The main drawback of the Russian education system is a lack of understanding of the purpose
This post was born when I realized that the comment on the newuser article “ The main shortcomings of the Russian education system ” was too big.
I graduated from a technical lyceum 4 years ago in a province far from the Moscow Ring Road. Education at the Lyceum takes place from the 7th to 11th grade. The load there was significantly greater than in a regular school. All sorts of checks came over us for allegedly excessive workload, but I think this is nonsense because only those who wanted to study came there. They go there for exams, so that not everyone will pass. I am very pleased with this education, and to the question “why?” I reply with this post.
1. Normal provision with everything necessary, namely skis of any size on a ski base, do not have to carry your own like in a regular school, all the textbooks in the library, with the rarest exceptions, video reproducing equipment in the right classrooms. Chemicals in the chemistry room and a bunch of physical equipment in the physics cabinet.
2. The educational process.They studied in pairs, almost the same as in a university, but it seems that the couple consists of two lessons of forty minutes with a break of 5 minutes in the middle. In my opinion this is the best option. On a day for 3-4, occasionally 5 pairs. It greatly simplifies the preparation of d / z, because for 4 pairs, 4 subjects must be made, not 8 as in a regular school, and the textbook should be carried accordingly. Plus, between the third and fourth pairs, a normal lunch break, 40 minutes, is enough to have a normal lunch in the dining room on the ground floor. Remembering from school where lunch was 15-20 minutes and boiling tea was poured into glasses in me still alive. By the way, we studied 6 days a week.
3. Dramatically increased loadin algebra and analysis, geometry, physics, English, computer science, drawing. Excluded from the program are quite works, music, painting. The remaining subjects corresponded to the school curriculum but were perfectly taught, with the exception of a couple of subjects.
1. Computer science. The first six months we were introduced to what Windows is, gave the concept of a window, folder, file, taught how to move, copy, explained what is a shortcut and what is a file, etc. Only the first half of the year, then we did not see computers in computer science lessons for a year and a half. We studied number systems, Boolean algebra, and other necessary things. Almost the entire university course of discrete mathematics, except for coding and encryption. Then programming in Pascal, then HTML, SQL, database design. All this greatly develops the brain. Yes, I put it all into practice now, although many do not, but they have learned not to be afraid of the unknown. I find this an ideal computer science curriculum.
2. Mathematics.I will not list everything that was, I’ll only say that we honestly tried in the Epsilon-Delta language to define the limits, derivative, integral. On geometry, we knew how to count volumes through a vector product, respectively, we knew how to take the determinant of a third-order matrix. Helped on the exam.
3. Physics. Bow to Valery Anatolyevich. Textbooks in the trash, studied according to compiled notes. For each pair, he brought us notes with a specific topic, and we studied them instead of a textbook. And not only Ohm’s laws, but even the Synchrophasotron’s device was there. Well, masterpiece experiments, the benefit of the equipment allowed.
4. Drawing , on sheets A3, sections, isometry of complex intersections (for a student), for example, a hexagonal pyramid intersects with an octagonal prism.
5. English was studied in part by English Grammar in Use, Raymond Murphy, blue, in a large format paperback, whoever saw it will remember. By the way, the textbook is all in English by itself, even reading assignments and rules gave the practice of English.
Russian and Literature, Chemistry. Both there and there we came to not very responsible teachers who did not particularly understand what was needed and what wasn’t. As a result, constant conflicts with teachers of the whole class, disgusting knowledge of the subject, terrible discipline. And then I remember the formulas of basic acids, I remember some valencies, I naturally distinguish between alkalis and salts, I often apply knowledge of chemistry at home.
As newuser already mentioned, we forget what is not needed. But communicating with the unnecessary, we learn to learn, learn to find the right information, learn not to be afraid of the unknown, pump up our “brain muscle”. As a weightlifter pulls a barbell in the gym. From this, he does not learn to raise the sofa to the eighth floor, and he lowers the barbell, no seemingly useful work, but this seemingly useless work is directed inward, to the development of the body. In the same way, studying the processes of ethylene polymerization develops your brain, educates your spirit.
I graduated from a technical lyceum 4 years ago in a province far from the Moscow Ring Road. Education at the Lyceum takes place from the 7th to 11th grade. The load there was significantly greater than in a regular school. All sorts of checks came over us for allegedly excessive workload, but I think this is nonsense because only those who wanted to study came there. They go there for exams, so that not everyone will pass. I am very pleased with this education, and to the question “why?” I reply with this post.
What was there
1. Normal provision with everything necessary, namely skis of any size on a ski base, do not have to carry your own like in a regular school, all the textbooks in the library, with the rarest exceptions, video reproducing equipment in the right classrooms. Chemicals in the chemistry room and a bunch of physical equipment in the physics cabinet.
2. The educational process.They studied in pairs, almost the same as in a university, but it seems that the couple consists of two lessons of forty minutes with a break of 5 minutes in the middle. In my opinion this is the best option. On a day for 3-4, occasionally 5 pairs. It greatly simplifies the preparation of d / z, because for 4 pairs, 4 subjects must be made, not 8 as in a regular school, and the textbook should be carried accordingly. Plus, between the third and fourth pairs, a normal lunch break, 40 minutes, is enough to have a normal lunch in the dining room on the ground floor. Remembering from school where lunch was 15-20 minutes and boiling tea was poured into glasses in me still alive. By the way, we studied 6 days a week.
3. Dramatically increased loadin algebra and analysis, geometry, physics, English, computer science, drawing. Excluded from the program are quite works, music, painting. The remaining subjects corresponded to the school curriculum but were perfectly taught, with the exception of a couple of subjects.
What was in the classroom
1. Computer science. The first six months we were introduced to what Windows is, gave the concept of a window, folder, file, taught how to move, copy, explained what is a shortcut and what is a file, etc. Only the first half of the year, then we did not see computers in computer science lessons for a year and a half. We studied number systems, Boolean algebra, and other necessary things. Almost the entire university course of discrete mathematics, except for coding and encryption. Then programming in Pascal, then HTML, SQL, database design. All this greatly develops the brain. Yes, I put it all into practice now, although many do not, but they have learned not to be afraid of the unknown. I find this an ideal computer science curriculum.
2. Mathematics.I will not list everything that was, I’ll only say that we honestly tried in the Epsilon-Delta language to define the limits, derivative, integral. On geometry, we knew how to count volumes through a vector product, respectively, we knew how to take the determinant of a third-order matrix. Helped on the exam.
3. Physics. Bow to Valery Anatolyevich. Textbooks in the trash, studied according to compiled notes. For each pair, he brought us notes with a specific topic, and we studied them instead of a textbook. And not only Ohm’s laws, but even the Synchrophasotron’s device was there. Well, masterpiece experiments, the benefit of the equipment allowed.
4. Drawing , on sheets A3, sections, isometry of complex intersections (for a student), for example, a hexagonal pyramid intersects with an octagonal prism.
5. English was studied in part by English Grammar in Use, Raymond Murphy, blue, in a large format paperback, whoever saw it will remember. By the way, the textbook is all in English by itself, even reading assignments and rules gave the practice of English.
What was missing
Russian and Literature, Chemistry. Both there and there we came to not very responsible teachers who did not particularly understand what was needed and what wasn’t. As a result, constant conflicts with teachers of the whole class, disgusting knowledge of the subject, terrible discipline. And then I remember the formulas of basic acids, I remember some valencies, I naturally distinguish between alkalis and salts, I often apply knowledge of chemistry at home.
Now conclusions
As newuser already mentioned, we forget what is not needed. But communicating with the unnecessary, we learn to learn, learn to find the right information, learn not to be afraid of the unknown, pump up our “brain muscle”. As a weightlifter pulls a barbell in the gym. From this, he does not learn to raise the sofa to the eighth floor, and he lowers the barbell, no seemingly useful work, but this seemingly useless work is directed inward, to the development of the body. In the same way, studying the processes of ethylene polymerization develops your brain, educates your spirit.