like France, has always had centralized, top down government.
In the U.S. the system is designed from bottom up: Amendment 10 - The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Education in this country was always considered the most local of government functions. Thus a German town in Pennsylvania would have a very different school that a New England Puritan settlement or a Tennessee frontier village.
I've been meaning to post this link forever:
A Russian Teacher in America
Math Forum quotations from Andrei Toom
"Toom was also quite outspoken in exposing the fraudulent promotions and incompetence of the NCTM leadership, whom he described as "impostors of education."
Dom Rosa at Math Forum
I found Toom's posts on mathforum fascinating and eventually read his articles on his website.
He had some articles on teaching word problems that I found useful.
My favorite Toom quote, "Those who have been taught pizzalogy instead of mathematics will not know mathematics."
Excellent article! I will definetely comment on it later. We have couple of Russian mathematicians in NY (one is running the prep courses for SAT, ACT etc, and another is teaching in the NYU and publishes his articles). I will look for those, too.
Interesting article Exo. In a later post, could you please address what happens to students who learn at a faster or slower rate than the average?
I note one thing - the entrance exam being given by the university would change incentives on students. There arguing for a good grade from teachers would not help one get into uni, so Soviet students should have less of an incentive to argue with their teachers for good grades even if the student didn't learn much.
Tracy,
The grades you earned in school (the transcript) were evaluated univercity commeetee, so students with higher school grades had priorities when getting the same grades on entrance exams as a student with lower school grades.
Yes, some students were trying to get high marks in school at any price (literally - by bribing teachers), but if such student failed the entrance exams he would not be accepted.
Also, on slower and faster students - even though I will touch it later in more details - the answer is no, no accomodations were provided. The rate of teaching was acoounted for an "average" student.
I was struck by this passage:
After 8th grade the student could get into a vocational school to get a trade in hands or straight join the world of work. Those, who were bound to college, were staying in school until grade 10. (Best years! All misbehaving and failing students - gone!)
I'm sure that is good for the remaining students... but as a school system, that is surely a sign of failure!!
I don't think it was a failing system. All basics you need to survive were taught by grade 8. In vocational schools, the curriculum for grades 9-10 was taught, though with more "practical applications". It was a great opportunity for kids who needed to start supporting their families early: unlike general schools,vocational schools were paying stipends to achieving students, plus giving the a profession to earn the living. After that, being able to support themselves, many kids(my husband among them) were entering the universities to get higher education.
I think what Exo is not saying here, but is probably true, is that there were/are special public high schools in the arts, music, and math and science as well for those who were highly motivated and gifted. She hasn't talked about the math circles and clubs either which would be another possible resource for gifted students.
Tracking is not what many Americans make it out to be. It's not simply a case of a 12 year old not passing a test, being kicked out of the system to work at manual labor in a rock quarry. I think that many countries which use tracking have a system of junior colleges and polytechnics for those who don't qualify to enter the flagship research university. Also there are colleges available to adults who wish to change their careers later on. In other words, should someone decide to "get with the progam" they can improve their educational lot in life. Remember, also that countries using tracking have FREE or incredibly cheap tution at colleges and universities, and by tracking they are carefully allocating scarce resources. One other thing to consider is that here in the US any sort of major can be found at a university. By limiting the students to unverisities we really would be cutting out a lot of career options, But in other countries many of our areas of study, such as teaching and engineering would be found at colleges, and the unversities are reserved for high level research rather than job training.
Tracking is portrayed as unfair or cruel, or even elitist, but I think our system is worse. Our system does not cater to the needs of every student but pretends that all are college-bound, when in fact perhaps only 25% of high school students end up with college degrees. Further more, the really sad part is all the college students that drop out of their sophomore year with thousands of dollars in student loans and NO vocation with which to support themselves.
If you are curious as to how tracking in K-12 works, Singapore's Ministry of Education has a 50 page booklet written for the public to explain just that:
http://www.moe.gov.sg/corporate/edu_info_booklet/pdf/edu-booklet-english.pdf
Exo - thanks for answering my question. Do you know why school transcripts were considered along with the exam results?
As I understand, with given equal grades on entrance exams, a better transcript could ensure the admission.
Also, for some non-prestigeous majors were the limit of students could not be reached due to the absence of "wishing" students, an excellent transcript (GPA 5.0 or 4.9) would relieve a student from taking entrance exams at all.
Great post! The system of education you describe sends a very clear message to learners- do your best to get it right the first time. This no nonsense approach sounds good on paper, but what about hard working kids who don't make the cut despite their best efforts?
I like that resources (subsidized higher education) are allocated to successful students instead of safety nets (*cough* NYC summer school is a joke for raising student achievement *cough*)in place for failing students, most who are below the mark for a wide range of issues unrelated to aptitude.
Post a Comment