AN ANGEL SHOULD FLY BY...

I am talking with Sergey Shestakov, teacher of mathematics, teacher of the year of Moscow (1994), who won 4 times the Soros award, author of a number of the manuals in mathematics, and Iskra Shestakova, scientific researcher of Scientific and Pedagogical Association "School of self-determination ". Our talk is spun around of school as social institute and those changes, which happened recently in the educational system. Sergey is speaking as a practicing teacher, and Iskra speaks rather as the theorist and conceptualist. But the talk is getting interesting...

Question. Now there are a lot of new trends in the educational system and it would be possible to call them alternative to our conventional school. What do you think about them?

Sergey. That the very different opportunities have appeared is not bad. As a rule, all alternative innovations are in the frames of humane values, work on development of the child, that, certainly is welcomed. But this raised wave besides bringing a lot of new, interesting and really useful, contains as well a lot of foams. As a rule, conductors of these new trends are the directors who have heard something, seized any slice and begun to insert it in the school. In outcome, on the famous expression of Viktor Stepanovich " wanted it as better, and came out as always ". Almost nothing new is brought in, and the subject education fails. It always seemed to me, that the teaching should be plotted by a principle, that that general evil, which we anyhow bring into the world, should be, whenever possible, reduced to minimum. And what Iskra thinks about it?

Iskra. I have another point of view. I am supporter of alternative education on that simple reason, that the whole system of conventional education is constructed on reproduction of the certain information, which was by someone and for some reason structured in the certain way. The tutorials, on which we teach modern children now, as a matter of fact, differ by nothing from those, on which our parents, grandmothers and grandfathers have studied. Everything stays in general the same. And what, the world has not changed during all this times? These text-books have nothing to do neither with the science, nor with the human experience. Even in the best text-books on natural sciences, where the complex description of the world is shown, there is nothing about concrete experience of the child. And the child has not less experience, than we have, it is just of another quality.

As I already told you, the traditional informational school is constructed on translation of the information. What is valuable in informational field now, in ten years will be valuable in the best case of 10 - 15 percent. Why should we drum all the same to the children?

Let's try to recall, what did we learn at school. Not at home, not in the court yard, not in the summer camp, but namely at school? And then honestly we shall answer ourselves the question: whether it was necessary to spend 10 years for it? Whether it was possible to learn all that much easier and faster?

Question. It is clear that the idle output is very high. On the other hand, partly it happens because the school acquaints with a wide spectrum of miscellaneous subjects. How without that even approximate familiarization could it be possible to find something that really might appear interesting to you? And one more question: whether the educational tendencies on which accent is made in the alternative schools affect the subject education? Iskra. The alternative school offers functional and not informational approach. It means, that some process is organized when the child, taking an active position and using different from the traditional education technologies can master any subject material. The alternative education means supporting of individuality development. The development of the personality is considered more relevant, than customary knowledge, the accent on such development is made in all the alternative schools except only Waldorf schools. Certainly, the alternative schools do not have as its aim to prepare all children to entry the higher school.

Sergey. A problem of general education, nearby forgotten during the last 10-12 years, is raised now again. There are some attempts to introduce concepts of the educational policy at schools in modern conditions. The question is: does it badly affect the subject education and as result the subject knowledge? I can not speak about all alternative schools, but it seems to me, that the subject education is disappearing. That happens because, as the Iskra has noted, the special attention is given not to the subject knowledge, but to the development of individuality of the child. And what do we have in outcome? The child has received certain development, has gained some universal skills. He was brought to the certain age and has been left alone with the real life. Because of poor subject preparation the chances to entry the higher school for such child are very poor, and for the boy that is a straight way to the army. And what our harmonic person is going to do in the army?

I am not saying, that we should not be engaged in alternative education, on the contrary we should. But... It is meant, that our child should not be lost in life, that he already has enough of internal forces and development, and that nothing should happen to him. But I have my doubts, that it is far from being so in our country (and not only in our country).

Iskra. Actually, the situation is as follows. Among the graduates of alternative schools the approximately 30 percent are intelligently advanced and well prepared. They entry higher schools and the study for them there is much easier, than for children finished traditional school, by virtue of those positive effects, which are stipulated by alternative education. Other 30 percent of the graduates have positive effects, but they are very weak in the subject field. They, certainly, can not entry any higher school. And the approximately 40 percent are average. Sergey says, that it causes certain social vulnerability, because we, specially for the boys, even at the level of physical survival do not have other path how to enter institute.

As for an idea I support the alternative education absolutely. If we speak about the reality - everything depends on the person of the teacher. If we speak about the mediocre teacher at alternative and traditional school, it is one case. In the first case such a teacher is for the child simply a person, to whom the child can trust - that too, in general is important - but he does not have enough fuel to add to the fire of the personal development of the child. In the second case - at traditional school - the average teacher will bring at the very least the child on overcoming of social obstacles in the form of examinations, it means that he will prepare him for reality better. In case we are talking about a good, talented teacher here and there, it is quite another thing. In both cases children are involved in a system of values, interests and priorities of such a teacher, then it becomes some situation of development.

Sergey. Let's see how all the projects of reforming of education implemented during last 10 years have influenced traditional school. School's Advisory Boards have appeared, sometimes self-government institutions have appeared, the profile classes - humanitarian, technical, mathematical - everywhere have received the right of citizenship. Very many beautiful names have appeared: Gymnasium, Lyceum, school with classes of Lyceum's type - not yet a Lyceum, but already not traditional school. As a result of such freedom any school could declare the availability of profile classes, that the majority has made. Thus has lead to a certain profanation. Let's say, there were in Moscow approximately 20 decent traditional schools, where mathematics were well taught. After it became possible to create specialized classes at any school, they have appeared at any school. And parents instead of bringing the child to the specialized school to drive an interview, are bringing the child to the mathematical or humanitarian classes, which were organized at their native school. And after, let's say, a year started to realize, that these profile classes do not have any difference in comparison with the ordinary classes. The level of the strong schools was lowered too because of the outflow of the potential pupils. Here is the reform of education in action. And the point has remained the same. The parents look, how children enter higher school after graduating from the school. Very often it is determining factor in choosing school.

Question. And you, as a parent, what requirements do you have to the school?

Sergey. The minimum requirement, that the child should not go there under pressure. I would like, that teachers in the schools are well educated, kind and professional. Alone speaking, from the teacher two - three positions are required: professionalism, good level of education and something more, that makes him a teacher and can be expressed by words " do not do much harm ". The real practice is those, that the child comes in one class-room - there is a good teacher there, who does not shout at children and is interesting not only as the translator of the information, but also by virtue of his own personal qualities. Then the child goes into another class-room, and there sits something... Unfortunately, it happens, but it should not. Now statistics are very interesting - after pedagogical higher schools only 10-13 percent of the graduates go to work in schools. Very many people who have come to schools recently do not have pedagogical background - a lot of "closed institutions" have been closed, and people with engineering education and similar came to teach in school. If to speak about reforming of the education's system, it should be complex. It should start with preparation of the teachers. In pedagogical higher schools they study rather serious things, and the graduates come to schools and do not know how to present elementary things.

The second moment is the construction of the school programs. Why do we teach just these subjects and in this volume? Why within the framework of a course of biology, chemistries or mathematics we teach that and that? Understandably, what is registered in the programs, and we teach this. But whether it is necessary and what for is it necessary? Now there is a very strong opposition to that quantity of natural science disciplines, which are taught at school. Really, formally speaking, what for do the children need all this mathematics? And not only mathematics. The result is, that on the one hand, the child overworks and on the other - there are a lot of useless subjects. For example we all love Moscow, but what for to give lessons of "Moscow history" from the 1st and till the 11th grade? It comes to the situations when a teacher comes from another city and says: " Most ridiculous, children, is that I shall teach you the Moscow history".

Iskra. There are statistics, that during the first year after leaving school 83 % is forgotten from what we have learned. And during the second year - 83 % of what that remained. Even if the person after school continues to study, he studies already other things and in the other life context. A lot of people are engaged in the coordination the programs of higher schools and schools. And till now there is no coordination.

Sergey. I, and not only I, already for a long time had such simple idea to make in the 10-11th grades classes of general educational subject courses, with duration from the half a year to one year, so that the free time could be used according to the interests of pupils. Because these mathematics, chemistry or biology, which we learn at school, generally speaking, are completely redundant. Now I am reviewing the conspectus of the pupils on chemistry and biology. There are sentences there, in that I do understand two words from the five. We can say the same about mathematics. At school, where now I work, the pupils of the 11th grade have passed examination in mathematics already in the 10th grade. Thus, we have the whole year in reserve, during which we can do whatever we want to do. Well and we are occupied with preparation for examinations in higher school. In such situation the children have a choice: if children precisely know, that they do not need mathematics for entrance examination, they do not go to me, but into another group.

The oppositions on this idea are normally the following: that the schools are overloaded and there are not enough free class-rooms. But there are normally at school 2-3, sometimes up to 5 senior classes, which are using from 2 up to 5 class-rooms. And if to select 3 groups, conditionally speaking, humanitarian, natural scientific and mathematical, the problem with locations could be decided.

In general, if we review let's say, last 150 years, we can note, that every 50 years complaints by the existing educational system appear. The changes were made with such difficulties that it seems that they should result in cardinal revolution. But, basically, nothing new has taken place. Let's take specialized schools. You see they have appeared hardly 40 years ago and punched its road with extreme difficulties, overcoming that general orientation on average, which once prevailed in the education. And what spokes were put into their wheels! And what screams could be heard, that there should not be selected children, that everyone should have the equal rights and opportunities! So that present education system, after some reflection, seems to be rather strange - specially if to take into account a jump in the field of information technologies which has occurred for last 10 years.

Question. And still, what tendencies in reforming of this system are now to be observed?

Sergey. The reforming now is reduced to possible transition to the system of testing in the 11th grade. It is discussed as well the possibility of transition to a 12-years education system, as children are overload and it is offered to add one more year. In general at the present time we have three poles: the alternative schools (though definition " alternative " is not very good - the education is existing or not), private schools and state schools. In some state schools something permanently happens too: searches of new paths, implementation of the new pedagogical projects etc. It is clear that it is necessary to reform our educational system, and it is possible to start doing this in frameworks of quite conventional teaching, without turning everything upside-down. All our troubles are caused by the absence of the definite social order. What do we want from the state schools?

Iskra. To reform the system of education it is necessary to define, what kind of a person will be required in 10-12 years. For this purpose it is necessary to forecast the future development of the society. The systematic education has appeared in Europe at the end of the 17th century and was caused by transition from the craftsmanship to the guild type of production. At craftsmanship the process of preparation of the apprentice, who adopting all skills of the master, at the end became good specialist in ceramics, weaving etc, took a lot of time. It could be much faster to learn to specialize in fulfillment of any one task. Then it was transferred into the system of schools, social institutions which were created for organization of learning process. The science as the main way of knowledge of the reality is built on the same guild principle. Chemistry, physics, biology etc. are separate guilds of scientific knowledge, which are taught in a certain way at school. Now, as it seems to me, this guild educational system already has become obsolete. I mean, that now we came near to the moment of some uncertainty, for orientation in which there are no ready prescriptions. The knowledge and experience of grandparents, parents, teachers help very little to orientate in a new reality. We are on a new turn, when a certain integrity of perception of the world and orientation in it is needed, as well as understanding of the fact that it is possible to receive different results under the same conditions, as well as comprehension of the alternative. And this should be taught.

Sergey. My point of view is, that during the last 100-200 years the consciousness has changed very little. Eventually, the same ten commandments came to us from much earlier times. These are ethical things. The science lies outside of ethics, and the education is attractive because it is directly connected to ethics. The certain humanist purpose indirectly is presented at every lesson. For me most relevant is the moral aspect: there are some things, which should not be made, and it is important to inform the child about it but not in the way of direct prohibition.

Question. Well, whatever we say about reforming the system, about the alternative and traditional approaches, it all is reduced to one - to the person of a teacher. Sergey, what attracts you in this work? For me personally it was always a secret, how the teacher every day, from year to year can repeat the same?

Iskra. It is well known, that everybody has certain resource, the exhaustion of which results in the emotional combustion, after what the attitude to the work ceases to be creative. For the teacher this resource is approximately 10-15 years. Afterwards the person puts before himself other problems, either changes his job, or finds pleasure in something else, for example in socializing.

Sergey. Though there is here something to object. The point is that nothing repeats. Certainly, there are teachers, who work from year to year work on same notes. But, on my own experience, I can say, that almost always the lesson is an improvisation. It is understandable, that the material always remains the same. But children are very different. Let's speak only about translation of certain knowledge, although it is not the main purpose for me. My aim is that the children not simply get acquainted with some algorithms, not just reproduce some skills, but they should learn to invent and solve different tasks, really to think, to overcome certain difficulties, and if they can not overcome do not feel uncomfortable.

Certainly, the teachers have a lot of difficulties. There are very serious money problems. It seems even absurd to demand something from the teacher whose salary is 800 rubles. The maximum salary in a normal school could be about 3000 rubles and that under conditions that the teacher has the candidate's of sciences degree, is a so called honored teacher and having at least 6 lessons per day during the whole week. And that is the situation in Moscow! And despite of it, there are still a lot of really good teachers who go on to work in state schools.

Iskra. It appears, that teachers are such unfortunate people earning miserable money by hard working. But you should not forget the other side. Contacting children, the emotional field, where the teacher is working, is extremely strong thing building strong emotional dependence. Otherwise hardly anybody would work at school. It fascinates, when the people are changing and you actively participate in this process.

Sergey. Iskra is right - the other side is very important. I know many good mathematicians, and almost nobody from them has left to private schools, although they pay more there. But children are absolutely different. In his class the teacher has the possibility to choose the children, and in private schools it is done by administration and purses of the parents. And in general the dialogue with children by itself is very interesting, it is charging you emotionally. This is what the teacher is getting. And what creates a good teacher as I already told - professionalism, good education and something third... Eventually, the teacher is not the one who teaches, but this is the one from whom we learn. To say, that this is a gift from the God, - is too loud, but, undoubtedly, an angel should fly by...

Conversation held by Julia Kachalova