In the Opinion of Experts, both Degeneration and Reform Start at the Top

The level and quality of Belarusian education has been steadily declining throughout the period of its independent existence. The process began back in the days of the USSR; in the early 80's the stagnation of Soviet education began to alarm experts and even the party elite. That is why the 1983 education reform was initiated and since then, the education system has been in a perpetual state of “reform”.

However, none of these reforming initiatives have been followed through to their conclusion. Partial and global changes are initiated by each new minister of education. In any case, not all changes can be considered genuine reforms; some changes were merely following transient fashions, some directly retrograde and some merely to give the appearance of something happening. A typical example: the change of the metrics for school evaluations. Instead of a serious attempt to evaluate the quality of education, reform was simulated – by the replacement of the old five (actually - four) point system with a ten point structure. However, because there was no conversion training for teachers, in many schools the new  scheme is reduced to the old five grades, additional points are seen as supplements to the old estimates, almost in the same manner as previously practiced when the four numbers carried pluses and minuses. As a result it is completely unclear what distinguishes “4+” from “5”. The same applies in respect of the number of years of tuition, and about the number of school days a week. Quantitative changes without changing the content of education achieve nothing, they just distract people and overload teachers and students.

It is possible to cast doubt on any peer reviews as all experts can be accused of subjective judgments, however, the system is capable of self-assessment. For example, Graduate School, taken in its entirety,  makes an assessment of high school. Let us consider a single factor - assessment of the readiness of school leavers for high school education. The country introduced centralized testing into high schools and practical experience over several years shows that schools cannot adequately prepare graduates for success in the centralized tests. It is irrelevant whether the universities place exaggerated or inconsistent demands upon applicants, or the school is unable to change its programmes to prepare graduates to enter universities. What matters is that a discrepancy exists and this indicates the presence of a systemic error. This, in turn, is indicative of poor management and failures in the managerial systems.

The incompetence of education authorities has long been a subject of wide discussion. Academician Rubin and other senior officials have spoken on several occasions about the incompetence of the Ministry of Education and the crudity of educational reform proposals. One recent example: a statement by the Chairman of the National Bank, P. Prokopovich, criticized both reforms and the Ministry. This does not mean that these critics are correct in every respect, it says only that the errors and weaknesses of educational management have become apparent. However, such criticism does not change anything of itself - the erosion and destruction have affected the entire management system. If were only one incompetent minister and his subordinates! However there have been nearly a half dozen years of developing and selecting  management personnel at all levels of education from the district offices of education to the Ministry. During this time all the competent staff in the education system have been removed and the vacancies filled with  apparatchiks  whose sole aim is the maintenance of control. And what exactly should be controlled and supervised? Officials do not know. More precisely, they control whatever they can and they know how to control the knowledge of students, since most of it comes from their teachers who have no managerial or project management training. Almost 100% of personnel at all levels of government functionally illiterate as administrators and managers as they do not possess basic competence.

Enough has been written about the unsatisfactory and difficult situation of middle and high schools. However, neither the scientific literature, nor in general publications is there any serious analysis of the current state of the education system. The reason is that, on the one hand, this analysis is not demanded and on the other hand, there are no research teams, capable of analysing the performance of the system. In relation to the education system so we can state with full confidence that the progression of teaching science and related disciplines, capable of analysing the economy of education, legal relations in this area, institutional conditions and other factors that has been artificially halted. In the early years of independence lead to the creation of academic institutions (NIO - National Institute of Education, RIPO - The National Institute of Vocational Education, RIVSH - The National Institute of High Schools, the Institute of training for managers and specialists of the education system) that concentrated the necessary scientific, research and design capability -  but their development has been stopped. Today, these institutions (or what remains of them) are closed minded, and never in recent years raised the issues and problems the education system as a whole in any publications or at conferences or in internal R & D (research and development). Even VAK (Higher Attestation Commission) that controls the awarding of academic degrees and titles was, a few years ago,  forced to admit that dissertations fo candidate and doctoral degrees in Education have no scientific value. All are built on the description of anecdotal teaching experience and contain no analysis or criticism of that experience which makes them useless even in a narrowly practical sense.

All this is well known to those working in education, teaching science and also at Government level – but not to the wider public. Total state control over the media has meant that much of what the public ought to know  remains unknown and inaccessible.

In such a complex, if not disastrous situation, what action can we and should we take - and why is nothing being done? In any event the public is not aware of any steps to rectify the situation. Even the mere absence of action requires explanation.

It seems to us that the reason is relatively simple: any measures and actions would constitute a new round of reforms, and the system is tired of perpetual reform. Today, it is impossible to enthuse either teachers or officials regarding new reforms. However, and this is the main issue, neither in the education, nor in science, nor the government are there any ideas or proposals for new reforms. The only action that can have an effect in this situation is to replace the staff. That is the simple action of our time, however it is rather difficult to implement.

The prolonged tenure of professor of physics Vasily Strazhev as Minister of Education presided over the slow degradation of the entire system. This is when it became obvious that there was a personnel problem.  None of the officials the Ministry could be put forward to replace Strazhev as minister because he surrounded himself with inactive and incompetent people. We had to look for new people. Ministers appointed historian Peter Brigadin, however he was not able to fit into the prevailing culture. We had to resort to the traditional sources y of staff – mathematician and educator Alexander Radkov who became Rector of Mogilev Pedagogical Institute. However the  rector of a provincial university is not accustomed to thinking at the level of a state, and therefore could not understand the real problems that arose during the reign of Strazhev. In addition, the academic activities of Radkov were connected with the testing of knowledge, but unfortunately using techniques that have been outdated for at least 30 years. He brought to the Ministry a provincial approach to administration and archaic scientific methodologies. Slow degradation was replaced by the rapid decay. All management practices were limited to monitoring the implementation of orders and ideological directives. Teaching science was overwhelmed with banal views and academic degrees became an appendix to bureaucratic posts. Now the education system simply cannot provide a decent candidate for Minister, appointment of a person from outside is necessary. Such experience in an Administrative structure exists, you recall the previously mentioned Prokopovich who - as a builder, was appointed to lead the National Bank.

The manpower problem is not confined only to the candidate for the Ministerial position. Improvement calls for the replacement of the entire apparatus of the Ministry and, moreover, the radical reform of education management. All previous reforms have failed to address the administrative structures and the whole system has hardly changed since the days of BSSR. The main obstacles in the path of change are district officials, at urban and regional levels. This is a huge mass of supervisors, methodologists, and related bureaucrats  are functionally illiterate and incompetent. Anyone who gets generally acquainted with the existing state of affairs in education, will be nonplussed. The problems will seem intractable.

The system of education is desperate for essential changes. However in order to implement changes there, the entire approach to management should be changed.

Firstly, higher schools, universities and postgraduate education should withdrawn from the auspices of the Ministry of Education. This would allow universities to return to normal academic activities and to remove onerous burden on the Ministry itself.

Secondly, the system of management should be simplified and the excess part of the regional administration should be removed.

Thirdly, it is necessary to restore the principle of public form of management in education and to implement it in practice. Education is a point of concern of entire society rather than a functional responsibility of the Ministry of Education.

Secondary school was and remains the core and the fundamental part of the entire education system. However management of secondary schools should derive directly from the interests its interests. All the changes are dictated by the needs and requirements of comprehensive systems. Higher and Vocational School sdictate requirements for high schools, secondary schools for elementary, and schools in general to pre-school education. This understanding should be the basic principle of changes in the system of education. In addition, the entire system of education should focus on tomorrow, rather than today. Reforming educational system means thinking about the future rather than about how to cover up holes today or rectify mistakes of the past.

Ulazdimir Matskevich